NGO Partner Capacity Assessment 2015

Transcription

1 NGO Partner Capacity Assessment 05 SUMMARY A complete NGO Capacity Assessment (CA) tool kit was developed based on a consultative process with PHPF stakeholders, and is included in the 05 PHPF Country Operational Manual Of 45 invited NGOs, 88 submitted due diligence documents and applied for CA process. A total 84 NGOs (65 national, 9 international) have successfully passed the process. The partner s geographical coverage areas include Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), Balochistan, Sindh and Punjab, with minimum coverage in Gilgit Baltistan (GB) and Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK). The partner s humanitarian sectoral coverage areas includes community restoration, education, food security, health, nutrition, protection, shelter/nfi and WASH. INTRODUCTION In accordance with the 05 global Operational Handbook for Country-Based Pooled Funds, one of the most significant changes in the operation of a country-based pooled fund is the NGO registration and capacity assessment to appraise a partner s eligibility to apply to PHPF for funding. The CA is aimed at determining whether the NGO partner has sufficient level of capacity in terms of institutional, managerial, financial and technical expertise. This analysis establishes eligibility to receive funding from PHPF. The CA does not apply to UN agencies and IOM. The CA is carried out by OCHA Pakistan. Every NGO will be assessed and based upon the result, will determine if an NGO is eligible to apply for funding to PHPF. The CA will be conducted once a year, with the possibility of additional rounds based on cases that merit exceptional consideration. In sudden onset emergencies, there may be situations where organizations that have not been subjected to a formal capacity assessment require funding in order to carry out critical missions or life-saving activities that no other organization can perform. In these cases, a capacity assessment is not necessary, or can be carried out later. Nonetheless, it is important to ensure that a minimum level of checks are performed in order to safeguard the accountability of the Fund. METHODOLOGY Due to financial constraints, OCHA s Humanitarian Financing Unit (HFU) carried out the CA through the use of proxies. Proxies are assessments that give a strong or reasonable indication of the capacity of an NGO, and can function as a substitute to the fully fledged assessment. For this purpose, OCHA developed a CA tool kit (Annex ) based on consultations with PHPF s main stakeholders and OCHA s Headquarters Funding Coordination Unit. The assessment is structured to systematically review the applicants based on the following indicators: a. Governance and institutional capacity, b. Technical and response capacity, c. Financial management capacity, d. Funding capacity, and e. Participation in the Inter-Cluster Coordination Mechanism (ICCM). Based on the appraisal using the CA matrix tool (Annex ), eligible partners are rated as either: (i) High Risk, (ii) Medium Risk, or (iii) Low Risk. The risk level determines the minimum control mechanisms applied throughout the grant management cycle. The Operational Modalities table (annex 4) provides an overview of the modulation of the control mechanism based on the three elements of partner s risk level, budget amount and project duration.

2 OCHA invited the following NGOs to participate in the first round of the CA process:. NGOs with experience in implementing ERF/PHPF funded projects since 00;. NGOs that attended ERF training sessions; or 3. National NGOs recommended by the National Humanitarian Network (NHN) This first CA process took place between April and July 05. OCHA invited 45 NGOs ( national and 4 international) based in Islamabad, KP, Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan to participate in the process. For this purpose, OCHA conducted seven briefing sessions in Islamabad, Peshawar, Karachi, Quetta and Multan to explain the online registration process and the CA application through the new Grant Management System (GMS). The applicants were required to submit relevant due diligence documents for further assessment. 88 NGOs submitted their application to GMS. After a thorough review process, 84 NGOs are considered eligible to apply for funding to PHPF (Annex 3). OCHA provided explanation to the unsuccessful NGOs on the result of their assessment. In the last call for proposal in June 05, 5 eligible NGOs (0 national and 5 international) successfully secured funding from PHPF to support the returnees in Bara of Khyber Agency. ANALYSIS Type of Partner The eligible partners consist of 69 (78 per cent) national and 9 ( per cent) international NGOs. For the last five years, ERF/PHPF has allocated a higher percentage of funding to national than international NGOs. Some of the international NGO partners have implemented projects through local NGO co-partners. As of July this year, the percentage of fund allocation to national NGOs has reached 6 per cent, in comparison to 57 per cent in 04 and 48 per cent in 03. In locations where access is a challenge for humanitarian actors, national NGOs have a comparatively better chance to directly and smoothly implement projects (Annex 4, Table ). Partner Experience with PHPF Since this first CA process prioritized the assessment of existing partners, about 74 per cent of eligible NGOs are currently working and/or have experience implementing PHPF projects for the last five years. The other 6 per cent are national NGOs that have attended ERF/PHPF training sessions or were recommended by the NHN (Annex 4, Table ). Origin Base Nine national and 9 international NGOs (approximately 3 per cent) of the eligible partners are based in Islamabad. One hundred per cent of eligible international NGO partners are based in Islamabad. Another 38 per cent are based in KP, considering that since 04 ERF/PHPF fund allocations have been focused on supporting IDPs and returnees in KP and FATA. The provincial authorities highly advise to maximize the local resources (i.e. local NGOs from respective province) for projects implemented in that respective province. Only six per cent are based in Sindh and nine percent in Punjab, and none are based in AJK and Gilgit Baltistan. (Annex 4, Table 3). Risk Level Approximately 55 per cent of the partners are at Medium Risk, 39 percent at High Risk and only two per cent at Low Risk level. The two eligible partners with Low Risk levels are CERD (national) and ACTED (international). The four unsuccessful partners are national NGOs, one of which has a project with PHPF in the past (Annex 4, Table 4).

3 54 eligible partners (approximately 64 per cent) are currently implementing and/or have past project portfolios in KP/FATA, with two of the partners at Low, 37 at Medium and 5 at High risk levels. Between 6 to 34 per cent of eligible partners are currently implementing and/or have past project portfolios in Balochistan ( NGOs: at Medium, 0 at High), Sindh (4 NGOs: 9 Medium, four High and one Low) and Punjab (9 NGOs: 0 Medium and 9 High), but only NGOs in GB and in AJK are at Medium risk (Annex 4, Table 6). Sectoral Coverage The eligible partners are currently implementing and/or have past project portfolios in all humanitarian sectors - including community restoration, education, food security (food aid, agriculture and livelihood), health, nutrition, protection (general protection, child protection, gender-based violence and aging & disability), shelter/non-food items (NFI) and water and sanitation (WASH). About 5 per cent of eligible partners have sufficient capacity to implement WASH projects and 48 per cent for protection projects (combined general protection, child protection, gender-based violence and aging & disability), while only 7 per cent have sufficient capacity for the implementation of nutrition projects. All partners have experience in implementing multi-sector projects, i.e. not only focusing on one sector (Annex 4, Table 5). Geographical Coverage Areas About 64 per cent of eligible partners are currently working and/or have past portfolios in KP and FATA and thus will be able to implement projects in these areas in the future. In particular for flood-prone areas, 9 per cent of partners are currently working and/or have past portfolios in Sindh and 35 per cent in Punjab. Only one partner is currently working and/or has past portfolio in AJK and another NGOs in Gilgit Baltistan. About 7 per cent of the eligible partners are currently working and/or have past portfolio in multi-geographical areas (Annex 4, Table 6). RECOMMENDATIONS For the 06 CA process, the following points are recommended:. HFU refines the CA matrix tool based on their experience piloting the tool in this first round of the CA process.. For the NGOs that will be invited: o KP/FATA-based NGOs should be recommended by the clusters. o Non-KP/FATA-based NGOs should be recommended by members of the National Humanitarian Coordination Mechanism (NHCM) in Islamabad. o International NGOs should be recommended by the Pakistan Humanitarian Forum o (PHF) with assurance of valid new MoU with the Minister of Interior (MoI). NGOs that have passed UN agencies CA process, including the Harmonized Approach to Cash Transfer (HACT) framework, should be invited. 3. HFU will invite NGOs based and/or having prior experience to implement projects in AJK and GB. 4. Considering geographical coverage areas, HFU will increase number of invitees for NGOs in Sindh and Punjab, considering the provinces vulnerability to floods. 5. Considering sectoral coverage areas, HFU will coordinate with nutrition cluster coordinator in KP and at NHCM in Islamabad to have a significant number of NGO invitees with specialization in nutrition. 6. For the purpose of point, the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC) through the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT), to advocate to UN agencies to share their partner pool list and other relevant information.

4 ANNEX 3. List of Eligible NGO NO NGO Name Action Against Hunger Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development 3 American Refugee Committee International 4 Cesvi 5 HelpAge International 6 Handicap International 7 International Rescue Committee 8 Islamic Help Pakistan 9 Japan Emergency NGO 0 Johanniter International Assistance Medical Emergency Relief International-UK Muslim Aid 3 Muslim Hands International 4 Norwegian Church Aid 5 OXFAM GB 6 OXFAM Novib 7 Secours Islamique France 8 World Vision International 9 Plan International 0 Basic Education & Employable Skill Training Bent-e-Hawa Peace and Development Organization Centre of Excellence for Rural Development 3 Community Appraisal & Motivation Programme 4 Community Research and Development Organization 5 Education Health Social Awareness and Rehabilitation 6 Friends Foundation 7 Frontier Primary Health Care 8 Hayat Foundation 9 Help in Need 30 Initiative for Development and Empowerment Axis 3 Integrated Health Services 3 Just Peace Initiative 33 Pakistan Rural Initiatives for Emergency Preparedness, Response and Development 34 Pakistan Village Development Program 35 Participatory Rural Development Society 36 Peace and Development Organization 37 Peoples Empowerment and Consulting Enterprise 38 Poverty Eradication Initiative 39 Prime Foundation 40 Relief Pakistan 4 Rural Empowerment and Institutional Development 4 Sarhad Rural Support Programme 43 Social Services Program 44 Society for Human & Environmental Development 45 Society for Human and Institutional Development 46 Support Agency for Rural and Human Association s Development 47 Tameer-e-Khalaq Foundation

5 48 Women Empowerment Organization 49 Youth Resource Centre 50 Associate in Community Development 5 Humanitarian Organization for Poverty Elimination 5 Balochistan Boys Scout Association 53 Balochistan Rural Development society 54 Bright star Development Society Balochistan 55 Drugs and Norcotics Educational Society for Humanity 56 Innovative Development Organization 57 Nations Capacity Building Program 58 Participatory Integrated Development Society 59 Society For Empowering Human Resources 60 Society for Mobilization, Advocacy and Justice 6 Women Development and Community Organization 6 Sabawoon for Peace and Sustainable Development 63 Water Health Education Environmental League 64 Awami Development Organization 65 Association for Gender Awareness & Human Empowerment 66 Doaba Foundation 67 Farmers Friend Organization 68 MOJAZ Foundation 69 Rural Education and Economic Development Society 70 Sanjh Preet Organization 7 Sangtani Women Rural Development Organization 7 Chenab Development Foundation 73 Community Word Service Asia 74 Islamic Relief Pakistan 75 National Rural Support Programme 76 PAIMAN Alumni Trust 77 Shifa Foundation 78 Strengthening Participatory Organization (SPO) 79 Sungi Development Foundation 80 We Can 8 Health And Nutrition Development Society 8 Management and Development Foundation 83 Root Work Foundation 84 Sindh Development Society

6 ANNEX 4 Table. Type of Partner Type of Partner INGO 9 % NNGO 69 78% Table. Partner Experience with PHPF Partner Experience with PHPF New IP 3 6% Current IP 65 74%

7 Table 3. Origin Base Origin Base Balochistan 3 5% Punjab 8 9% Sindh 5 6% KP/FATA 34 38% Islamabad 8 3% Table 4. Risk Level Risk Level D 4 4% A % C 34 39% B 48 55%

8 Table 5. Sectoral Coverage Sectoral Coverage Nutrition 0 3 CR 3 4 Health 0 6 Education 8 Food Security 9 Shelter & NFIs 9 4 Protection 3 5 WASH 7 6 A B C D Table 6. Geographical Coverage Areas AJK GB Geographical Coverage Areas Balochistan 0 Sindh 9 4 Punjab 0 9 KP/FATA 37 A B C D 5

9 Table 7. Risk Level and NGO Operations