Partnership Models - The case of NRC Colombia
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•305 views
NRC Regional Country Directors Seminar. Presented by Andrea Naletto
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Featured
Featured (20)
Partnership Models - The case of NRC Colombia
- 1. Andrea Naletto ♦ NRC Colombia Partnership: The NRC Colombia experience Amman, Jordan ♦ 24-26 January 2013 NRC REGIONAL SEMINAR
- 2. “If You Want To Go Fast, Go Alone. If You Want To Go Far, Go Together” African Saying
- 4. NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC NRC Colombia Program NRC Refugee Program Panama City San Cristó bal Quito Bogotá Pasto Santa Marta Cúcuta NRC Tumaco NRC Tulcan NRC Ocana
- 5. NRC Colombia Strategy & Partners
- 7. Instrumental Intrinsic Partnership Typology InstitutionalFunctional Collaborativ e 1 2 3 PARTNERSHIP Perception of the Partner Power/Balance Agreements Capacity building Accountability
- 8. CEALP ONPAR Partners — What and how many?
- 9. Eligibility Criteria (IPs) Compatibility in terms of shared organisational goals and values Specific-expertise & experience Demonstrated track record in managing similar interventions Legal compliance Administrative, HR & Financial systems in place Well defined and planned exit strategies and sustainability
- 10. National NGOs INGOs Faith-based CBOs (ethnic groups) Universities 1 2 3 4 5 Partners — What and how many?
- 11. Education ICLA Public Policy Refugee Emergency Response 25PARTNERS CONTRACT Partners — What and how many?
- 12. CEALP ONPAR Partners — What and how many?
- 14. COUNTRY STRATEGY 2012-14 NRC COLOMBIAWorking with Partners
- 15. To Be To Do To Relate Capacity Building of partners
- 16. Working with (implementing) partners Opportunities Challenges &
- 17. Working with (implementing) partners Promotes local ownership Promotes sustainability Greater access/acceptance Greater (potential) cost- effectiveness Better programs? More attractive to donors Opportunities
- 18. Working with (implementing) partners Security NRC Visibility/Credit Confidentiality Corruption Funding calendar Dependency M&E (reliability of data) Capacity development Quality Challenges
- 19. COUNTRY STRATEGY 2012-14 NRC COLOMBIA Sponsoring Agencies Managing Organization Implementing Agencies Examples of Partnerships
- 20. COUNTRY STRATEGY 2012- 14NRC COLOMBIA Sponsoring Agency Managing Organization Implementing Agencies Examples of Partnerships
- 21. Lessons learnt “Accompanying” vs. “policing role” “Zero-tolerance” vs. “lighter systems” Some NRC programs are more suitable for partnership? Easier to work with partners in IDP settings? Sensitive issues (e.g. ICLA) ? Better direct implem.?
- 22. Lessons learnt (cont.) Clear communication and expectations Well defined and planned exit strategies from the start Defining the extent of “capacity development”
- 23. Conclusions 1. Time-consuming & demanding but gives better results 2. Delivering excellent projects and programs in the current aid environment 3. As shift in organizational culture - A NRC own partnership model (“the NRC-way”)?
Editor's Notes
- Now let me bring in a new dimension to this model: as we move along the partnership axis we have got two extremes: on the right hand side there the INTRINSIC partnership and the other extreme there is the INSTRUMENTAL partnership. So in terms of: Perception of the Partner Power/Balance Agreements Capacity building Accountability INSTRUMENTAL Partners seen as a means to implement certain pre-set objectives Power monopolised by one partner Domination by one partner Sub-contracting Capacity building goes down only Accountability goes up only INSTRINSIC Recognising the importance of strong partners as an end goal in itself Power shared between partners Equality between partners Autonomous partners cooperating Capacity building works in both directions Accountability goes in both directions This does not imply that instrumental is necessarily ‘bad’ nor that ‘intrinsic’ is always good. Certainly there may be times when a more instrumental approach is appropriate – such as using partners to deliver relief to a population in urgent need. But if all relationships are instrumental in nature, then this is not going to encourage the development of strong, independent partners and a robust civil society sector. ** Quote to be used if needed: The poor man who enters into a partnership with one who is rich makes a risky venture. - Plautus
- Capacity Assessment
- Refugee: ICLA and Education Some CC are not partners-friendly or at least more INSTRUMENTAL partnership than INSTRIC (ex. distribution of aid)
- Non-implementing Partners Intuitions of the state tasked with IDP assistance. UARIV – Emergency Assistance, Land Restitution Unit, MoE, Attorney’s General Office, CC, State Council. Etc. We could add Mayor Offices, Government (with some of whom we have MoUs ex. NdS) Below, other partners: SC, UNICEF, UNCHR
- There is something developed by Eric Severin but in Colombia we have used for a long time the MOP Projects’ Operational Manual – a bit outdated, but it spells our: Step by step process Annexes and forms Roles and responsibilities Process for resolving disagreements and disputes.
- What is capacity building/capacity development? For NRC Colombia it has a multidimensional aspect related to 3 spheres: to do, to be, to relate. To BE Identity, mission and values of partners and On internal organisational development (e.g. human resource management, governance), Ex. We directly and indirectly build capacity of partners by raising the bar on internal control (time sheet for implementing partners) To DO Promoting NRC core area of interest and core competencies Ex. Don Bosco and FUNDER: VT providers, but to vulnerable youth and not necessarily refugee or PNIP youth. We have taught them what are the legal/normative framework and rights of these population. To RELATE NRC has helped forge linkages between partners (government and non-governmental) and in the formation of some key local networks. Ex. Education Roundtables in Ecuador, the IGA roundtables for displaced youth in Colombia, etc.