1 / 7

Framework Programmes

This analysis examines the rationale behind and frameworks used for programme funding of NGOs in various donor countries such as Belgium, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. It explores factors such as eligibility criteria, funding modalities, programme management, and reporting, with a focus on promoting transparent and results-oriented funding approaches.

brittanyn
Download Presentation

Framework Programmes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Framework Programmes Comparative Analysis

  2. Rationale • Set of co-financing instruments • Regular revision of funding instruments by ADA • DAC-Peer Review 2009 • “The DAC encourages Austria to move away from multi-project funding towards multi-annual results-oriented programme funding for NGOs as development partners. Austria could learn from the experience of other DAC members which provide such funding.” • Analysis • Belgium, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, • Switzerland, UK, Austria

  3. Results I • Programme approach • Broad definition: ‚strategic programmatic support on a • multi-annual basis’ • Unrestricted funding (UK) – concrete programme (SE, A) • Right of initiative; however required linkages to donor‘s thematic • and geographic focus (IE, NL, BE), or higher % of funding (N, A) • Performance framework as basis, focus on programme level; • various frameworks formats used by donors

  4. Results II • Programme management & reporting • Various systems for verification of results (less focus on impact) • Audit: organisational level – programme specific audits • Dialogue with framework partners (CH)

  5. Results III • Eligibility • National organisations; programme capacity; longstanding • cooperation • UK also INGO • SE: also umbrella NGO, provding funding to own members • NL consortia programmes • Building public support in Europe (SE, UK) • Number of NGOs • 5 (IE) up to 58 (BE)

  6. Results IV • Programme funding • € 1 Mio/year and more • Lack of transparent criteria for allocation • Grant ceiling only in NL, A – question of dependency on donor • funding, up to 90% of NGO income • Co-financing: 10% - 30% NGO resources • 100% in UK, N (in case of focus on priority sectors) • 50% CH • Funding modalities: framework agreement main instrument for • national NGOs; additional grants for small NGOs; tender • implementing country programmes; CSO support in partner • countries

  7. Austria: future exchange with agencies • Interest in exchanging: • Right of initiative • Performance framework & measuring results • Criteria for allocation of funds • Development of modalities for CSO support • other then framework programmes

More Related