MediaDev Fundraising Guide
FUNDRAISING HELP DESK: Sign up for fundraising support and mentoring
  • MediaDev Fundraising Guide
  • Feedback & collaboration
  • NEW: Resources related to US funding suspension
  • THE GUIDE
    • 1. Preparation & planning
    • 2. Competitive advantages
    • 3. Donor engagement
    • 4. Identifying opportunities
    • 5. Types of application
    • 6. Application process
    • 7. Building partnerships
    • 8. Writing a proposal
    • 9. Common templates
      • Guide to completing logframes
      • European Commission
      • ++ EC Concept note
      • ++ EC - Full application
      • ++ EC Logical framework
      • FCDO (UK)
      • ++ FCDO Project Proposal Form
      • US Department of State
      • ++ Form of Application Submission
    • 10. Project staffing
    • 11. Budgeting
  • Annex
    • + Fundraising lexicon
      • Call for proposals & terms of reference
      • Applications & offers
      • Application forms
      • Contracts & agreements
      • Stakeholders
      • Budgets
    • + MediaDev funding experts
    • + MediaDev funding webinars
  • MediaDev funding
    • + MediaDev Funders
      • Government agencies
      • Foundations
      • UN agencies
      • Other international bodies
      • Other funders
      • Crowdsourcing platforms
    • + Funding opportunities
  • Crisis & emergencies
    • + Crisis/emergency funding
    • + Crisis/emergency resources
      • Logistical support
      • Physical Safety
      • Digital Support
      • Fact-checking
      • Mental health resources
      • Monitoring Crimes Against Journalists
      • Legal Support
      • Directory
    • Resources for Lebanon
    • Resources for Ukraine
      • + Fundraising and Crowdfunding for Media and Journalists in Ukraine
      • Displaced Journalists
    • Resources for Palestinian media
      • + Fundraising and Crowdfunding for Media and Journalists in Palestine
      • Displaced Journalists
    • Media in Exile
  • Other tools & resources
    • How-to guides on fundraising
      • AI in Fundraising
    • For journalism nonprofits
    • For nonprofits
    • Articles and videos
  • The GFMD Fundraising Guide in other languages
    • Guide sur la collecte de fonds pour le développement des médias
    • Guía de recaudación de fondos de MediaDev
    • Посібник з фандрейзингу MediaDev
    • Руководство по фандрейзингу MediaDev
    • دليل التمويل MediaDev
    • Ghidul de fundraising GFMD MediaDev
  • Other GFMD Resource Spaces
    • GFMD IMPACT
    • GFMD homepage
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  • Reasons why donors encourage a partnership approach
  • Types of partner
  • Types of relationship
  • Co-applicants, sub-grantees & co-beneficiaries
  • Sub-contractors
  • Media partners
  • Ground rules
  • Collaboration on project design
  • Negotiation

Was this helpful?

Export as PDF
  1. THE GUIDE

7. Building partnerships

Module seven of the GFMD MediaDev Fundraising Guide.

Effective, balanced partnerships are an essential ingredient for success. However, it is very important to ensure a proper rationale for your choice of partner as well as to ensure that the resulting partnership is manageable and conducive to better results.

Reasons why donors encourage a partnership approach

It allows them to spread their funding more widely and improve the perceived equity of their programmes.

It ensures that the workload can be divided between multiple organisations, thereby avoiding bottlenecks or resourcing problems.

It gives beneficiaries access to a wider range of expertise and experience (not just that of one organisation or one country).

Partnerships involving international and local organisations allow for an exchange of experience and ideas as well as ensuring that new approaches are firmly grounded in local realities

Types of partner

In the media development field, organisations leading bids tend to look for the following types of partner:

Research partners

Organisations which can take responsibility for context analysis, baseline research, monitoring and evaluation etc.

Strategic partners

Partners who compensate for any perceived weaknesses in the experience or track record of the lead (e.g. experience in the target country or aspects of the project design). These might include technology, humanitarian or health partners for development communications programmes.

Local partners

Local organisations which can ensure the project benefits from local knowledge, networks and personnel. Local partners may also be able to provide a base of operations.

Media partners

Media outlets, local or international, who can provide broadcast or publishing platforms for any content produced through the project.

Implement due diligence processes with all partners, large or small. When considering a partner for a specific programme, consider whether or not the proposed role matches the organisation's institutional goals and mission statement.

Request institutional documents, detailing financial performance and technical capacity.

Ask trusted sources for their views and take up any references or testimonials from previous implementing partners.

Types of relationship

It is, therefore, essential that this partner’s leadership role is clearly articulated and that the organisation concerned has the internal resources and systems to deliver.

Co-applicants, sub-grantees & co-beneficiaries

Sub-contractors

Several donors allow for sub-contractors or suppliers who are not named in the bid but who are selected according to an agreed procurement process during the implementation phase.

The complexity of the procurement process will generally depend on the value of the contract but, in all cases, proper due diligence should be carried out.

The proportion of the budget which can be used for sub-contracting is often limited because the donor assumes that the actual contractor should be capable of delivering the vast majority of the required activities.

Media partners

Media partners may not fall into any of the above categories.

They may be broadcasters or publishers who have agreed in principle to carry content produced by the project because this content is perceived to have value in terms of attracting new audiences or enhancing editorial credibility.

These partners are, therefore, likely to agree to carry the content free of charge.

Donors may want to see evidence that such organisations are on board during the bidding stage through letters of support or other forms of commitment.

Ground rules

The prerequisites for a successful partnership can be summarised as follows:

Complementary skills and experience

Shared values and a common vision

Partners, broadly speaking, should have the same institutional goals and development priorities.

Similar organisational culture and effective decision-making structures are also the foundation stones for a good working relationship.

A fair division of the available budget

It is not always possible to agree on definite budgetary allocations from the outset since some activity strands may be determined by the findings of baseline research.

There should, nevertheless, be clarity about the workstreams “owned” by each partner and the project management resources required to deliver related activities.

Collective and inclusive decision-making

This approach should be carried through into project implementation.

Autonomy

Conversely, partners need to be given the space to develop and deliver their own work packages or activity strands.

Mutual support

Training and instruction should be offered, where necessary, as well as assistance with internal procedures in order to ensure complementarity across the consortium.

Effective knowledge management

All partners benefit from mechanisms aimed at sharing ideas, resources and materials across the project lifecycle.

Managing information is also crucial for project continuity (e.g. for effective briefings of consultants and proper handovers between key staff).

Collaboration on project design

It is vital that all opinions are considered and that a foundation is established for proper consultation and feedback.

Ultimately this will ensure that each partner feels a strong sense of ownership for its allocated activities.

Clearly, this process is easier when partners already have experience of working together but effective collaboration with new partners can be assured by:

Ensuring that all partners are properly introduced and their roles are fully articulated from the outset.

Clarifying focal points and responsibilities as early as possible, then ensuring all key decision-makers are copied into relevant correspondence (without inundating them with unnecessary material).

Encouraging bilateral exchanges between partners in order to build strong working relationships.

Drawing on the experience of individuals working for the partner organisations and, potentially, making funds available for commissioning research or input that can strengthen the credibility of the project.

Providing templates or frameworks for contributions (including standardised CV templates or past performance tables).

Making allowances for varying language skills and ensuring that key messages are fully understood by following up on all oral interaction with detailed minutes of what was discussed and agreed.

Negotiation

The ground rule for negotiation should be to ensure that all dealings are fair and transparent while respecting the need for some confidentiality around issues such as salaries and operational running costs.

Dos and don’ts of partner negotiations

Involve all partners in the negotiation process wherever possible.

Ensure that each partner is clear about the role assigned to them in order to avoid conflict between partners who have overlapping skill sets.

Ensure that you have a paper trail confirming that each partner has accepted the budgetary allocation and division of labour before you submit the bid.

Don’t make the assumption that local expertise is worth less, in monetary terms, than international expertise.

Don’t divide the project up according to arbitrary percentages and then design the activities according to this division.

Don’t take a one-size-fits-all approach to allocating the project management roles. Some countries have larger bureaucratic overheads than others and organisations working there may need additional resources to deal with them.

Don’t put yourself in the position of having to make a value judgment about which partner is better equipped to deliver the same activity.

Previous6. Application processNext8. Writing a proposal

Last updated 2 years ago

Was this helpful?

The is typically responsible for driving the project design and managing the bidding process.

In the event of a successful bid, the will be the contract-holder and will be accountable to the donor for ensuring the project is delivered on time and on budget.

, and are essentially who deliver an agreed portion of the matching their skills and experience.

They report to the and ensure that delivery and expenditure are properly documented, using common templates and agreed procedures.

will generally sign a partnership or cooperation agreement with the , mapping out their agreed , budget and payment schedule as well as their legal commitments and obligations.

Sub-contractors will deliver a finite set of services that cannot be provided by the or members of the , generally because they fall outside the remit of these organisations or because they are commercial in nature.

See the for descriptions of and which are EU-specific categories.

There should be a mutual need in all partner relationships. should select who fill gaps in their own expertise; junior partners should join where they feel they have a clear role to play and bring added value.

All partners should be closely involved in and should endeavour to establish a forum that facilitates and encourages a constructive exchange of views.

That said, projects cannot be managed by a committee and, therefore, a needs to be the ultimate voice of authority on the project, without being overly prescriptive or top-down.

The relationship within a should be based on mutual respect for the ability of each partner to draw on the right expertise in order to deliver a successful .

Partners need to be able to rely on other members of the , particularly the , to provide support with unfamiliar processes or systems.

The principles highlighted above should be applied during the process.

Negotiating the division of labour and can be among the most time-consuming and stressful elements of the project development process.

However, mishandling the negotiations can cast a shadow over intra- relationships for the duration of a project.

It is important to agree on the division of labour before discussing the budgetary allocation. Project management costs should be directly linked to each partner’s overall level of effort so, until the actual workload is clear, the question of should be left pending.

Ultimately, the simplest way of dividing available (particularly what some donors describe as ) is to calculate the percentage of the overall activities being implemented by each partner and then to apply this percentage to the . However, there are more complex agreements around profit share which are applicable to service contracts only.

Find a fair way of sharing the available – it is not 'best practice' for the to lay claim to the entire allocation.

Stakeholders
designing and developing the project
lead partners
lead partner
consortium
lead partner
project design
budgetary allocations
consortium
overheads
overheads
indirect costs
margin
indirect costs
lead partner
Fundraising lexicon
planned activities
outcome
Co-applicants
sub-grantees
co-beneficiaries
junior partners
lead partner
associate partners
affiliated entities
Lead partners
junior partners
consortia
consortium
lead partner
lead partner
Junior partners
lead partner
deliverables
lead partner
consortium