3.3 Partnering for the wrong reasons
Reasons for partnering in development programmes don’t always apply in emergencies. Some reasons that can turn out to be the bad ones for partnering in an emergency include:
- To build capacity-In an emergency, effectiveness is the key concern. Unless CARE has long-term plans and is well prepared, it is also unlikely to be able to invest significantly in partner capacity, except by providing simple technical assistance (TA).
- Limited funds-Making funds go further is a good aim, but is secondary to providing adequate services. Also, partnering increases the costs of oversight, technical assistance and maybe risks of disallowed costs.
- To evade donor rules-It is wrong to see partnering as a way to get around rules on procurement, logistics or financial accountability. Indeed, partnering is probably tougher for CARE, as it is responsible for partner compliance.
- Limited capacity-Managing partner contracts demands finance and support capacity, and resource is also required for oversight and TA. Instead of being a reason to partner, limited capacity is a reason not to programme at all.
- Recruitment problems-Problems with finding good staff are unlikely to be solved by partnering. If INGOs can’t do it, it is unlikely that their partners can.
- Safety and security-Partnering due to concerns about safety and security of CARE staff might not be respectful of partners’ rights to them too. These issues should at least be properly discussed with partner agencies.
- Because CARE should partner-Although partnering is important for CARE, it won’t always be the best way to work. There should always be good reasons to partner. In emergency, increasing effectiveness is all that really matters.
