June 24, 2016 UNAIDS Partnerships- Strategies, structures and social relationships Sally Smith Partnership Adviser

June 24, 2016 UNAIDS Principles for partnership 1 Strong partnerships: Have clearly defined and specific shared goals, clear purposes/objectives and an agreed strategy to achieve the goals Include the full and meaningful participation of all stakeholders, including People Living with HIV (PLHIV) Respect Human Rights and the dignity of all, especially PLHIV and the most marginalized Respect the principle of Gender equity Build trust and model transparency Are results orientated Sustainable or have clearly defined criteria for their end point- are time bound

June 24, 2016 UNAIDS Principles for partnership 2 Strong partnerships: Are accountable- and use resources efficiently, human and financial Are values and evidence informed Have clear roles and responsibilities as well as division of labour for the partners Have clear terms for monitoring and evaluation Respect country priorities- are aligned and harmonized with country priorities Include methods to gather and manage knowledge Are flexible, responding to learning and changes in the environment Have an appropriate structure to meet the goal and carry out the strategy- “form follows function”

June 24, 2016 UNAIDS More questions: What type of partnership do you have? – this will help to define the structure e.g.:  Funding mechanism  Research  Technical Support  Product development  Coordination/ collaboration  Advocacy  Network/Social Movement What is the most appropriate structure? How is the achievement of the goal evaluated? How do you measure the contribution made by this partnership to achieving the goal?

June 24, 2016 UNAIDS How do we know we are getting it right? Questions to address in developing a partnership: What is the value added of the partnership in the Global Arena? What is the primary goal? What are the specific objectives or purpose of the partnership? What are the 3-6 main elements of the strategy to achieve the goal What are the respective strengths of each partner – what does each contribute to the partnership- what resources, human, technical and financial does each bring?  What is the best division of labour, roles and responsibilities to achieve the objectives

June 24, 2016 UNAIDS Drilling down…. What makes us legitimate, credible, valid?  Inclusiveness of all key partners  Mechanisms for hearing voices from country/grassroots members Does the proposed action lead to addressing the goal? - (how to guard against competing agendas and pet projects) Is the time frame of the need defined- time bound or long term and sustained?  If time bound- how to decide when to stop? What will be achieved- by when?  If long term, then how will the activity/partnership be sustained over the long haul? Is the partnership flexible- how will it respond to changes in the environment or the problem?

June 24, 2016 UNAIDS How do you know you are making a difference? How does knowledge move through the partnership- spiral up and/or spiral down? What mechanisms are there for learning and knowledge to influence the goal and the structures of the partnership? –review and re-visit How is the partnership building trust and modeling transparency? To whom and for what is the partnership accountable? How is the cost effectiveness of the partnership assessed? – is this partnership and this approach the best/ most effective way to achieve the goal? How will the results be measured- what are the evaluation criteria?

June 24, 2016 UNAIDS Types of partnerships: characteristics and governance elements: This list is not exhaustive but illustrative: TypeCharacteristicsStructural Elements Funding mechanisms Need strong accountability mechanisms Need trusted secretariat support often housed in trusted partner organization Small numbers of partners Formal governance structure Formal decision making process Formal accountability mechanism Technical review standards or objective criteria for funding Technical review panel or expert body needed e.g. GFTAM Formal partnerships Generally small number of partners Formal arrangements and agreements Specific deliverables- e.g.: technical support or product development Secretariat support needed M.o.U’s or other legal contracts Governing board Formal decision making process

June 24, 2016 UNAIDS Collaborative/ coordination mechanisms May have minimal or no formal governance- but a small group of technically strong partners. A tight agenda and deliverables maximum flexibility to achieve deliverables with minimum bureaucracy Other broader partnerships may have collaborative type governance mechanism Secretariat support needed Agenda can be tight as above or much broader consensus based- Difficult to coordinate large number of partners! Less formal – more consensus basis for decision making Less necessity for legal documents or contracts e.g.: Research partnerships More structured collaborative mechanisms need a governance mechanism with consensus style decision making e.g.:UNAIDS Alliances Some elements of formality in the structure Collective definition of the agenda Some kind of decision making body needed Secretariat generally housed in lead partner Large numbers of partners possible Mobilization of advocacy and action effective- communication mechanisms need to be strong- often strong on internet use Useful for generation and sharing of capacity development tools –guidance documents- consensus building around advocacy Steering committee or governing body with consensus style decision making common Technical working groups to advise on specific areas- or develop specific tools- e.g. Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance, WAC, International HIV/AIDS Alliance. MERG, YWCA

June 24, 2016 UNAIDS Networks Very loose structure, often completely internet based Needs little staffing, possible to have one or two people working from home with strong internet skills No decision making body Strong information exchange capacity Often run discussion groups Strong on generating advocacy messages and raising public awareness Social Movements Not necessarily structured, flexible, cannot be controlled, may generate mass public action on specific issues Can be short-lived the people can be easily led by strong characters. Strong positive and negative characteristics. Mobile, but may be a rapid way of exchanging knowledge- can be dominated by emotion. Carry significant potential and significant risk.