LEARNING TOGETHER THROUGH PARTNERSHIPS: LESSONS FROM THE FIELD
Save the Children Philippines (SCP) is setting its aim at becoming a thinking organization rather than an implementing one. This translates to revolutionizing Save the Children’s program delivery platform and moving away from decades of direct implementation towards partnerships where it can serve as a “thought leader” on child rights issues in both the development and humanitarian settings. Beyond just implementing programs, Save the Children is now challenged to reflect on the intellectual value it brings to its interventions, and the innovation that can be introduced and applied in the local context. Partnership then constitutes a valuable learning area where the organization can extract key lessons that can inform its programming and operational management.
In an activity designed to harness and consolidate the rich partnership learning experiences, six (6) partners presented their respective experiences in implementing programs/projects with Save the Children. They are the Affiliated Network for Social Accountability in East Asia and the Pacific Foundation, Inc. (ANSA-EAP), the Eastern Visayas State University (EVSU), Educational Discipline in Culture and Area-based Services, Inc. (EDCADS), Youth Meets the Children Organization (YMETCO), Taytay sa Kauswagan, Inc (TSKI), and the Municipality of Malungon, Sarangani. In synthesizing the key takeaways from their sharing, four factors that were critical to ensure good partnerships were discussed:
Clarity, Synchronicity, Participatory, and Alignment.
Clarity: the importance of having clear written roles, functions and deliverables
Working with partners can be exciting, fulfilling and productive. But like any relationship, there needs to be a good understanding between and amongst everyone. Establishing definite roles and functions of key people from each organization involved in the partnership will help ensure efficiency and increase accountability. Knowing who leads, who decides and who does what in terms of implementation (i.e. manager, coordinator, etc.) and support services (i.e. finance, admin, etc.) will ensure that there is no confusion and clear delineation of responsibilities. This also helps both parties determine who they need to engage, coordinate and consult when it comes to the finer details of actual project implementation. This does not mean that things are set in stone. Consistent reviews may point towards a need to calibrate and fine-tune these details to improve mechanisms and to accommodate any unplanned events such as abrupt staff turnover, force majeure or changing socio-political dynamics. Having something written also helps when there is a review of the project and the partnership itself, as there is a clear reference and starting point for an objective evaluation. One example of this is a partnership in one program office where there was confusion in the community about whom to coordinate with. Both staff of Save the Children and the partner organization go to the project areas and conduct separate and parallel consultations with the local stakeholders. There was no written agreement when it comes to coordination with the community and local government partners and this created confusion in the local area. This could have been avoided if the coordination structure down to the local level implementation was clearly set right from the start to help clarify each stakeholder’s roles and responsibilities as well as how it contributes to what the project wants to achieve with the community.
Synchronicity: keeping a look out on maximizing opportunities to work together
The partners shared that they believe it will be beneficial if Save the Children partners are more conscious of how their projects and activities connect with each other — there might be opportunities in working together that are missed because of the tendency to work in silos. Being able to synchronize some activities together might just be the key factor to maximizing outcomes in a cost-effective manner. It also helps them visualize the bigger picture — tangibly seeing how their efforts contribute to the whole gives them more than just satisfaction, but also a challenge to improve their delivery and try to achieve things at scale. One good example is how one regional partner’s expertise on developing a Theory of Change for development was identified as beneficial to other partners under a specific grant, so it was incorporated into the design of the program. Through this collaboration, the different partner organizations were able to see the ultimate goals of the project and how they can continue working with each other beyond the program. Understanding how their projects can synergize by accessing complementary strengths has also helped them create stronger organizations with increased potential for sustainability in each of their programs. This means Save the Children has a responsibility to get to know their partners better, outside of their thematic expertise, and understand their aspirations and long-term goals so that partnership goes beyond project implementation.
Participatory: the transformative power of the consultative process
Consultation and participation are key elements of partnership processes. A sense of ownership and commitment are important regardless of whether a partnership is funded or non-funded. Save the Children works with partners who do not necessarily have child-focused programs but also share the same commitment to protect and uphold human rights. This commitment will help an organization justify if and why they need internal transformation in adopting a child-rights perspective and mainstream it into their programs. This also ensures that that they are active contributors to our projects and programs.
Consultation and participation may come into play in day-to-day work such as coordinating schedules of activities or other initiatives being conducted in the same areas. These two elements are also critical in project design. One example is a project in the Southern Philippines where two partners were consulted and engaged because of their particular expertise. However, in the course of implementation, changes were introduced to the project design — the biggest one of which was the demand to implement the program by geographical area and not by thematic expertise. The decision was made without any consultation. Nevertheless, the partners accepted the decision and proceeded to adopt the changes, which meant a shift in their strategies because they believed in the goals and objectives of the project and recognize that these aligned with theirs. However, there were some difficult moments in the partnership to accommodate the change in design, especially since it forced them to implement portions of the program which were not necessarily their strength. A shift in mindset had to be made to regain a sense of project ownership, and at the same time, learn and immediately apply a new set of program strategies. It was indeed fortunate that the program was able to achieve its desired goals even with these challenges, partly due to the flexibility and maturity of the partners involved. However, this may not always be the case.
Alignment: why it is critical to continually check for consistency
Save the Children considers organizational and programmatic alignment as key elements when assessing possible partners. In turn, the CSO partner is also provided the same opportunity to reflect on the same things about Save the Children in alignment with their own Vision, Mission, Goals and Objectives. However, there is a risk of forgetting these alignments in the course of a project, especially in multi-year endeavors.
Our partners’ experiences emphasize the need to be more mindful and purposive about revisiting shared goals and aspirations. Checking if the partners still share the same values and goals will help ensure that project deliverables are contributing to higher level outcomes which will produce the desired impact over time. Having shared values can also potentially encourage buy-in from the other actors who will then push to have available resources complement Save the Children’s interventions and create a more holistic program with far-reaching results. One good example is a partnership between Save the Children and a big micro-lending organization. The latter’s expertise is on providing financial literacy and livelihood training but they have not reached out to the poorest of the poor. Through the partnership, they are able to reach this group of people and provide them access to lending and livelihood opportunities. With the additional components of health and risk reduction and resilience, the project has enriched their program, and at the same time, contributes to the overall vision and mission of the organization to help build self-sufficient families.
Leave a Comments