Annex 9: Interview and Survey Questions Partnership Report

• Author: Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO) (European Commission), Landell Mills International
• Pages: 189-191

Annexes

189

Annex 9: Interview and Survey Questions

Partnership Report

Topic

Interview questions (as relevant to the stakeholder)

Policy dialogue

• In your experience, what has been the most important dialogue about policy (HQ)

and advocacy (country) between the partners?

• How similar or different have the viewpoints been?

• Do you have an example of where you have influenced the partner and/or the

partner has influenced you?

Localisation

• How important is the localisation agenda to you?

• Are there differences between your approach and the partner’s?

• Has your position been influenced by the approach of the partner? In what ways?

• What progress has the partnership made on localisation?

• What are the challenges in moving forward?

• Are there advantages of addressing localisation in partnership compared with by

each partner individually?

Humanitarian –

development nexus

• How important is addressing the nexus to you?

• Are there differences with the approach of the partner?

• Has your position been influenced by the approach of the partner? In what ways?

• What progress has the partnership made on the nexus?

• What are the challenges in moving forward?

• Are there advantages of addressing the nexus in partnership compared with by

each partner individually?

Efficiency –

management costs

and administrative

burden

• Is DG ECHO a prompt and reliable provider of funds?

• For each SGA, does DG ECHO reliably adhere to an agreed funding schedule?

• When an SGA is modified, is DG ECHO prompt in providing additional funding?

• The FPA anticipates that cooperation will lead to ‘simplified procedures. ’ Has it?

What are they? Have there been significant cost and time savings?

• Only NRC: How do the transaction costs of DG ECHO funding compare with

NMFA, DFID and SIDA184? What stages of the project cycle are onerous?

• Are DG ECHO compliance costs (for example, with procurement procedures)

more or less onerous than those of NMFA, DFID and SIDA?

• To what extent is any of the above documented?

• Only DG ECHO: Does DG ECHO have any analysis of the efficiency of its grant-

making process compared with other reference donors?

• In what respects might the DG ECHO relationship be streamlined without

significant compromise in quality and accountability?

Efficiency – cost-

effectiveness of DG

ECHO-supported

NRC responses

• To what extent has the DG ECHO partnership led to operational efficiency and

cost-effectiveness improvements? Are there examples?

• Do DG ECHO staff (for example, regional experts and country TA) make a

significant contribution to NRC project design or implementation modality?

• What further input from DG ECHO might enhance NRC’s operational efficiency

and cost-effectiveness, and in what ways?

Efficiency – cash-

based response

• Are NRC and DG ECHO aligned in their cash policies and analysis?

• Has input/pressure from DG ECHO changed NRC’s policy on the use of cash?

• Has input/pressure from DG ECHO increased NRC’s use of cash over the period

of the evaluation?

• Is this documented?

184 NRC’s top four institutional donors globally are NMFA, DG ECHO, DFID and SIDA