Insights

(Apologies to Robert Louis Stevenson)

Like many programs designed to build the capacity of local organizations, NPI EXPAND offers technical capacity strengthening and grants to our local partners. There are many advantages to being able to combine these two functions. For programs that only offer capacity strengthening, the local organizations can be limited in their ability to develop their capacity because of a lack of resources for their programs. This can be particularly frustrating to local organizations who sometimes would rather receive the funding that goes into capacity building put into grants to support their activities. On the other hand, grants-only programs may not succeed when a local organization needs capacity strengthening to achieve the objectives of the grants, but the program is not set up to provide the capacity strengthening. Ideally, being able to combine grants and tailored capacity strengthening to ensure that the grantee is successful should prevent these two problems.

Unfortunately, the solution of combining grants with capacity strengthening creates a new problem. If the same organization is providing grants and capacity strengthening, that organization has to have a dual personality. A sort of a Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde problem.
On one hand, the capacity strengthening organization has to play a supportive role. A good capacity strengthening organization has to listen to the local organization, understanding its needs, and design capacity strengthening programs with the full involvement of the local organization. This kind Dr. Jekyll prime organization will let the local organization set its own priorities, develop its own strategies and support the direction the local organization wants to move in. The local organization owns the program and the activities. Dr Jekyll is an enabler and a coach.

But if the prime organization also provides grants to the local organization, a different personality emerges—Mr. Hyde. Mr. Hyde imposes conditions on the local organization. Mr Hyde has to approve targets and budgets. Mr Hyde has long lists of rules and regulations that the local organization must follow. If they don’t follow those rules, Mr Hyde may withhold funding, thereby handicapping their program. Sometimes, the terms of the grant may raise questions about whose program it is. The grant must address the priorities of the funding organization. If the local organization has different priorities, they must adapt or lose the opportunity for funding. Although the grants are supposed to support the local organization’s program, sometimes local organizations have the impression that they are being hired by the donor to implement the donor’s program, according to the donor’s specifications.

Sometimes, Mr. Hyde can get the better of Dr. Jekyll. The local organization might want Dr. Jekyll to help them develop new skills to improve their performance in their activities. But Mr. Hyde has other ideas. He only wants Dr. Jekyll to teach the local organization how to better follow his rules, complete his reports and adhere to prescribed procedures. Dr. Jekyll is still playing a supporting role in building capacity, but it is not the capacity the local organization most wants strengthened.

What is the solution to this dual personality problem for prime organizations? Is it better to have one prime play the role of Dr. Jekyll and another one the role of Mr. Hyde? Perhaps, but that would require a high degree of coordination between the two primes. Capacity strengthening organizations are more likely to understand the limits and the strengths of a local organization and can provide useful input to the grant-making prime. At the same time, the offer of resources and the fear of losing them can sometimes provide useful incentives to the local organization to make the most of capacity strengthening and achieve improved performance.

At NPI EXPAND, we are conscious of our dual roles and try to balance them. Our Dr, Jekyll regularly talks with our Mr. Hyde with a view toward providing effective support to local organizations, ensuring the discipline that the donor requires and still respecting and nurturing the ownership by the local organization. It isn’t always easy, but it is the challenge we have taken on.