This document summarizes a partnership between CARE International and local NGOs in Laos to promote good forest governance. The partnership aims to ensure ethnic groups' rights and participation in forest management. Initial outcomes of clarifying roles, building awareness and commitment, effective lobbying, and developing a joint operational plan indicate the benchmarks of an effective partnership have been met. The experience highlighted the importance of identifying relevant partners, using complementary strengths, mutual learning, and reflecting on practices to strengthen the partnership over time. Next steps include an annual reflection seminar and obtaining external feedback on partnership performance.

1. PARTNERSHIP FOR GOOD FOREST GOVERNANCE
By:
Phetsoulaphonh Choulatida, Project Manager & Phommachanh Phothichanh, Information Management Specialist
CARE International in Lao PDR
18-20 November 2014
Phnom Penh

2. Presentation Outline
 Introduction
 Partnership benchmarks & process
 Outcomes
 Assumptions
 Key learning
 Next steps

3. Introduction
Project : Good Forest Governance for participation of
remote ethnic groups (GOFOGO)
Project Duration: April 2014 – September 2016
Budget : 330,000 EURO
Types of Partners: Local NGOs (Non Profit Associations): SODA, GCA,
INGOs: CCL, CARE Lao PDR
Network: Land Issues Working Group
Project objective : To contribute to good forest governance in Lao PDR that respects the rights of ethnic groups and ensures the participation of relevant stakeholders.

4. Benchmarks & Process
Ensure clarity about the purpose of relationship
Foster effective work from all partners involved in the relationship
Monitor and manage the quality of the relationship
Proposal designed together (using mutual strengths) with partners (August 2013)
Inception meeting with Partners
(May 2014)
Partnership agreement signed
(Jul – Sep 2014)
Financial and procedure orientation
(June 2014)
Operational planning
(August 2014)
Participatory partnership capacity assessment (September 2014)
Quarterly meetings
On the job trainings based on mutual expertise of each partner
(October 2014)
?
Process
Benchmarks

5. Initial Outcomes: Nov - 2014!
Ensure clarity about the purpose of relationship
Foster effective work from all partners involved in the relationship
Monitor and manage the quality of the relationship
Role clarity among five key partners (No confusion, high commitment and cooperation)
Awareness and commitment among partners about organisational development needed
Effective lobbying with government on sensitive issues
Ownership and commitment on joint operational plan of action (shared roles and responsibilities)
Mutual learning
Process
Outcomes
Benchmarks

6. Our “Assumptions” at the beginning
What we “realized” from our experience
•Local NGOs will not accept the findings of a capacity assessment
•Self-assessment will not be Critical, Constructive, and Consensus (3C) – culturally sensitive
•Partners will not accept assessment by third party (CARE) including foreigner
•CARE will have the internal capacity to engage in the partnership
•Our partners accepted their gaps and mutual strengths
•Good facilitation can promote/ensure 3C self- assessment by partners
•Self-assessment facilitated by CARE is most welcomed even by INGO partners
•Working in partnership requires additional skills (than direct implementation)

7. Additional learning so far
•Identification of “relevant partners” with “long term interest” and their “participation” from the beginning of proposal design and use of complementary strengths to develop the concept and strategy helps create mutual understanding and stronger partnership.
•Partners with diverse backgrounds and complementary strengths supports lobbying at different levels! This then strengthens the partnership due to mutual benefits.
(INGOs: CCL, CARE; local NGOs: SODA, GCA; Network: LIWG)
•Partnership allows mutual and Internal learning, especially sector specific “expertise” such as gender, finance, M&E,…
•Partners’ capacity assessment is required (compulsory) before engaging in partnership
•Partnership might require some flexibility in term of internal procedure
•Who leads the partnership ?
•There is need to consider different partnership modalities

8. CARE and partners conducted a reflection session after our first capacity assessment (our practice) to extract the learning and CARE applied the learning together by changing our approach . As a result CARE had fewer challenges during the 2nd capacity assessment and partner staff said ’CARE Cares’.
SODA
S
C
B
F
GCA
Reflection
Learning
Applied
B
F
S
C
CARE cares
Went well
Challenges
Learned
Next time
….
….
…..
……
…..
…….
……
……
Partner 2
Partner 1
Applying learning into action

9. Good practice by CARE that contributed to strengthening the partnership
•Use of pictures to illustrate the meaning of partnership during capacity assessment was found to be attractive & convincing.

10. Next Steps to foster effective work through partnership
Annual reflective seminar among five key partners at the beginning of 2015
External feedback from beneficiaries or other stakeholders about partnership performance in the end of 2016

11. Thank you
Contacts:
Phetsoulaphonh Chaulatida
Phommachanh Phothichanh
Bharat Raj Gautam
Phetsoulaphonh.Chaulatida@careint.org
Phommachanh.Phothichanh@careint.org
Bharat.Gautam@careint.org