P2P and LRSP Proceses: Lessons learnt from CARE Niger’s satellite Zakari Madougou ACD, CARE Niger WARMU RAC – March 26, 2009

What is Satellite ? Sites committed to making the programmatic shift but not necessarily ready or able to take on the responsibilities of learning and dissemination as a learning lab. Sites of adapting and implementing initial conceptualization of the programmatic approach. Sites that have the capacity to gain knowledge and insights from the Learning Lab COs.

What have been done so far in Niger ? Sharing broad information on Labs, sats, signature program P2P and UBORA. As part of our LRSP process: Conduct of a base line study on Program Quality indicators ( report available) Review of Vulnerability and poverty profile through the lens of UF and UCP Use the theory of change for the new NORAD women empowerment programs( reports and proceeds available) Alignment of the LRSP with the framework of the Program approach (in progress)

Costs and requirements Fund secured through LRPSP preparation budget Need for laying out resources (time and $$) an about sixty people, 4 areas, 2 days of preparation, 2 days of workshop for PQI Fears of staff compared to their job: Potential resistance of staff.

Benefits and opportunities The program quality tools allows An exhaustive evaluation of activities being implemented Give opportunity of questioning (quality and impact) our work Rigorous tool which makes possible identifying GAPs of our work Better understanding of ToC when using the UF Update of the criteria of vulnerability and poverty profile Reorganization of the M&E pole to redirect it towards the quality control, accountability and the measurement of impact

Challenges and difficulties • The PQI tool raise complex questions (exclusion, discrimination, marginalisation • How to put the partners at the same level of understanding • Complicated exercise which requires a long preparation • Tool difficult to fill if there is no evidence to be given (quality M&E, capitalization) • Often there is no relation between the questions and the criteria of notation • Difficulties to evaluate alone the quality of a consortium program when CARE is lead

Out standing issues   To educate donors and checking their willingness to fund programs and in which conditions Need for developing suitable communication and marketing mechanisms for donors and decision makers Active engagement of the members of CARE Int' L is necessary