SOCCER Steering Committee Visit at EASO Offices, Bangkok June, 2014 Presented at SOCCER F2F Meeting Session 5e - September 2014 Vienna, Austria 1

EASO Office Visit Met with Patrick Canagasingham, SDO and key members of his team Mark Kelly, SDO for SAPO, also joined the meeting Issues discussed: O4 – framework & principles (realizable expectations); Implications of partnership priorities; SOCCER relationship with eGOLT; SO Common Fiduciary Requirements. The meeting was “exploratory” and open in terms of its approach. The SOCCER group got a very warm welcome from Patrick C. 2

EASO Meeting Patrick’s Concerns: – Implications of SO Common Fiduciary Requirements – Recruitment for 5/7 NDs O4 Desired State FY16 – Much work still to be done in Region – Portfolio level management in SOs – what does it mean? SOs engaging at ADP level – not realistic vs ensuring full accountability to donors. Accountability to donor goes all the way to the donor – but need to engage at NO level. – Being able to fill gaps in Evidence base – we’re not there yet – RO cannot fill missing NO level – Challenge of understanding (partnership) changes not only at leadership level – but at staff level. And understanding what RO can and cannot do. 3

EASO Survey of NOs NOs want engagement that leads to acting with choice, not prescription Empowering of NOs has not happened NOs want to excel – excel at work that matters What NOs want from RO: – Simplify processes – Understand No individually – Engage NOs in integrated management – Be professional with NOs – Champion NOs 4

EASO - Discussion NOs and ADPs need to be empowered – otherwise we’ll not reach O4 goals Balancing strategic engagement with Fiduciary requirements; PST is one of many vehicles to achieve this O4 challenge is not only programmatic, but institutional GNOD providing more info now Dealing with NOs – not just “E,C, B issues” – but size issues RO cannot do capacity building of NOs. Should it be institution building? How is NO capacity building done? PSTs need to be the primary “working platform” for the CPMs; we all need to take PSTs seriously. Some PST members still focus on ADPs NO needs to lead and set the tone for the PST 5

EASO - Discussion We need thought leadership in SOs GC is enforcing compliance – not promoting innovation. This can be “soul-crushing” on the ground. PCPR: – PCPR a useful tool but does not tell the whole story – Ratings will inform the OCPs – but OCPs cover the whole NO – PSTs need to look at PCPR results – does it precipitate a change in PST plans? – Use of PCPR: performance mentoring; performance evaluation? 6

EASO - Discussion LEAP3: – EASO and SAPO will be looking at LEAP3 in depth in August; many questions coming from NOs on LEAP3; – Higher caliber of technical thinking seen as a plus; – TPs should give us a more robust baseline – SOs will post funds generally at AP level – not TP level – Budgets from AP can go to any TP?? – Auditors need to see the link to the RC – Solution? A good quality design at AP level – Let’s take on real examples for LEAP3 – less theory and more experiential – Balance between technical top-down approaches vs community-led contextual approaches 7

EASO - Discussion EASO RICE: – Issues: sequencing of change – particularly for LEAP3 and Horizon3; need to have DPA in place – More interest and excitement about LEAP3 than perhaps the other pieces 8