putting partnership back at the heart of development
TRANSCRIPT
Canadian Civil Society Experience with CIDA’s Call‐for‐Proposal Mechanism,
Partnerships with CanadiansBranch
Putting Partnership back at the Heart of Development:
In July 2010, the Minister of International Cooperation, the Hon. Beverley J. Oda, established new funding mechanisms for Canadian civil society organizations (CSOs) through Partnerships with Canadians Branch (PWCB), moving from responsive programming to a competitive process.
In January 2012, the Canadian Council for International Co‐operation (CCIC) and the Inter‐Council Network of Provincial/Regional Councils for International Cooperation (ICN) undertook a detailed survey to assess the experience of CSOs with six call‐for‐proposal competitions and to evaluate the impacts on the sector.
Survey Backgrounder
The survey had five goals:
• Map the outcomes of the various calls‐for‐proposals and share these with our constituencies;
• Assess both the positive and negative aspects of the new process, including the outcomes from the new mechanism;
• Draw concrete recommendations that can be presented to CIDA and other key decision makers to improve the competitive mechanism or to re‐evaluate the use of the competitive process;
• Use the findings to develop a collective response for the sector to the current challenges faced by organizations with this new system; and,
• Identify a network of organizations that would be willing to share their lessons learned with others on their submissions.
Survey Backgrounder (con’t)
The RespondentsThis report is based on the responses of the 158 organizations that participated in the survey.
109 proposals (52.4%) out of 208 presented to the Under and Over $2 million competitions are included in the survey. This makes it a significant sample of those most directly involved in and affected by the calls‐for‐proposals mechanism.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
No Paid Staff
1‐2 3‐5 6‐15 More than 16
The Respondents (Con’t)
Number of Respondents by Staff Size
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Number of Respondents by Income Scale
Outcomes of the Call for Proposals
• Close to 25% of the 158 respondents had not applied to any of the competitions, either because they already had an active contribution agreement with CIDA or because they were planning to do so in the future.
• A smaller number (11,7%) of organizations that didn’t apply say they no longer plan to seek funding from CIDA or found the new funding mechanismtoo much workfor the expected outcome.
• More than 70% of the sample applied to one or more of the six PWCB competitions.
• Organizations that applied to more than one competition were notably more successful than those that applied to only one.
• Both the staff size and total income of an organization also correlate with success.
• Fifteen organizations reported that they had submitted proposals as a consortium and of these, only two were successful.
Outcomes of the Over/Under 2 M Calls
• For the “Under $2 million” competition there was a much larger number and proportion of unsuccessful proposals
• The analysis of the “Over $2 million” and “Under $2 million” results highlights the importance of staff size and income scale, particularly for the former competition.
• For the “Under $2 million” competition, size and income scale are less correlated to success.
• Almost all the proposals in both competitions had a very high concentration in CIDA’s thematic priorities but less in the countries of focus
Reduced credibility of the organization with partners and volunteers because of the delays in funding announcements, lack of success, very significant funding disruptions and a reduced ability of the organization to program effectively;
Pressure to change the organization’s priorities in order to meet criteria and the need for an “acceptable” proposal, including restructuring overseas partnerships;
A heavy investment in proposal development, including consultants, overseas consultations, with no assurance of any positive outcome
Impacts of the Call for Proposal SystemThe vast majority of respondents raised serious concerns over a range of significant and negative impacts of the new call‐for‐proposals mechanism, including:
More emphasis on fundraising in a difficult environment, with 18% of respondents having no idea yet how they will make up the loss of revenue from CIDA;
Need to restructure the organization, including reduction in staff and overseas activities, due to an unsuccessful proposal.
Reduction or end to long‐standing partnerships (reported by 22 organizations) abroad which are at the center of civil society’s approach and unique contribution to development;
Impacts of the Call for Proposal System
Cuts to public engagement (PE) work, with 64% of respondents indicating that they would not or could not replace previous CIDA funding for PE with their own resources; and
A chill on advocacy activities as a result of the widely shared perception that CIDA looks unfavorably on organizations that do policy and advocacy work.
Impacts of the Call for Proposal System
A system that requires much improvementThe implementation of the new PWCB funding mechanism has been a difficult and challenging experience for most Canadian CSOs involved in international development
Putting organizations, partnerships and development results in jeopardyThe sudden and drastic reduction of funds coming from CIDA – compounded by long delays in announcing funding decisions and the large number of organizations that were unsuccessful in seeing their proposals approved‐ has meant that dozens of Canadian organizations now have to reduce or end partnerships with local organizations in developing countries.
Key Conclusions
Canadian public awareness of and active engagement in global poverty issues is at riskThe sudden elimination of the 10% of budget previously allowable for public engagement work
in the PWCB contribution agreement, and of long‐standing responsive public engagement
funding mechanisms will have significant and adverse effects on many Canadian
international development organizations and their efforts to build awareness and sustain
meaningful engagement with Canadian citizens on global poverty issues.
Recognizing the role of CSOs – development actors in their own right?Civil society organizations contribute to development in very unique, innovative and essential
ways.
Key Conclusions (con’t)
The domino effect of losing CIDA fundingThe loss of CIDA funding by so many organizations doesn’t just impact a percentage of an Organization’s budget: it will most likely have a knock‐on effect in terms of the amount of funds that organizations can subsequently leverage from other donors: multilateral, provincial, individuals, etc..
Hitting smaller organizations harder: level playing field?Smaller organizations are being hardest hit by the new funding mechanism. The survey clearly shows that organizations that have fewer staff, lower budgets and limited capacity for producing proposals, are less successful with the new PWCB mechanism.
Key Conclusions (con’t)
Learning from what worksIt seems that the specialized calls for proposals (Haiti, Muskoka) have worked better in terms of
turn‐around‐time and improving the system as it goes. We are hoping that the same happens
for the next round of calls for proposals for the Under and Over 2 Million projects.
What happened to partnerships?In the new call for proposals mechanism, not enough value is put on trust and on pre‐existing
relationships between CIDA and Canadian civil society organizations, nor on existing
partnerships between Canadian organizations and developing countries organizations.
Key Conclusions (con’t)
Make sure that the calls for proposals are more inclusive
Main Recommendations
Produce clear and predictable annual timetables
Create a two‐tiered process
Increase opportunities to engage with CIDA
# 1
# 2
# 3
# 4
Re‐establishing some responsive programming
Main Recommendations
Establish a regular and formal mechanism for ongoing dialogue
Engage in a national consultation with CIDA CSO partners on Public Engagement mechanisms
Improve the proposal guidelines
# 5
# 6
# 7
# 8
Develop a CIDA policy on CSOs and development, both in Canada and abroad
Main Recommendations
Create greater transparency prior to and during the assessment process
CIDA should organize capacity‐building training programs on the calls for proposals mechanism and competitive processes more generally
Undertake a full evaluation of the impact of the call‐for‐proposals mechanism
# 9
# 10
# 11
# 12
How can CCIC and the Provincial/Regional Councils be Helpful?• Advocacy ‐ Respondents felt that the Councils are well‐positioned to represent the
voices of smaller CSOs and their southern partners to CIDA.
• Training ‐ Respondents wanted the Councils to provide training or education, particularly on proposal‐writing and navigating CIDA processes.
• Communication ‐ Respondents wanted the Councils to communicate with members and keep them updated on developments in the granting process and on what is happening with CIDA.
• Information and Analysis ‐ Further surveys and analysis by the Councils in order to collect aggregate information on behalf of the sector.
THANK-YOU!