Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Programme - Sida

3 C O N C L U S I O N S
AGIR programme coordination by the intermediary organisations is improving
through the focused use of the ICC and technical groups. AGIR is conceived
as a programme, but its operationalisation is still mostly done as four
sub-programmes with some common areas. Therefore, sub-programme consistency
is better than programme consistency. Despite efforts in joint coordination,
implementation and reporting (apart from the common areas), it is
sometimes not clear to what extent sub-programme outcomes and results are
feeding into programme impact. 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 to
decrease the threat of programme fragmentation and less effective implementation
and reporting on results.
A central mechanism for capacity strengthening of CSOs within AGIR has
been through the providision of training on a wide range of issues, techniques
and processes. This training is focused at both the organisational and individual
levels. However, the mid-term review team has found a widespread low
level of satisfaction among AGIR CSOs in the area of capacity strengthening
as it relates to a range of critical issues. Furthermore, the review team has
noted that there is very limited replication of training at the provincial level
where capacity is generally substantially lower than at the central level.
Networking within the AGIR programme is generally weak, although some
organisations have created networks and linkages. The objectives for AGIR
state that networks should be created in relevant areas. While there are relatively
strong networks vertically within sub-programmes, there are weak horizontal
linkages between sub-programmes. Within AGIR, most contacted partners
are part of, or are in contact with, external national and even international
networks; and they are able to illustrate how some of these networks/linkages
have led to advocacy results.
Reporting on outcomes at all levels within the AGIR programme varies, but
has been improving with support from the intermediaries. As an example,
Diakonia works with partners to build the narrative to establish linkages between
interventions and results. Similarly Oxfam from the beginning of the
programme, has been concerned with building a narrative of how outputs lead
to outcomes and acknowledging the difficulties of attributing some results to
the direct intervention of the programme. Generally, however, all intermediaries
claim that partners’ reporting is weak and tends to be activity-focused,
hence challenging the reporting on outcomes. Training has been provided in
71