Week 4 SDWC check-in 🌷

Hello, how are your weeks going?

Like Comment


How is everyone? I just wanted to check in to see how everyone is getting on. 
Was the feedback we gave on the situation analyses useful? 

In the videos this week I chat about the mountain chicken, which is not a chicken but a frog! If you've never had the pleasure of knowing about the mountain chicken, then here is some more info about it.

A quick poll for you: Which of the following do you think is the most important in preventing a project from achieving maximum impact?

  • A lack of a clearly defined objective
  • A lack of an ambitious enough objective
  • An incomplete strategy which misses key things which need to be considered
  • A lack of expertise or skills to develop a comprehensive strategy.


In the next live session, we will be developing our theory of changes. This will be a lot easier if you have a) read and reflected on the feedback given on the situation analyses, b) made any changes you want to your situation analyses, and c) done the exercise within the week 4 videos of adding the scope, biodiversity target result and 3 threat results to your theory of change. Any questions, please ask. 


A mini-challenge for you, if you are willing to accept... in the next live session, set your zoom background as an image or video related to what you are creating a conceptual model about. This was started by a participant a few workshops back and it went down well. Not compulsory! I'm thinking giant earthworms, dreamy coral reefs and beautiful sun bears. Details on how to do this here. It doesn't work for everyone, for me, my hair disappears into the green wall and I look bald!

Please add any thoughts as replies below. 
Beth 🦖

Beth Robinson

WildLearning Specialist, WildTeam

I'm a WildLearning Specialist with WildTeam, a bit of a odd job title. My main role is to design, deliver and organise both our online and class-based training workshops. One of the best parts of my job is meeting other conservationists and learning about the work that they do. I really enjoy geeking out reading teaching theory and thinking about ways I can more creatively and engagingly deliver learning. Before working for WildTeam I did a PhD in invasive plants and human wildlife interactions. I find it really interesting to learn about the ways people interact with nature, both when nature is being wonderful, but also when is is being a bit annoying!
155 Contributions
15 Following


Go to the profile of Christel Scheske
5 months ago

Hi Beth! I'd be super grateful if you could help review: 
- The updated situation analysis I just did in the Peru Gocta Waterfall case (there's a new slide marked "Christel Update".
- The theory of change I've done for that same case.

For the ToC, I have a question: is one usually meant to incorporate all of the elements that were mentioned in the situation analysis into the ToC (behaviors, contributing factors)? Or only the ones that are accompanied by a work package? I mean in general, say if I were to create a ToC for a grant-giver. 

Thank you very much in advance, and have a great weekend!


Go to the profile of Beth Robinson
5 months ago

Done! Look great, good effort. In the session later we are working on theory of changes, so you can either continue to develop yours or what could be beneficial is to work with another group to get more experience and practice. 

I start a situation analysis with everything in, and in general, ToCs are more complex (have more boxes) than situation analyses. But up to you really and what you think represents the things you are aiming to achieve. If you are sharing a ToC with a donor you don't need to present the whole thing, if it makes sense just to present a sub-section to simplify things in the narrative then that would work I think. 

Hope you had a lovely weekend :) 

Go to the profile of Christel Scheske
5 months ago

Wonderful, thank you, and thanks for reviewing the ToC draft!

Go to the profile of Christel Scheske
5 months ago

Beth, also, regarding sustainability + work packages: in addition to whether the work package will be able to continue post-project, I think another important set of factors to account for is whether your work package has set up self-sustaining mechanisms that make the continuation of the work package from the NGO obsolete. For instance, if through your work, a new government agency has been created, has been assigned funding, and has a policy framework that guides its work, which makes NGO intervention superfluous. Or something like a sustainable financing mechanism (e.g. a % donation from tourism income) that replaces NGO-financed conservation action, + a community mechanism for coordinating conservation work. Am I interpreting this correctly or would what I'm mentioning be part of a different portion of the ToC?

Go to the profile of Beth Robinson
5 months ago


I think this would be captured in that sustainability rating, as you can rate it for cost, so if self-sustaining, then cost would get a good rating. Impact would also get a good rating, and I expect, overall, work packages like you describe would get a good sustainability rating, leading more likely to a good rating overall, so an increased chance that you would want to carry them out. I'll add a note to our doc review tracker, as I don't think the sustainability ratings as they are are quite right, I think so tweaks could make them easier to use.