This indicator captures the total number of supported civil society organisations (CSOs) that demonstrate an improvement in their overall organisational capacity with Grants' support. This indicator can apply both to organisational grants or projects with a capacity building component. Organisational development is assessed across a set of dimensions aligned with the optional FMO Organisational self assessment template.

These may include:

• Governance and leadership

• Strategy and planning

• Organisational structure, internal processes and internal control systems

• Human resources (including equality, diversity and inclusion)

• Financial management and sustainability

• Fundraising programme and partnership management

• Monitoring, evaluation and learning

• Communications, outreach and advocacy

• Technology and data management

• Human rights based approach.

Determining “Improved overall organisational capacity”: A CSO is considered improved if it increases its score in at least one third of the assessed organisational dimensions.

Examples:

• 10 dimensions → improvement in ≥ 3

• 8 dimensions → improvement in ≥ 3

• 6 dimensions → improvement in ≥ 2.

No fixed minimum score increase (e.g., +0.5 or +1) is required, as long as the rule is applied consistently within the programme.

Each CSO should undergo the same assessment twice—at the start (baseline) and towards the end (endline) of the grant—to measure change over time.

Methodology:

1. Applicability of the methodology per programme: Programmes already using an organisational assessment tool may continue doing so, provided alignment with the FMO approach has been discussed with the FMO Results & Evaluation Officer and Programme Manager. If no tested methodology exists, the FMO self assessment and spider diagram tool should be adopted or adapted to the programme context.

2. Recommended approach: The spider diagram (radar chart) is recommended due to its wide use in CSO organisational development assessments in Europe. Other comparable approaches (capacity assessments, scorecards, peer review methods) may also be used if compatible with aggregation requirements. The diagram plots scores (e.g., 1–5) across multiple organisational dimensions. The resulting shape provides an intuitive visual of strengths and gaps.

3. Facilitation by the Fund Operator (FO): The FO guides Project Promoters (PPs) through a structured and participatory assessment process:

1. Preparation: Tailor the FMO template to the programme context, if/as needed. Brief PPs on the methodology, scoring, process and timeline.

2. Assessment: Facilitate a participatory self assessment involving staff, volunteers, Board members, etc. Score each organisational dimension and plot results on the spider diagram. Integrate this step into routine grant management processes where possible (e.g., annual meeting, monitoring visit).

3. Interpretation: A balanced, evenly shaped diagram indicates broad organisational strength; a lopsided shape highlights gaps requiring targeted support. Average scores can provide an overall snapshot but should not replace dimension level analysis.

4. Reflection and action planning: Use results to develop or adjust organisational development / capacity building plans.

5. Programme level aggregation: Each CSO is counted once (improved / not improved). Results are aggregated cumulatively at programme level.

6. Re assessment: Conduct an endline assessment using the same tool to ensure comparability.

Key principles of the methodology:

• Improvement must be quantifiable, based on a clear scoring scale.

• Apply consistent scoring rules across the programme.

• Results should be used primarily for learning, dialogue, and planning, beyond compliance.

• Document methods, evidence, scoring decisions, and results transparently.

Assessment frequency: At minimum, two comparable assessments (baseline and endline) are required. If feasible, programmes may add a mid term assessment to support ongoing learning and adjustment.