Civic engagement & advocacy with local government/stakeholders
Assesses the organization's engagement in civic activities and advocacy with local government or relevant stakeholders. It evaluates the commitment to representing community interests through a Board-approved strategy that balances sincere counsel (nasiha) with wisdom (hikmah), ensuring strict adherence to non-partisan charity law (CC9), electoral regulations (PPERA), and data ethics (GDPR), while delivering measurable public benefit (maslahah).
| Metric | Civic Engagement Balanced Scorecard |
|---|---|
| Target | Maturity dependent (e.g., Level 4 = 6+ meetings, 2+ outcomes) |
| Frequency | Annual |
| Method | Composite score of Output (meetings), Quality (briefs), Outcomes (policy changes), and Compliance (CC9/PPERA checks) |
| Unit | Scorecard |
Level 1: Initial/Ad-hoc
Engagement is informal and reactive. The organization may occasionally sign a petition or attend a public meeting when prompted by an urgent issue, but there is no planned approach to civic engagement.
Level 2: Developing
Engagement is defined but inconsistent. A stakeholder map exists, but engagement is ad-hoc (<2 meetings/yr) and largely reactive. Compliance checks are informal.
Level 3: Established
Engagement is proactive and structured. A Board-approved plan is in place with quarterly issue scanning. The organization meets officials regularly (≥4/yr), participates in at least one coalition, and uses formal compliance checklists.
Level 4: Advanced
Engagement is strategic and influential. The organization is a recognized voice, meeting officials ≥6 times/yr with demonstrated Tier 1 impact (e.g., policy briefs accepted). It has a robust election playbook and manages conflicts transparently.
Level 5: Optimizing
Engagement is exemplary and shapes the civic landscape. The organization co-designs solutions with government (e.g., working groups), holds multi-year MoUs, achieves Tier 2+ outcomes (policy/funding changes), and publishes annual impact reports.
Organisation Types
By Organisation Size
| Size | Applicability | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Micro | exempt | Formal advocacy plans, theories of change, and PPERA compliance checklists are entirely disproportionate for volunteer-run groups. |
| Small | optional | May engage local councillors informally, but formal board-approved plans, budgets, and quarterly stakeholder logs are not expected. |
| Medium | partial | Requires basic CC9 compliance and a simple stakeholder list, but complex theories of change and formal PPERA checklists can be scaled down. |
| Large | full | |
| Major | full |
Applicable When
- Organization operates within a local community
- Organization's activities have implications for local governance
- Organization seeks to represent community interests to local government
Not Applicable When
- Organization operates solely online with no physical presence in a community
- Organization's activities are purely internal and do not impact external stakeholders
- Organization is explicitly prohibited by its constitution or by law from engaging in political or advocacy activities
Discussion (1)
📋 **Version updated: 1.0.0 → 2.9.7** **Changes:** Updated islamic_references from mizan-297.json
Sign in to post a comment.