Partnership Equality Review Consultant

BACKGROUND

The International Rescue Committee responds to the world’s worst humanitarian crises and helps people to survive and rebuild their lives. The IRC recognizes that people who directly experience crisis and the actors closest to them are best placed to drive lasting change – they have the right, and should have the power and resources, to do so. Working in partnership with local civil society, government and private sector actors is therefore fundamental to the IRC’s new global strategy, and to its mission to help people whose lives and livelihoods are shattered by conflict and disaster to survive, recover and gain control of their future.

The IRC’s Partnership Excellence for Equality and Results System (the ‘PEER System’ or ‘PEERS’) sets out the IRC’s policy, process, guidance and tools for working in partnership. The primary objective of PEERS is to ensure the IRC defines and delivers its role in each context based on how we can best ‘add value’ to the roles, capacities and strategies of local civil society, government, and private sector actors. PEERS aims to promote principled, collaborative partnerships that share power and harness the complementary knowledge, expertise and power of each partner, to develop better solutions for more people caught in crisis. The global application of PEERS is supported by a global training program, e-learning modules, and training webinars.

SCOPE OF WORK

The consultant will review the PEER System Handbook and associated training curricula and learning resources and make specific, actionable recommendations for how the IRC can improve the extent to which PEERS applies and promotes the core institutional and partnership principle of equality in practice. The consultant will apply three overlapping lens to the review, identifying opportunities to improve the extent to which PEERS:

• drives an anti-racist approach to the IRC’s work;
• applies feminist principles in practice; and
• promotes the expressed priorities of global south actors.

It is anticipated that the work, described in more detail below, will be performed over a 6-9 month time frame. The methodology should be designed to address issues of power within the consultancy. The methodology and time frame is to be agreed with the consultant.

SPECIFIC RESPONSIBILITIES

The specific responsibilities of the consultant are:

• Review recent literature exploring decolonizing aid and anti-racism as it relates to partnerships, as well as literature relating to the application of feminist principles in partnership, and relating to participatory approaches in the community development sector
• Review the public positions of key ‘global south’ networks articulating their priorities in partnerships with INGOs, including the NEAR Network’s Localization Performance Measurement Framework
• Review best practice from southern-based grant-making bodies, such as Women’s Fund Asia and FRIDA
• Review the complete PEERS handbook and key tools (e.g. organizational snapshot, vetting, PPCR, partnership agreement, meeting & monitoring, feedback, etc) through anti-racist, feminist and ‘global south’ lenses
• Review the PEERS training curriculum and e-learning module through anti-racist, feminist and ‘global south’ lenses
• Meet with IRC partners and staff at different levels as appropriate and conduct interviews to understand their perspective on the power imbalances in the systems, processes and policies
• Set out specific, actionable recommendations to strengthen the extent to which PEER System and the associated training program and learning materials promote an anti-racist, feminist approach to partnerships that aligns with the expressed priorities of global south actors. The draft recommendations should propose sequencing of application and distinguish between changes that are possible within existing donor regulatory frameworks, and those that should be the focus of advocacy with donors and/or other relevant parties
• Facilitate a review of those recommendations with a cross-section of IRC staff and partners to determine feasibility (having regard to change management issues), sequencing and timing, as well as alignment with the IRC Strategy 100 framework and donor regulatory requirements
• As part of the process described above, identify terminology in use that risks perpetuating power imbalances (e.g. ‘localization’) and alternatives

KEY DELIVERABLES

• An Inception Report including a methodology and workplan for approval
• A set of draft recommendations, with accompanying rationale, to be reviewed with a cross-section of IRC staff and partners as described above
• A brief final report summarizing methodology, findings, recommendations (including rationale for each) and outcomes
• A presentation of the findings and recommendations in audio/ visual/ webinar format designed to improve accessibility for a wider audience