Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Programme - Sida

2 F I N D I N G S
the AGIR programme has to produce results that are, in fact, a combination of partner’s
results, there needs to be a more consistent way to plan for AGIR to implement,
monitor, and collect data on these activities across the programme. As commented on
by one intermediary staff member, ‘there is not a consistent theory of change’ shared
by the intermediaries, which makes it difficult to actually plan for and document
‘change’ within the programme. Reporting on its activities (and successes) is definitely
improving within the AGIR programme, but there is still much room for change.
This would also help the visibility of the AGIR programme as its successes are now
often seen by others (external actors) as attributable to the work of specific CSOs or
the intermediaries with whom they work – rather than AGIR.
The mid-term review team endorses the solutions outlined in the semi-annual report
2012 by intermediaries to improve the level of outcomes of cross-cutting issues, particularly
in gender, which constitute an important step forward, not only in terms of
probability of improving gender/cross-cutting results, but also in terms of the systematic
joint planning (and budgeting) of common activities. AGIR intermediaries have
decided to take a joint approach to improve outcomes in the area of addressing
cross-cutting issues, which has been persistently weak. This joint approach will use a
new ‘change-oriented’ gender training approach that was successfully tested by the
intermediaries in 2012. A gender technical group, comprised of representatives of the
four intermediaries was created in February 2012 to support the operationalisation of
this approach. Furthermore, intermediaries will scrutinise partner plans from a gender
and cross-cutting issues perspective in order to better track and identify partner results.
2.4.3 Networking Mechanisms for AGIR CSO Partners
As noted by some interviewees, taking good-donorship principles into account means
that existing networks and coalitions should be focused and strengthened. The priority
of the programme, it is felt, should be to facilitate and create opportunities for this
strengthening process, rather than to promote new networks. However, these principles
are not in line with current programme strategies and the intermediaries still
have to devise an approach to support networks, since the ambition is to create networks
that cross-cut intermediaries and thematic areas. Some partners raised concerns
about the difficulties of networking, managing and monitoring the work of networks
and their added-value is being partially addressed; and in this regard Oxfam
has produced a small explicative brochure on networks. A study on how change happens
has been also commissioned to this end.
Networking within the AGIR programme is generally perceived as weak. Although
some organisations have created networks and linkages within the AGIR programme,
these are mainly vertical ones (including partners of the same intermediary), with a
limit to networks or linkages that cross-cut sub-programmes. According to many
AGIR partners, opportunities for internal networking are limited to training sessions
and joint meetings. The lack of a clear mechanism for partnership is also perceived as
an obstacle to more effective partnership. For example, the Electoral Observatory
49