Duke International Non Governmental Organization Action Aid Case Study Course readings and discussions show that INGOs have many decisions to make regarding which international issue(s) to focus on, how to explain the cause(s) of an international issue, what programs or services to offer to address the issue, how to organize and manage resources, how to market themselves, how to ensure accountability, and how to assess their performances. In addition, INGOs face various challenges operating in the international setting.
To better understand how an INGO is run (i.e. its governance structure, how it makes decisions on some of the issues mentioned above, how they address certain challenges, etc), you will conduct an in-depth analysis of an INGO by:
interviewing a manager/director of an INGO
and/or
getting information about the organization from secondary sources (i.e. the organizations annual report, website, financial report, etc.).
In general, projects with interviews will receive higher grades than those that solely rely on secondary sources.
The paper, including references, should be 10-12 pages, double-spaced, in a 12-point Time New Roman font, and with 1-inch margins.
The paper should at least consist of an introduction, a literature review, a discussion (organizational analysis), and a conclusion.
You need to attach the interview questions to the paper.
For the course project, you will conduct an in-depth study of an INGO to gain a better understanding of the concepts and issues covered in class. Course readings and discussions show that INGOs have many decisions to make regarding which international issue(s) to focus on, how to explain the cause(s) of an international issue, what programs or services to offer to address the issue, how to organize and manage resources, how to market themselves, how to ensure accountability, and how to assess their performances. In addition, INGOs face various challenges operating in the international setting. To better understand how an INGO is run (i.e. its governance structure, how it makes decisions on some of the issues mentioned above, how they address certain challenges, etc), you will conduct an in-depth analysis of an INGO by interviewing a manager/director of an INGO and/or getting information about the organization from secondary sources (i.e. the organizations annual report, website, financial report, etc.). In general, projects with interviews will receive higher grades than those solely relay on secondary sources. The INGO you choose should not be one of the organizations discussed or studied extensively in class (i.e. CARE, Oxfam, Doctors Without Borders/MSF, Amnesty International, WWF, BRAC, ACCION International, Habitat for Humanity International, and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Society/Red Cross). You are suggested to consult the instructor early in the semester to make sure the INGO you choose is appropriate for the course project. The final project paper should be 10-12 pages in length, including references, doublespaced, in a 12-point Time New Roman font, and with 1-inch margin. The paper should at least consist of an introduction, a literature review, a discussion (organizational analysis), and a conclusion. You need to attach the interview questions to the paper. Sources of information should be properly cited following the APA citation style.
Course Project Rubric – 100 points
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCompleteness
30.0 pts
Exemplary
Follow the assignment guidelines and conduct an in-depth interview with well-designed research questions.
20.0 pts
Aspiring
Follow the assignment guidelines and conduct an interview of the INGO or a thorough study of the INGO with seconary sources.
10.0 pts
Insufficient
Follow the assignment guidelines and conduct a study of the INGO with secondary sources.
0.0 pts
Not Evident
Fail to follow assignment guidelines.
30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysis
25.0 pts
Exemplary
Arguments were explained thoroughly and developed clearly. Evidence and logic were always used to support claims made.
15.0 pts
Aspiring
Arguments were explained adequately and developed clearly. Evidence and logic were usually used to support claims made.
5.0 pts
Insufficient
Arguments were presented without much explanation and were often unclear. Only a few claims were supported by evidence and logic.
0.0 pts
Not Evident
Very little analysis was demonstrated.
25.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality Sources
10.0 pts
Exemplary
6 or more quality sources were cited.
8.0 pts
Aspiring
3-5 quality sources were cited.
4.0 pts
Insufficient
1-2 quality sources were cited.
0.0 pts
Not Evident
No quality sources were cited.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization and Flow
10.0 pts
Exemplary
Paper was harmonious and integrated, with a unified theme and purpose. Organization and integration were apparent both within and between paragraphs.
8.0 pts
Aspiring
Paper was organized with discernible sections and transitions that helped guide the reader from start to end. Connection of ideas to the central purpose and/or theme of the paper were not always clear.
4.0 pts
Insufficient
Paper contained sequences of organized thoughts, but the organization did not carry throughout.
0.0 pts
Not Evident
Paper lacked a central organizing structure. Thoughts and ideas were presented without clear purpose or connection.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormatting
10.0 pts
Exemplary
No APA formatting errors.
7.0 pts
Aspiring
1-3 APA formatting errors.
3.0 pts
Insufficient
4-5 APA formatting errors.
0.0 pts
Not Evident
6 or more APA formatting errors.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics
10.0 pts
Exemplary
No spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors
7.0 pts
Aspiring
1-3 spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors.
3.0 pts
Insufficient
4-5 spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors.
0.0 pts
Not Evident
6 or more spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTiming
5.0 pts
Exemplary
Every stage of the paper was handed in on time.
3.0 pts
Aspiring
One stage of the paper was handed in late.
1.0 pts
Insufficient
Two stages of the paper were handed in late.
0.0 pts
Not Evident
Three or more stages of the paper were handed in late.
5.0 pts
Total Points: 100.0
LDR 3302-21.01.01-1A24-S1, Organizational Theory and Behavior Unit III Essay Top of Form Bottom of Form…
Chapter 9 What are teratogens? Give 5 examples. Define each of these stages: Germinal, embryonic,…
You are a Financial Analyst that has been appointed to lead a team in the…
You are familiar with the ANA Code of Ethics and have a growing understanding of…
This week’s discussion will focus on management decision-making and control in two companies, American corporation…
Mary Rowlandson felt that the man who eventually came to own her, Quinnapin, was “the…