Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Programme - Sida

2 F I N D I N G S
gender policy, - we really hope we will pass to core funding…’. Some prominent examples
of this support are:
i) The Electoral Observatory relies on AGIR funding to become a permanent
body – it is active under and between elections – and to strengthen linkages
with similar organisations in Africa.
ii) N’wety uses the AGIR funding in a very focused and strategic way for institutional
development in all dimensions in order to improve their legibility for
future funding by a range of donors, i.e. risk reduction and sustainability.
iii) Centro Terra Viva uses funding not only to consolidate their organisation at the
central level, but also in relation to their strategy to establish regional (south,
center, north) delegations, of which the delegation in the center is active.
While overall satisfaction is high, there are numerous points where concerns have
been raised regarding their interaction with the AGIR programme. These are:
Recognition of AGIR: In the visited provinces, many of the CSO sub-partners know
nothing about the AGIR programme and feel their connection (and funding) comes
from their connection to the CSO or to the intermediary with which they have a direct
relationship. This is not a problem except when discussing the intended result of having
AGIR establish itself and be seen as a cohesive programme. Having all partners -
whether central, national level or provincial sub-partners - understand what AGIR is,
and their connection to it, will help with the programme’s recognition by others and
the sustainability that will come with this in the future.
Funding Ratio for Staff Salaries: Some partners have expressed concerns in relation
to the established ratios for the distribution of AGIR funding to partners between staff
(30%) and other activities (70%). Arguing that the staff ratio is too limited, CSOs
claim that this negatively affects their absorption capacity and the implementation of
their strategic plan. This problem may be more pronounced for those partners with
various donors than for those with only AGIR funding because, if core costs are paid
by AGIR, the suggestion will be made that there is no need for another donor to also
provide this financial support.
The need for a readjustment in the established ratios for financial support has merit,
as it was continually seen by the review team that many of the organisations lack sufficient
staff to adequately undertake activities within their strategic plans. Rather than
reducing activities that can lead to or build a stronger civil society, providing additional
financial room for increased staff involvement could be beneficial to both the
depth and quality of existing activities, while also allowing for the exploration of new
areas relevant to the CSOs’ strategic plan and the work of AGIR.
Capacity Strengthening through Training and Education Activities: A central
mechanism for capacity strengthening of CSOs within AGIR has been through the
provision of training on a wide range of issues, techniques and processes. This training
is focused at both organisational and individual levels. However the mid-term
review team has found a widespread low level of satisfaction among AGIR CSOs in
41