Developing publicprivatecivil society partnerships to promote fundamental rights: how can we assess

1
Developing public/private/civil society
partnerships to promote fundamental rightshow
can we assess the performance of a partnership?

• Bucharest 27 September 2007

Financed by the DG Employment, Social Affairs and
Equal Opportunities
2
EUFIN background

• EUFIN phase 1
• In December 2004, RESEAU FINANCEMENT ALTERNATIF
  initiated a program entitled Developing tools
  shared by public authorities and financial
  institutions to promote fundamental rights in the
  European Union financed by the EC DG
  Employment, Social Affairs and Equal
  Opportunities.
• 17 European (Germany, Belgium, Spain, France,
  Northern Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Romania,
  United Kingdom, Slovakia and Sweden) partnerships
  between public authorities, financial
  institutions and social economy organisations
  promoting fundamental rights were analysed.
• The programme 2004-2005 provided the opportunity
  to complete the following actions
• Identify and benchmark experiments and good
  practices conducted on a partnership basis by
  public authorities, financial institutions and
  third sector organisations
• Study content, application, monitoring and
  verification issues of these experiments and good
  practices
• Explain and discuss these experiments and good
  practices
• Check if and to what extent they may be
  reproduced in other European Union regions
• Pool and coordinate these experiments and good
  practices so as to promote their convergence and
  transparency.

3
Fundamental rights

• The freedom to choose an occupation and the right
  to engage in work (article 15 of the European
  Union's Charter of fundamental rights)
• The freedom to conduct a business (article 16)
• Equality between men and women (article 23)
• Protection of family life (article 33)
• The right to social security and social
  assistance (article 34)
• Access to services of general economic interest
  (article 36)
• Environmental protection (article 37)

4
EUFIN part 1 partners
5
EUFIN background

• Eufin phase 2
• Based on the need expressed by the delegates at
  the end of the 2004-2005 programme, the RESEAU
  FINANCEMENT ALTERNATIF and its partners have
  launched the second phase of the Eufin project.
• 10 training sessions are scheduled during the
  second half of 2007 to support
• the creation of public/private partnerships so as
  to promote basic rights
• the continuation of public/private partnerships
  so as to promote fundamental rights.
• These training courses are intended for public
  authorities and for mainstream financial
  institutions in order to draw their attention to
  the issue of the promotion of fundamental rights,
  but they are also directed to civil society
  organisations in order to promote the
  professionalisation of the social economy sector.

6
Introduction

• Training leaders Maria Doiciu (Eurom) Bernard
  Bayot (Réseau Financement Alternatif)
• Recorder Annika Cayrol (Réseau Financement
  Alternatif)
• Delegates presentation and experience with
  partnerships

7
Training objectives

• We will talk about the assessments that remain
  focused on the initial key objectives.
• We will learn how to plan the assessment to
  guarantee approaches agree with obtained
  results.
• We will determine relevant indicators to assess
  the partnership in quantitative terms.
• We will discuss how to perform a qualitative
  analysis of stakeholders cooperation for an
  exhaustive partnership assessment.

8
Summary 1/2

• 0830 Reception of delegates
• 0900 Presentation of delegates, objectives of
  the training session
• 0915 How can we choose the assessment method
  best adjusted to the PPP to avoid departing from
  the key objective? How and when can an informal
  internal assessment be carried out? How and
  when can a formal internal assessment be carried
  out via reports? How and when can an external
  appraiser be used? How can we reconcile an
  independent assessment with its participative
  nature to guarantee that it is valid?
• 1045 Coffee break
• 1100 How can we plan the assessment to guarantee
  that approaches used agree with results
  obtained? How can we choose between internal or
  external assessment systems? When and how can we
  combine them? How can the cost effectiveness of
  the review be maximised? How can the skills of
  partners be used to pass the partnership audit?
  How can we guarantee that assessors are
  independent? How can we appraise the relevance
  of existing internal auditing procedures?
• How will the implementation of corrective
  actions have an impact on the evaluation
  management?

9
Summary 2/2

• 1230 Lunch
• 1345 How can we determine relevant indicators to
  assess the PPP in quantitative terms? Can
  we/should we assess everything? What figures
  should the review be based on? How can we
  assess the financial position of the
  partnership? How can certain quantitative
  elements provide some indications as to the
  quality of the partnership?
• 1515 Coffee break
• 1530 How can we perform a qualitative analysis
  of the cooperation of stakeholders for an
  exhaustive assessment of the PPP? What
  standards should be used to define the quality
  of work done? How can we define qualitative
  assessment standards such as information flows,
  independence of the organisation, coordination of
  heterogeneous interests, collective
  decision-making process, etc.? In what way can
  political and cultural backgrounds have an impact
  on the assessment of a PPP? How can we reach a
  certain balance between auditing and building
  trust between stakeholders?
• 1600 Case Study
• 1700 End of training day

10
1. How can we choose the assessment method best
adjusted to the partnership to avoid departing
from the key objective?

• Involve all partners
• Transparency of methodology
• Action definition needs to be clear and adopted
  by all stakeholders
• Possible tools internal assessment, external
  assessment, steering committee

11
1.1 How and when can an informal internal
assessment be carried out?

• Evaluate timelines with partners
• Set dates to informally chat about how the action
  is going on
• Informal assessment, is it really enough?

12
1.2 How and when can a formal internal assessment
be carried out via reports?

• Nature of formal reports financial, performance
  oriented, quantitative, qualitative
• Dates should be set out when the partnership is
  formed
• Due-in dates for management reports should be
  integrated in the convention agreement

13
1.3 How and when can an external appraiser be
used?

• Different kinds of appraisers financial auditor,
  management consultant, expert moderator
• Some of the above mentioned are used in times of
  crisis
• Others are planned and budgeted
• Why? Guarantees quality of partnership.

14
1.4 How can we reconcile an independent
assessment with its participative nature to
guarantee its validity?

• Ideally internal informal assessment before
  official and external one
• Selection criteria must be clear to all parties
• Beware  democratic  steering committee
  (objectives can be lost)
• Be ready to negociate and to compromise
• In case of big discrepancy, review both
  assessments with a third party
• Although sometimes difficult, crucial to keep
  participative nature to the assessment
• Consensus can usually be found

15
Coffee break
16
2. How can we plan the assessment to guarantee
that approaches used agree with results obtained?

• Must be in initial agreement contract
• Ideally discuss thoroughly and openly between all
  partners

17
2.1 How can we choose between internal or
external assessment systems? When and how can we
combine them?

• Each assessment system has pros and cons
• Complementarity between systems is clear
• If financial means allow, combine both approaches!

18
2.2 How can the cost effectiveness of the
evaluation be maximised?

• Thorough evaluation more expensive but
  increased credibility
• Comparative study can show advantages and
  inconvenients of different systems /
  methodologies
• Depends on the partnership duration. A longer
  partnership can justify higher costs in the
  beginning

19
2.3 How can the skills of partners be used to
pass the partnership audit?

• Necessity for the partners to have research and
  analysis competencies
• It can be helpful to have an external training
  for partners to acquire the assessment
  competencies
• Ensure participation of all stakeholders yes but
  representativity can be used

20
2.4 How can we guarantee that assessors are
independent?

• Assessor must be independent from partnership
  stakes, whether internal or external
• To achieve independence, possibility of
  constituting a group of assessors in order to
  avoid over-representation
• Negotiation and compromise help decisional
  process relevance

21
2.5 How can we appraise the relevance of existing
internal auditing procedures?

• Make sure a detailed action plan exists with
  goals, methodology, roles and responsabilities,
  timelines, resources and control processes
• Evaluation system should be able to question
  procedures and operational techniques used in the
  partnership but also its own processes!

22
2.6 How will the implementation of corrective
actions have an impact on the evaluation
management?

• Implementation of corrective actions should be
  done shortly
• Corrective actions should be credible and
  legitimate
• Implementation is usually helped by involvement
  and motivation from interested parties better
  buy in

23
Lunch break
24
3. How can we determine relevant indicators to
assess the partnership in quantitative terms?

• Through collective decision making choose
  relevant indicators to asses the partnership
• Use the experience of partners that have been
  active in other partnerships
• Find information through fund granting
  organisations
• Quantitative financial indicators about the
  action and about the partnership

25
3.1 Can we/should we assess everything?

• Partnership assessment should be done according
  to a series of parameters partnership size,
  available financial means, assessment goals
• It is difficult to imagine that everything can
  be assessed
• What needs to be assessed in priority is the
  actions outputs, the budget outline and the
  partners satisfaction

26
3.2 What figures should the evaluation be based
on?

• Two categories
• Initial objectives check results from past
  exercise
• In progress objectives check their validity with
  used methods, techniques and resources
• Qualitative and quantitative data

27
3.3 How can we assess the financial position of
the partnership?

• Through different financial indicators
• Asset quality
• Cost management
• Cashflow management
• Return on investment analysis
• Provisions (to reinvest or compensate potential
  losses)

28
3.4 How can certain quantitative elements provide
some indications as to the quality of the
partnership?

• Financial indicators can be reinforced by
  quantitative elements such as
• Number of crises
• Absentees during reunions
• Delayed deadlines

29
Coffee break
30
4. How can we perform a qualitative analysis of
the cooperation of stakeholders for an exhaustive
partnership assessment?

• Determine qualitative indicators that can be
  measured and evaluated throughout the partnership
• Involve all stakeholders to ensure better buy-in,
  legitimacy and credibility
• Develop a collaborative thinking process
• Have clear rules about voting on decisions

31
4.1 What standards should be used to define the
quality of work done?

• Tools that can be used
• Surveys to all stakeholders
• Initial agreed upon indicators
• Compare initial goals regularly not to deviate
  from decided actions
• Benchmark achievements from similar actions

32
4.2 How can we define qualitative assessment
standards?

• Information flows transparency, trust,
  frequency, content-gt understandable, relevant,
  useful
• Independence of the organisation financial,
  political
• Coordination of heterogeneous interests finding
  a consensus, participative thinking and trust
  building in order to prevent conflicts
• Collective decision-making process rules (such a
  power distribution, voting mechanisms,
  negotiation procedures etc.) must be clear,
  compromising is a necessity

33
4.3 In what way can political and cultural
backgrounds have an impact on the partnership
assessment?

• Political changes can impact financial flows of a
  partnership (through grant giving etc.)
• Interesting risk check to evaluate partnership
  strength
• Solution to prevent this risk have important
  financial provisions
• Success can be different according to different
  cultures since it refers to values, which are
  culturally marked

34
4.4 How can we reach a certain balance between
auditing and building trust between stakeholders?

• Clearly trust is an important fact in
  partnerships
• Trust is not a matter of contracts it has to be
  built and maintain
• Trust is an interaction process
• Evaluation system needs to allow an important
  space to trust analysis
• Beware internal controls that can contradict
  trust relationships
• Trust and innovation can be limited by evaluation
  systems
• Importance of seeking an equilibrium

35
Romanian Micro Credit Scheme (RMCS)Entities
involved

• Founders European Union
• Romanian Government through Ministry of
  Development, Public works and Housing (MDPW H)
• European Bank for Reconstruction and
  Development (EBRD) ( leverage funds)
• Beneficiaries MSMEs Micro enterprises and
  Start Ups
• Implementers MDPWH Management Authority
• EBRD Fund manager
• PLS -Partner lending Institutions
• Technical Assistance EU funded Project_ TA to
  assist SMEs development in Romania

36
RMC Scheme Disbursement of Funds and TA
Founders EU and R Gov.
Level 1
Fund Manager EBRD
PLIs MFIs Micro Credit Banks
Level 2
TA RMCS - experts, consulting firms
Beneficiaries Micro Enterprises and Start - Ups
TA Project experts and networking activities
37
RMCS budget

• EU/RG Contribution Total 18,6 mil Euro
• - 2,5 Mil. Euro Technical Assistance
• - 0,5 Mil. Euro TA from the project
• - 3, 0 Mil. Euro Risk fund
• - 12,6 Mil. Euro Micro credit fund for MFIs
• EBRD Contribution (matching funds)
• Around 50-60 mil. Euros Micro Credit Fund for
  MFIs and Banks

38
RMC Scheme Operations- Level 1
PLIs MFIs Micro Credit Banks
Founders EU and R Gov.
Fund Manager EBRD

• Activities / Responsibilities
• Negotiation with FM the Schemes administration
  contract
• Disbursement of MF funds to Found Manager
• Supervise the disbursement of the TA funds
• Design the Exit route
• Monitor and evaluate the schemes implementation

• Activities / Responsibilities
• Design TOR for PLIs selection
• Assess PLS capacity to implement the MC Scheme
  (Due diligence)
• Negotiate the Contracts with PLIs
• Disbursement the funds to PLIs
• Disbursement of TA funds
• Monitor the PLIs activities
• Report to Founders

39
MC Scheme Operations- Level 2
Beneficiaries Micro Enterprises and Start - Ups
PLSs MFIs Micro Credit Banks

• Activities/ Responsibilities
• Design Financial products for targeted
  Beneficiaries
• Promote the MC Scheme
• Extend Micro loans to final Beneficiaries
• Monitor the Beneficiaries
• Collect the Micro loans repayments
• Report to Fund manager
• Request and attend the TA activities

• Activities/ Responsibilities
• Prepare the loan application
• Implement the project
• Repay the loan and interest
• Apply and attend to the TA/support program

40
Projects Technical Assistance for RMC Scheme

• Activities/ Responsibilities
• Support R Gov.on Schemes administration
• Design the RMCS Exit route
• Design the Monitor and evaluation system of the
  RMCS
• Assist the PLIs MFIs in the design Financial
  products for targeted Beneficiaries
• Promote the MC Scheme
• Assist PLIs- MFIs to report to Fund manager
• Assess the needs, design and deliver the TA and
  Networking programs/ events
• Assist 200 potential beneficiaries in BP
  preparation and loan application

Founders EU and R Gov.
Level 1
Level 2
PLSs MFIs Micro Credit Banks
Beneficiaries Micro Enterprises and Start - Ups
TA Project experts and networking activities
41
Formal and Informal Partnerships
Founders EU and R Gov.
Formal Partnerships Contracts
Fund Manager EBRD
Informal Partnerships Agreements
PLIs MFIs Micro Credit Banks
TA RMCS - experts, consulting firms
Beneficiaries Micro Enterprises and Start - Ups
TA Project experts and networking activities
42
5. Training assessment and thank you

• Please take the time to fill the training
  assessment form and thank you for your attention!
• Have a nice evening!!