Technical Competency
Preparation and Planning
Performance review
Often performance reviews will be founded both on a job description or Terms of Reference (see the Anchoring section for suggestions) and on annual work plans or objectives (which can include soft skills or values). It is important that concrete criteria and expectations are set. Here is a reminder of the job description/Terms of Reference provisions suggested for this competency:
“Integrate survivor-centred, Code compliant approaches into project cycle stages (design, implement, monitor/evaluate).”
“Recruit and select teams or partnerships which secure the right set of competencies and flexibility to adapt to individual survivor needs and choices.”
“Allocate appropriate time and resources (budgeting and tasking) to undertake the work safely and effectively in compliance with the principles of the Code, including ensuring expertise and input as necessary.”
“Ensure scoping, analysis and assessments, security and risk management, monitoring and review, contingency and emergency planning all adequately provisioned in budget.”
“Integrate contextual and gender analysis and awareness into design and planning (and monitoring) of safe and effective work.”
“Design flexible methodology which allows for individual survivor needs and choices, and to meet changing circumstances.”
These could be incorporated into an annual plan or review using the Deep Dive table and a scale such as:
Exceeds Expectations: proactively design and planning activities to comply with the Murad Code and are contextually attuned and responsive; applies deep contextual and gender analysis throughout project design, planning, and monitoring; adapts tools and methods to cultural, gendered, and conflict-related dynamics; shares insights to strengthen sector practice; anticipates risks and proactively adjusts design/monitoring tools; develops adaptive methodologies with built-in flexibility; incorporates survivor input; demonstrates ability to pivot quickly in response to changes while safeguarding survivors; documents and shares learning; champions survivor input and feedback mechanisms; builds teams/partnerships that are diverse, trauma-informed, gender-sensitive, and flexible; conducts competency-based selection aligned with survivor needs; includes clear safeguarding provisions in partnership agreements; budgets and workplans systematically prioritise survivor safety and ethical compliance; resources allocated for staff support, survivor referrals, and specialist expertise; proactively secures contingency resources. (See relevant Deep Dive columns.)
Meets Expectations: applies survivor-centred and Code-compliant practices in project cycle, with some adjustments made in response to feedback; some evidence of flexibility to adapt to survivor needs; safeguarding and gender considerations addressed but not deeply embedded; basic risk assessment and mitigation measures incorporated; recruits teams/partners with required core competencies; time and resources generally sufficient to meet Code requirements; essential expertise and referrals budgeted; basic contingency or resourcing flexibility; includes contextual and gender analysis in project design and monitoring; adjusts activities where clear needs are identified; integration adequate but not systematically revisited. (See relevant Deep Dive columns.)
Needs Improvement: relies heavily on standard practice or generic tools - assumes “one size fits all”; does not adjust for ethical/safety risks, deep contextual understanding, gender dynamics or survivor agency; recruitment decisions overlook competencies critical for CRSV contexts (e.g., trauma-informed care); under-resourcing of safety, ethics, or survivor support; key expertise overlooked; budgeting driven mainly by efficiency or donor pressure without safeguarding considerations. partnerships lack flexibility; survivor needs not central in team selection; fails to integrate adequate security, contingency, or monitoring resources; planning reactive rather than proactive; limited or absent gender/contextual analysis. (See relevant Deep Dive columns.)
You can choose to focus on specific aspects or tailor the expected behaviours specifically to the job or tasks and include these more specific expectations in an annual work plan or job description.
It is important to include free-narrative boxes for evidence-based assessment and explanations both for a person’s own self-assessment of their work, and for the line-manager’s/supervisor’s constructive comments.