Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Programme - Sida

2 F I N D I N G S
This observation was primarily centered on the belief that for AGIR to have a legacy
in terms of good practices, it is important to clarify its contribution as a programme
to a certain set of results, instead of linking these results to specific intermediaries. 21
The question has been raised if this is in fact critical – does there need to be a distinction
between the programme, intermediaries and CSOs in the determination of results
and who gets credit? This is an important question and in terms of the end result, the
answer is perhaps not – civil society benefits from the result that has taken place. The
point made by the external voice and with which this review agrees, is that for the
programme to be sustainable as a programme, it must be recognised for the results
it has accomplished (as a programme).
The 2011 AGIR semi-annual report states: “one of the greatest challenges of the
AGIR programme is the consolidation of the diverse programme partners view of
AGIR as a single programme in which each of them makes his contribution” (Relatório
Semi-Anual 2011, page 26). In a follow-up to this statement, the mid-term review
team agrees with the conclusions of the 2012 semi-annual report that, while general
reporting has improved, the programme needs to start analysing how the various outcomes
of the thematic areas can be clustered and reported as a set of consistent programme
results that clarify and strengthen the ability of AGIR to document and report
on outcomes as a cohesive programme. A ‘spheres of influence model’ helps us to
understand how AGIR has established these ‘pathways of change’ through which
funding and support flow out to partners, where change takes place at the organisational
level of the CSO, and then through them, to the benefit of beneficiaries. This
model can also help in demonstrating that the need for the programme to plan for,
implement, monitor and report as a programme is critical to maintaining these pathways
as a cohesive approach and decreasing the threat of programme fragmentation
and less effective implementation and reporting on results.
Indeed, the programme has come a long way from its beginning, and has crossed
many hurdles to improve coordination among intermediaries with different organisational
cultures. Central to this coordination, is the Intermediaries Coordination Committee
(ICC) and a technical team to support the coordination efforts undertaken to
overcome the threat of fragmentation. The ICC is now consolidated as a steering body
through which the intermediaries discuss programme cross-cutting issues, approaches
to supporting CSO partners, the sharing of experiences and lessons learnt, and coordinating
joint monitoring, reporting and outreach to the wider society. The number of
21 However recently, including in the last Consultative Forum, the AGIR programme’s visibility has improved,
signaling a positive change in the right direction and of what it can achieve in terms of the dialogue
between civil society and government.
37