1

2020Charter4ChangeEndorsersSurveyReport

8/12/2020

"C4Cisgratefultoallthoseorganisationswhogavetheirtimetocompletethesurveyandthosewhohelpedwiththeanalysisanddraftingofthereport,wehopewehavedonejusticetotheinformationthatwasprovided".

The Charter4Change Secretariat is currently being hosted by Humanitarian Aid International in India. Website: www.charter4change.org | Email: admin@charter4change.org | Twitter: @charter4change

2

Introduction:

The2020Charter4ChangeEndorser’sSurveymarksthe thirdtimethatnationaland localorganisationshavebeenaskedtoreflectontheprogressoftheirinternationalNGOpartnersduringthe4yearssincetheCharterwaslaunchedin2016.Thefirsttwosurveysin2018and2019underscoredendorserorganisations’increasingrolewithintheCharter4ChangeandtheirambitiontoensurethattheinternationalNGOsignatoriesfulfilledtheircommitmentstoputmeaningfullocalisationintopracticeatthecountrylevel.

Summary:

The2020Charter4Changeendorsers’ surveyelicitedabroad rangeof responses,bothgeographically and intermsoftypeoforganisationandrelationshipswithC4CsignatoryINGOs.Ingeneral,respondentswereslightlymorecriticalof theprogressof their internationalpartners’ in implementing theC4Ccommitments than thesignatoriesthemselveswereintheir2020reporting;-somethingthatisnotsurprising.Despitetheirfrustrations,localandnationalNGOsarebroadlysupportiveofeffortsforchangebytheinternationalcommunity,ifalittleexasperatedbytheslownessofthepaceofchange.RespondentswanttheCharter4Changetocontinuebeyonditsoriginal2020deadline,withthemajoritysayingitshouldcontinueuntilinternationalorganisationsliveuptotheircommitments.

Methodology:

96organisationsrespondedtotheendorsers’surveyfrom22countries.87werecompletedintheEnglishversionfrom19countriesand9inFrenchfrom3countries.61%oftheEnglish-speakingrespondentsdescribedtheirorganisationaslocal,and39%asnational.4describethemselvesaschurchorfaithbased,oneasanethicalhealthorganisation.FortheFrenchsurveysitwas33%localand66%national,includingoneresearchinstitute.74%oftheEnglish-speakingrespondentsreportedthattheyareC4Cendorserorganisationsand78%oftheFrenchspeakingorganisationhadendorsedtheCharter.Thevastmajorityinbothsetsofsurveyresponses,82%,aredoingbothhumanitariananddevelopmentwork.

Thescopeofthesurveywasslightlybroaderthanthepreviousendorserssurveywhichwasundertakenin2018and2019.The2020survey includedmoredetailedquestionson thequalityofpartnerships,whichprovidedsome interesting responses. The survey was undertaken with a relatively short turnaround time, and this,combinedwiththefactthatmanynationalandlocalorganisationsareworkingwithinacontextofcomplicatedcoronaviruspandemicconditions,mayhavemeantthatsomeorganisationswereunabletoparticipate.

Whilstthesurveyprovidedsomeinterestingdatatherearenumberoflimitationstopointout:Becauseofthelengthofthesurvey,itwasdecidedtoaskforlessqualitativecommentsandreflections.Themajorityofquestionswerequantitativeinnature.Asaresultthereislessnuanceorinsightintohowlocalisationcommitmentsarebeingimplementedandaleveloftherichnessandflavourismissing.SecondlyrespondentswerenotaskedtolisttheirC4CsignatorypartnerINGOs.Consequently,itisimpossibletoknowfromthedatawhetherforexamplethegoodpracticesarewidespreadacrossorganisationsorwhether thedata refers toonlya small clusterofINGOs (or indeed the same organisation which might have several local partners). Organisations whichcompletedthesurveywereaskedwhethertheywereendorsersoftheCharter.Roughly20-25%(French-Englishresponses)werefromorganisationswhichhadnotendorsedtheCharter.Thelimitsofthedataanalysismeanthatitisnotpossibletoidentifywhichorganisationsgavewhatresponses,somethingthatcouldskewthevalidityof the data when it comes to interpreting how far INGO signatories are compliant. Furthermore, not allrespondentsansweredeveryquestion,anditisimpossibletoknowwhichtypeoforganisationansweredwhichquestion.Forsomequestionsonlyaroundhalforjustabovehalfoftherespondentsanswered.Asaresult,itistrickytodrawmeaningfulconclusionsfromsomeanswerswhichhaverelativelysmallsamplesizes.

Countries,partnersandtypeofpartnershiprelationship:

1/3oftheEnglish-speakingrespondentspartneredwithjustoneC4Corganisationoverthelast2years,another1/3withnone.Only19outof80partneredwithmorethan2,butofthose,severalhad4,5,or6C4Csignatorypartners.FortheFrenchspeakingrespondents6ofthe9hadnotpartneredwithaC4Csignatoryorganisationin

3

thelast2years.Unliketheprevioussurveys,respondentswerenotaskedtonametheirC4Cpartners.Surveyswerecompletedbyorganisationsin22countries,-coincidentlythesamenumberasin2018,-(althoughtheywerenotall the samecountriesaspreviously)but therewasamuchevenspreadof respondentsacross thecountries,withtheexceptionofYemen,whichthisyearhadmorethandoublethenumberofrespondentsthanthenexthighestcountry

Therewasaroughlyevenspread(1/3ofrespondents)betweentheseanswerstobestdescribetherelationshipwiththeirC4Cpartner:

● Project(s)whereyourorganizationistheapplicantandtheimplementer,andthesignatoryorganizationisthedonor

● Project(s)wherethesignatoryistheapplicant,andyourorganizationistheimplementer● Wehavemulti-yearfundingpartnership,notonlyone-timeprojectpartnership

Qualityofpartnerships:

Therewasanevenspreadofthosewhodoanddon’thavestrategicpartnershipstheirINGOpartner,althoughonapositivenotethemajorityagreedthatpartnersexplicitlydiscussedandagreedaprincipledapproachtopartnershipduringestablishmentofapartnership.Thisechoesthesignatorysurveywhichfoundthatjustoverhalfreportedthattheirrelationshipswithpartnersaremoreusuallyadhocorprojectbasedratherthanbeinglong-termandstrategic.

Ona lesspositivenote, one thirdof thosewhoansweredhadnothadapartnership reviewwith their INGOpartner.Although2/3rdssaidtheirINGOpartnerhadafeedbackmechanisminplace,afullonethirddidnotknowiftheyexisted.Inthesignatoryreportsomecountryofficesagreedonclearcommunicationmechanismsthroughwhichpartnerscanmakesuggestions.Howeverthereremainsaneedtoimproveandbemoresystematicin dealing with suggestions that have been made. Partners have asked for closer cooperation and clearerpartnershippolicies.Partnersspecificallyaskedsignatories formore transparency incommunicationaroundpartnershipselectionprocesses,toimproveinternalcommunicationsindailycollaborativeworkandtoimprovetheresponsetimeincaseofinformationrequests.

Halfofrespondentshadnottakenpartinastrategyreview/developmentwithanyoftheirsignatorypartners,althoughjustoverathirdhadbeenparticipatedinastrategyrevieworstrategydevelopmentprocesswithone

4

oftheirpartners,and13%haddoneitwithalltheirsignatorypartners.OnerespondenthighlightedthegoodpracticeofaC4Csignatorywhichheldapartners’meeting inMarch2020whereall the INGOs’keystaffandcountryofficeshadbeeninvolvedtogetherwithallpartnerorganisations.Moreworryingly,41%ofrespondentshadnotparticipatedinaneedsassessmentordecisionmakingprocesseswith their INGOpartnerswhiledesigninganddevelopinghumanitarianprojects and interventions.Althoughmostfelttheyhadtakenaleadershiproleinajointactivityorprojectdesignwithsome(45%)orall(10%)oftheirpartners.Therewasa similar responseas towhetherorganisationaldevelopmentof the local/nationalorganisationhasbeenacoreobjectiveofpartners.

59%ofrespondentsreportedthattheyhadfeltabletoraiseconcernsormakesuggestionstotheirsignatorypartnersonhowtheycouldimprove,andencouragingly60%ofthosesaidthattheirINGOpartnerhadtakenforward their suggestions or concerns. 80% of the country offices that responded confirmed that partnerssuggestedhowtoimprovetheirpartnerships.

Anumberofrespondentspointedtotheimportanceofkeystaffwithinsignatorypartnerswhoarecommittedtolocalisationanddriveitforwardwithintheirorganisations,althoughtheorganisationalprocedurescontinuetobeslowinmanyinternationalpartners,particularlyinthedisbursementoffunds,duringemergencyresponse.FundingIssues:Matchedfunds/technicalsupporttohelplocalpartnersapproachdonorswasreportedasverylow,withonly5respondentssayingtheyhadhadhelpwiththis.Therewasanevensplitof50/50astowhethertheL/NNGOhadbeenintroducedtoadonorbytheirINGOpartner,and2/3rdshadreceivednosupporttohelpthemtoapplyforparticularlycomplicateddonorgrants.

56%reportedthatnoneoftheirsignatorypartnersshareinformationwiththemabouttheirtotalhumanitarianbudget,although44%reportedthateithersomeoralloftheirpartnersshareinformationabouttheirbudgetswiththem.Thisislessthanthe65%reportedbysignatories.Thisdisparitymaywellbebecauseofthesmallsamplesizebutmayalsobean indication thatnationalorganisationsare lesssatisfiedwithprogresson thiscommitmentthantheirinternationalpartners.

Inthesignatorycountryreportpartnerssuggestedtoenhancesystemsforgranttransferstoimprovelagtimefor fundstransferandensuretimely implementation.Suggestionsalso includedaskingsignatoriestoprovide

5

managementfeestotheirpartnersaswellasprovisionofsupportoncoststheyincurtodevelopproposalsandbudgets.

Capacitysupportandorganisationalstrengthening:

InanefforttounderstandthewaythatINGOpartnersworktosupporttheorganisationaldevelopmentoftheirlocalpartnersthesurveyaskedaseriesofquestionsabouthowrespondentshadbeensupported.17%saidtheirorganisationaldevelopmenthasnotbeensupportedbyanyoftheirINGOpartners.However,themajority reported support on a wide range of issues, most notably organisational strategy support (54%),technicalservicesdelivery improvements(67%),proposaldevelopment(56%),developing transparencyandaccountabilitysystems(48%).ItseemsthatINGOpartnersgivemuchlesssupporttotheirnationalpartnersinareassuchaslogistics(43%),andITenhancements,andonly37%reportedreceivingsupportforHRsystemsand process improvements. Interestingly in the signatory report proposal development and finance systemperformanceimprovementwasratedthehighestoutofallothersupport.

6

63%saidthatsome,orall,oftheirpartnershadhelpedthemtoachievefinancialsustainability.Inthesignatoryreport support with organisations development on funding scored the lowest. This may indicatemisunderstandingaboutfinancialsustainability.Ontheotherhand,37%reportedthattheirpartnershadnothelpedtheminthisregard.

Over70%reportedthateitherallorsomeoftheirpartnersareprovidingthemwithadequateadministrativesupport. (althoughonly46respondentsansweredeachof thesequestions).Conversely24%considered thattheirpartnersdidnotprovidethemwithadequatesupporttocoveradministrativecosts.Inthesignatorycountrysurvey,partnerssuggestedtheneedforimprovementincoordinationandcomplementarityon”trainingoffers”astherearesomanycapacitybuildingactivitiesthatitimpedespartners’workandthusbecomesburdensome.Thiswasalsotoensuredifferentinternationalpartnersdonotoverlaporfocusonsimilarneedsandissues.

Themajorityofrespondents(73%)agreedthattheirsignatorypartnersfollowethicalrecruitmentprinciples,andmostsaidthatpoachingofstaffisnothappening.Althoughsignificantly15%saidthatoneoftheirstaffhadbeenrecruitedbyasignatoryorganisationwithinthe last2yearsduringthe firstsixmonthsofacrisis.Thiscompares to 20% in the signatory’s surveywho reported approaching local staff towork for themwithin 6monthsoftheoutbreakofacrisis.VisibilityofnationalNGOs:In termsof howwell internationalNGOs represent their local andnational partners in their own reports todonors therewas a rangeof answers.A significantproportion (26%) said theydon’t have access topartnerreports,(thiscouldbeforavarietyofreasons:itmaysimplymeantherespondenthasn’tseenthem,oritcouldindicateadeeperissuearoundINGOsnotsharingthisinformation/feedbackwiththeirlocalpartners),whilstthemajority(69%)saidinsomeoralloftheirpartnerreportstodonorstheirworkhadbeencredited.Only2ofthe46respondentstothisquestionsaidtheirworkhadnotbeencreditedintheirINGOpartnerreportstodonors.

ResponsesweresimilarintermsofrepresentationoflocalandnationalNGOs’workinsignatories’socialmediaand reporting to supporters: with 75% saying that some or all of their partners credit their role incommunicationsonsocialmediaandtothepublic.Thisisconsistentwithsignatorycountrylevelrespondents’average which indicates that at country level compliance with promoting partners in in-country public

7

communicationisthesecondmostcompliedwithpractice.Infact,itrangesjustafterthepracticeofcreditingpartnersindonorreports.Accountability:Overhalfofthe67organisationswhichansweredthequestionabouttheCharterofAccountabilitystatedtheirorganisationhassignedit.(55%versus44%whichhadnotsigned).Overhalftherespondentstothesurvey(54%)reportedthattheirINGOpartnersincountryhadnotsharedwiththemwhattheyhadsignedupto incommittingto implementtheCharter4Change8commitments. This isahigherpercentagethanthatreportedinthe2020signatories’countrysurvey,whichindicatedthatonly20%hadnotsharedtheirC4Ccommitmentswiththeirlocalpartnersand60%repliedthatpartnershadnotsuggestedhowtoprogressonC4C.ThediscrepancymayindicatealackofaccountabilityonthepartofINGOsinopenlysharinganddiscussingchallengeswithnationalandlocalpartners.

ConverselywhenaskedifthesignatorycountryofficeisfullyawareoftheC4Ccommitmentstheresponsesofendorsersindicateamorecomplexpicture,withafullspectrumofviews:over50%reportedthattheirINGOsignatorypartner’scountryofficesareeitherfullyawareorawaretosomeextenttotheC4Ccommitments,and15%felttheyarebothawareanddoadheretothecommitments.10%feltthatalthoughthereisawarenessatthecountryprogrammelevelitisnotastrategicdirectionfortheorganisation.8%feltthatdespiteawarenesstheINGOsignatorypartnerin-countrydoesnotadheretothecommitments.COVID19andCharterforChange:To understand how the situation dictated by COVID 19 influences the relation between endorsers andsignatories,aseparatesectioninthesurveywasdevotedtothispurpose.83endorsersrespondedtothissection:

10.8%ofthesurveyrespondentsreportedtheyhavereceivedmorefundingfromtheirsignatorypartners,while22.89%reportedthattheyhavereceivedmorefundingfromnon-signatorypartners.

Calculationwithseveralassumptionsofthosewhoreportedthattheyhavereceivedmorefundingfromnon-signatoriesshowsthefollowing(note:Wehave33endorsersofthewholesurveywhodonothavearelationshipwithanyofthesignatorypartners,while50endorsersdo).

� Ifthepercentageiscalculatedbyassumingonlynon-signatorypartnerendorsersresponded-the33aboverespondents-then57%ofthosereportedmorefundingbythenon-signatorypartners.

� Ifthepercentageiscalculatedbyassumingonlysignatorypartnerendorsersresponded-the50aboverespondents-then38%ofthosereportedmorefundingbythenon-signatorypartners.

Inanycase,more thandoubleof therespondents reported that theyhavereceivedmore fundingduring theCOVID19fromnon-signatorypartnersthanofthesignatories(10.8%).

Ifweconsiderthetypeofpartnership,wherearound79%indicateditisprojectbased,thosenumbersmightindicatethatsignatoriesinvestmorefundingwiththeirtrustedstrategicpartnerswhomtheyhavemultiyearpartnership,and/ortheythemselveshavelessfundingopportunities.Itisworthmentioningthatonly6%oftherespondentsreportedthattheywereintroducedtodonorsbytheirsignatorypartners.

In relation to flexibility of funding reallocation and funding requirements unfortunately, only 7% of therespondentssaiditismoreflexibleandfundingrequirementsareless.

Aslightlyhigherpercentage(13.25%)reportedthatsignatorypartnershadprovidedadditionalsupporttocoverextraCOVID19relatedcosts,suchaspersonalprotectiveclothing(PPE)forfrontlinestaff,andhigherinsuranceandhealthcarecosts.Thispercentagecanbeconfirmedbyonly4.8%oftherespondentsreportedthattherisksweretransferredtothembysignatorypartners.Disappointinglyonly2respondentsreportedthatsignatorieshadprovidedsupportforadditionaladministrationcostsorcontinuedtopaysalariesincaseswhereprojectsweresuspendedduetoCOVID19.Ifwecomparethiswiththe73.58%inthecommitmentssectionwhoreportedthattheyreceiveadequateadminsupport,thismightindicateahugefallbackduringtheCOVID19.

8

Ingeneral,thereisafallbackintheperceptionsandexperiencesoftheendorserswiththesignatoriesduringtheCOVID19 compared to thoseon theC4C commitmentsbeforeCOVID19 (during the last2 years), see someexamples in the table below (percentages are extracted from the commitments section and the COVID 19Section):

During the last 2

yearsDuringCOVID19

Endorsers have been introduced to any donor by theirsignatorypartner

49% 6%

Endorsers have taken part in a partner signatory needsassessmentanddecision-makingprocesses

60% 12%

Endorsers organization's work and role been credited insignatories'donors’reports

67.9% 0%

Endorsersorganization'sworkandrolebeencreditedinsignatory'scommunicationtothenational/globalandsocialmediaandthepublic

73.9% 6%

Those considerablediscrepanciesof the reportednumbers in theabove tablemight indicate the situationofuncertaintyandconfusiondictatedbythepandemicforbothsignatoriesandendorsers.

FutureofC4C:RespondentstothesurveyhadanumberofsuggestionsonhowtoenhanceINGOperformanceinmeetingtheirlocalisation commitments. Several suggested variations of setting up in-country co-chaired platforms ofsignatories and endorserswhere progress towards achievement of the C4C commitments are discussed andpromoted.Otherscommentedonwhatcouldbesummedupas‘advocacywithoutdemonstratedactiondoesnotyieldmuch’.Repeatedlytheemphasisofcommentsandsuggestionswereontheneedforvariationsonthethemeofmovefromrhetorictoreality,undertakemoreeffectiveandappropriatecapacitysupportandbettervisibiliseandincludelocalactorstoenablethemtoleadintheresponse.

Theoverwhelmingmajority(97%)ofrespondentswantC4Ctocontinuebeyonditscurrentenddateof2020,withmostsayingthatthereshouldnotbeaspecifictargetenddate,butthattheChartershouldcontinueuntilinternationalNGOsfullycomplywiththe8localisationcommitments,theyhavesigneduptoimplement.ThemajorityofendorserswhoparticipatedinthesurveyconsiderthatC4CisaplatformthatbridgesthegapbetweenINGOs and LNNGOs, encourages INGOs to improve their performance and delivery of localisation, andcontributestowardschangingattitudesofINGOstaffintheirinternationalandcountryofficestowardsnationalandlocalNGOs.55%alsosaidthatC4Cprovideshopethatthecurrenthumanitariansystemcanchangetowardsbetterenablinglocalleadershipinhumanitariancontexts.

ReflectionsoftheC4CEndorsersSteeringGroup:

WerecognisetheveryrealandgoodfaitheffortsthatmanyC4CINGOsignatorieshavemadeintryingtochangetheirbusinessmodelstoenablemoreequitableandlocallyledhumanitarianresponse.Nevertheless,fromtheresponsestoour2020surveyitisclearthatthisisunevenbothacrossandwithinorganisations.Thereisstillatendencyforexcellencetobeinpocketswherethereareindividualsorgroupsofstaffwhoarecommittedtolocalisation,andconsistentorganisation-wide implementation isstill lacking inmanyof thesignatory INGOs.Greatstrideshavebeenmade, forexampleat the international level inadvocating forchange,but this isnotreflectedatthecountrylevelwhererealchangeinapproachestoimplementationarestillmorelimited.

Overall,the2020C4CEndorser’ssurveyproducesaslightlymorenegativepictureofC4Ccompliancethanthesignatories’ownsurvey.Nevertheless,itshouldberecognisedthatthereisalsooftenanin-builttendencyforfunding recipients not to criticise their funders too strongly or too publicly. Although the answers areanonymisedtheoldmaximof“don’tbitethehandthatfeedsyou”isstilllikelytobeinternalised.