Development Policy Identity SF’s identity is based on Christian values emanating from the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. Thus, SF, inspired by the Christian view of God´s creation and absolute dignity of man, strives to approach people with openness and respect, regardless of religion, culture, gender, sexual orientation or political conviction. With a deep respect for human dignity and a conviction of the value of equitable partnership, SF works to empower the poor to take charge of their own lives and communities.
Vision A world free from poverty
Mission To eradicate poverty
Core Values
Inclusive. We meet all people with openness, respect and dignity.
Results-focused. We monitor and measure the results of our work, and make any corrective adjustments when needed to achieve our objective.
Challenging. We place high demands on the poor1, our partners and especially on ourselves.
Cross-Cutting Issues Gender Equality. SF sees the effort to combat gender inequality as essential to achieving its overall goal, as research and statistics clearly show that women are over-represented in all aspects of poverty. Gender equality is therefore chosen as a cross-cutting issue, to promote equal rights and opportunities both for women and men to share in the sociopolitical and economic order.
Environmental Sustainability. Damage to the environment is one of the greatest threats to sustainable development. Although the Global North is largely responsible for environmental deterioration through unsustainable energy use and over-consumption, the poor in the Global South pay the highest price for climate change. Therefore, environmental sustainability, or the ability to meet the needs of the present generation
1
SF does not give charity, but provides opportunities and help for self-help. This discourages dependence and strengthens empowerment.
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs2, is a cross-cutting issue for SF.
Cultural Freedom. SF believes individuals and communities have a right to define and protect valued and diverse ways of life. One seventh of the world’s population belongs to groups that face some form of exclusion based on their ethnicity, religion, or language3. Convinced that no human being is less worth because of their socio-cultural standing, SF has selected cultural freedom as a cross-cutting issue in order to ensure that there will be no form of exclusion related to participation in SF’s interventions. This does not mean that SF sanctions cultural practices that are harmful and inconsistent with SF’s belief in the absolute dignity of man. Rather, SF upholds cultural freedom as a fundamental human right, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These cross-cutting issues will permeate SF as an organisation, structurally and in all activities; in a) Development Interventions, b) Human Resources and Administration and c) External Communication. Regions may also adopt other cross-cutting issues in line with other important issues that are considered crucial in a given region (e.g. HIV/AIDS in East Africa and peace & reconciliation in Asia).
Poverty SF defines poverty as the absence of sufficient resources to secure basic human needs, coupled with an inability to affect change in one’s life.
Development Approach SF’s definition of development is based on the understanding that people cannot be developed; people develop themselves. SF, therefore, defines development as a process that starts from within the individual, communities and the nation. It is the realisation of the potential for self-support and contributing to the society, and thus involves the building of self-confidence. It aims at leading lives of dignity, which include gainful employment that helps individuals to meet basic needs and ensure security and participation, which ultimately lead to the self-fulfilment of individuals. Accordingly, development is a process that frees individuals not only from fear and want, but also from political, economic and social exploitation. It is a continuous struggle for the right and access to decision making that affects the life and livelihood of the individual and their respective community, nation and region. Thus, SF’s definition of development has two components: 1. Development is self-defined; it cannot be defined by outsiders. Within the national framework, it is defined in an evolving democratic process as part of the national project. Within this long evolutionary development process, decision making and control over national resources pass into the hands of the population and their democratic institutions. 2. Development is a process of self-empowerment. It is a long process of struggle for liberation from structures of domination and control – political, economic and socio-cultural. SF therefore fully subscribes to the wider definition of the international development agenda given by UNDP; “Human development is the process of enlarging people’s choices”. 2 3
United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Minorities at Risk dataset
SF’s development approach is based on the fundamental principle that all people are equal in human dignity. Thus, development is in essence a human rights agenda. It is about the realisation of human rights for all – whether economic, social, cultural, civil or political. The fight against poverty is a fight for justice. SF uses a rights-based approach, which pursues equity and a decent standard of living for all persons. This approach strives to integrate the norms, standards and principles of the international human rights agenda into the plans, policies and processes for development. All SF’s interventions shall accentuate pro-poor strategies and respect the stated core values. As such, people will be the main focus of SF’s development work; all SF’s interventions will be anchored and centred in the people SF strives to reach out to. During SF’s current long-term strategic planning period (2009-2013), the major questions when arriving at its development perspective are: How can SF’s development strategies strengthen people’s capacity to relate directly to the state and market from a position of collective strength? How can SF create enabling conditions for socio-political and economic empowerment in order to give people the power to re-build their lives by themselves? How can SF shift its focus from a service-delivery approach to a rights-based approach? How can SF move away from individual “Project Islands” to larger-scope “Programmatic Arenas” where projects are interrelated to achieve a larger programme outcome? How can SF create enabling conditions to change unjust and unequal power relations and power structures in favour of the poor and marginalised? How can SF play a catalytic role in empowering the marginalised sections of society to have access to basic needs, resources and decision-making institutions and thus aim at promoting a just society? These are the questions that will be addressed by SF’s strategic interventions in the Master Plan.
Intervention Sectors SF has deliberately chosen Education and Microfinance as the two sectors of intervention to enable people to climb out of poverty. The Development Policy, in alignment with respective country and / or regional policies and strategies, forms the basis for interventions in these two sectors. Education is central to development. SF uses UNESCO’s definition of education for sustainable development. According to this definition, education aims at empowering people to develop the attitudes, values, skills and knowledge needed to make informed decisions for the benefit of themselves and others, now and in the future, and to act upon these decisions. Investment in human resources is decisive for promoting economic growth, social change and poverty eradication. In line with the Education for All goals for 20154, interventions will largely be within early childhood education, primary education, adult literacy and vocational skills/life skills5. SF will also address potential partnerships in higher education, targeting the “leaders of tomorrow”, focusing on community- building disciplines. Furthermore, community empowerment through awareness building and strengthening civil society (cf. section 2.10) forms one of SF’s areas of core competence. See SF’s Education Policy for more information. The focus in microfinance is to provide individuals, households and communities with access to 4
The Education For All goals include 1) Expanding early childhood care and education; 2) Providing free and compulsory primary education for all; 3) Promoting learning and life skills for young people and adults; 4) Increasing adult literacy by 50 per cent; 5) Achieving gender parity by 2005 and gender equality by 2015; and 6) Improving the quality of education (UNESCO). 5 Although SF’s education indicators are tailor-made for SF, they correspond with the internationally recognised indicators for furthering development through education. SF’s alignment with the Education for All goals will be used as a central point in advocacy.
financial services such as loans, a safe place to save, insurance etc. This can reduce vulnerability and increase the income of the poor. Capacity building of the participants and clients is also an important component of the programs. As much of the economy and welfare of poor families depend on women, women are a prioritised target group. The microfinance intervention will use the methods of both institutional microfinance as well as Community Managed Microfinance (CMMF). See SF’s Microfinance Policy for more information.
Partnership Implementing Partners Strømme Foundation is not an operational NGO but works with implementing partner organisations in the South. Implementing partners are selected on the basis of the following criteria:
• • • • • • • • • • • •
•
Partnership Selection Criteria Compatibility with SF’s vision and values Commitment to development of the poor and marginalised Legitimacy and relevance to the constituents Accountability to beneficiaries Knowledge of the socio‐political and cultural situation of the country and region Institutional capacity and quality Promoting good governance through capacity strengthening, enhanced transparency and accountability in the internal decision making processes Functional structure (Board, Management, Field Staff, etc.) Good track record in documentation and reporting Quality assurance systems Zero tolerance for corruption Legally registered Other principles to be considered: Potential to secure funds, innovative or cutting edge, added value. Potential for replicability, scaling up and advocacy towards public sector and strategic partners.
SF’s implementing partnerships cannot be limited to working only with reputed partner organisations given the strategic choice to focus on the ‘poorest of the poor’ and marginalised segments of the population in the South. Often, these communities do not have reputable local organisations precisely because of their being marginalised and disadvantaged. SF will therefore also work with organisations that are not as well organised in terms of capacity, competence and good governance in decision making, in order to enable them to develop into better organisations. Thus, capacity building of partners is strategically important. SF does, however, have zero tolerance for corruption and will terminate any partnership if funds are misused.
Strategic Partnerships and Advocacy Promoting development and empowering the poor is challenging and cannot be achieved through individual efforts alone. SF and implementing partners will therefore aim at collaborating with other development stakeholders and working strategically to build networks on local, national, regional and global levels where this promotes the rights and interests of the poor. To advocate for the realisation of rights and justice for the poor SF will seek to:
Influence policies Influence power structures and power relations in favour of the poor and marginalised
Strengthen partners’ capacity in advocacy to promote local civil society for good governance, and to advocate local, regional and national policies. Promote democratic decision-making processes.
SF recognises that efforts by NGOs in development are not a substitute for what the public and private sector are required to do. It is therefore in the best interests of the local communities that everyone involved in development work challenges the public and private sectors to assume their responsibilities, be accountable to their people, and to manage their resources in the people’s best interests. SF therefore considers it essential to be involved with advocacy towards, and dialogue with both public authorities and the private sector. Building and maintaining relations are fundamental aspects of any cooperation or partnership. Believing in the power of the people to people networking and alliances, SF is committed to the use of dialogue, especially across borders, cultures, generations and between religions. More awareness of conditions between rich and poor countries in all spheres of life - including the economic, political, cultural and environmental spheres – as well as contact between leaders, civil society organisations and the population in general will contribute to strengthening the global development agenda. The commercial corporate sector has in some instances adversely affected society by overlooking social and ecological responsibilities. SF will therefore also aim at addressing these areas of concern at local, regional, national and global levels. Strategic partners will also be sought through networking with organisations that have similar values to SF. Through such strategic partnerships, funding opportunities may be increased and SF’s efforts in its countries of operation may be strengthened.
Strengthening Civil Society SF strives to strengthen civil society through community-based and local partner organisations. A strong civil society is fundamental to ensure that the poor and marginalised have their own channels for expressing their interests. Individually, poor people are vulnerable and often powerless victims of oppression and deprivation of their rights. SF aims to safeguard people from such exploitation by creating an environment in which they are able to address their individual and collective needs, provide mutual support, resist external threats and claim their rights for durable changes in the lives of their families and communities. Thus, civil society can be strengthened, and people can move from being passive recipients to being active participants in decisions that influence them. SF does not wish to create dependency on the external environment, but works to prepare the community to take control of their lives in deciding what is best for them, having realised their inherent strength, i.e. their potential for collective action.
Geographical Concentration During the current strategic planning period (2009-2013) SF will continue to focus on four regions; Asia, East Africa, West Africa and South America. Countries of intervention have been selected according to: poverty status (number of people living below the poverty line, literacy rate, country’s position in the Human Development Index), potential for maximum outreach and impact, degree of interventions by the national government and other actors, country’s socio‐political situation, SF’s knowledge and experience of the country, national and international funding possibilities, and the position of the country in relation to other countries in a region for cross-country fertilisation. The 12 (13) countries in which SF will focus in the five-year period are: Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Uganda,
Sudan, Tanzania, Kenya, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Peru and Bolivia. The thirteenth country is Burma, where SF will seek new registration and resume operations when conditions permit and if suitable partners are identified.
Choice of Target Groups
Economically speaking:
Sociologically speaking:
Culturally speaking:
Indigent poor - those who are deprived of the basic necessities of life Oppressed poor - those who are powerless victims of human injustice Marginalised/excluded poor - those victimised by internal/external factors because of their cultural identity.
SF will focus on uplifting the poor in these three categories, in light of the local context. More specifically, the primary focus of SF’s target groups is women, children and youth.
Thematic Focus SF has decided to organise its activities on the basis of intervention lines, which, in various combinations, are assumed to achieve a limited set of thematic goals. An intervention line is basically bundles of activities. Each intervention line is targeted towards one of the four thematic goals. A thematic goal is measured as situation achieved, and the change in the lives of the target group. During the current five-year plan, SF will focus on the following thematic goals and intervention lines:
Thematic Goals 1. 2.
Improved educational opportunities for vulnerable children Enhanced economic empowerment and entrepreneurship
Intervention Lines 1.1.
Strengthen formal and non-formal education
2.1.
3.
Sustainable civil societies
3.1. 3.2.
Promote community managed microfinance (CMMF) Provide holistic pro-poor financial and nonfinancial services by: Increasing income opportunities for poor Increasing ethically and environmentally sound business knowledge and skills Empower communities for democratisation Build leadership and life skills through local culture
4.
Gender-based violence on the agenda
4.1. 4.2.
Empower adolescents on their rights Use local culture for value formation
2.2. a) b)
The relative emphasis placed on these intervention lines in a region is context-dependent and is outlined below.
Synergy Effects Synergy can be defined as “The combined power of a group of things, when they are working together, which is greater than the total power achieved by each working separately.”6 SF’s two sectors, Education and Microfinance, are effective interventions that can enable people to climb out of poverty. Together they can be even more effective, each one complementing and reinforcing the other in the task of eradicating poverty. Education, on the one hand, empowers people, mobilises them and provides them with knowledge and skills needed to make informed decisions for the benefits of themselves and their communities. Microfinance, on the other hand, gives people the means to act upon these decisions through access to capital, secure savings as well as social and economic networks. Thus, when education and microfinance work together, poverty eradication can often be accomplished to a greater extent than when they work alone. Synergy is achieved in different ways in SF’s four regions, according to context, available resources and the needs of the target group. Depending on the context synergy is sought not only between SF’s education and microfinance sectors but also between different interventions within the sectors. The selection of intervention lines and thematic goals, and hence the budget allocated to each intervention line, will therefore differ from region to region (cf. 2.17.9). SF strives – as far as it adds value and is possible – to work with other organisations in the fields of education and / or microfinance. Furthermore, SF may strive for synergy between its own interventions and those of agencies with other developmental priorities (eg. health, agriculture) at various stages of the project cycle; whether through joint planning, joint design, joint baseline, joint targeting and/or joint monitoring and evaluation. The different ways of operationalising synergy are spelled out in each region’s strategy paper (cf. Master Plan part 2).
2.15 Exit Strategy In SF, phasing out is understood as a gradual withdrawal from SF’s interventions in coordination with the gradual take-over of interventions by communities and partners. This will happen when communities and/or partners acquire the capacity, competence and resources necessary to move forward on their own. SF encourages its partner organisations to have a built-in exit strategy at the time of planning together with the target groups. SF’s phasing out strategy is conceptualised at two levels; the community level and the partner level. At the community level, SF will phase out when, together with community stakeholders, SF is convinced that the sustained interventions have achieved the desired outcomes and impact, and / or the community has developed adequate mechanisms for ensuring the sustainability of the programme in the future. At the partner level, SF will phase out when it is determined that the partner has acquired the requisite capacity and competence that enables it to achieve its mission on its own. However, having invested in building the capacity and competence of a partner organisation, SF can challenge partners that have attained sustainability in a given community to focus on new areas, or to share their competence with other partner organisations of SF. Thus, the acquired capacity and competence of one partner can be made available to other communities or partners.
6
Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary
SF has zero tolerance for corruption and will withdraw from partnership with a given partner if funds are misused (cf. Anti-Corruption Policy). SF will also sever partnership with a partner organisation if the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) or agreements are consistently violated. With regard to SF Microfinance AS’ partner organisations for financial and non-financial services, partnerships are generally long-term by virtue of the nature of the MF business and the needs of the community. MF beneficiaries need long-standing and expanded financial assistance in order to move their livelihood from subsistence or poverty level to a sustainable income level. The SMF AS strategy is based on the MFIs’ ability to attain operational self-sufficiency in a reasonable time frame of usually three to four years after inception, followed by financial self-sufficiency within a period of seven years. SMF AS will, however, continue to provide financial assistance and capacity building to organisations that are ready to expand their outreach to poorer and more vulnerable communities in a sustained manner.
2.16 Relief and Rehabilitation SF is a long term development organisation. As such, SF is not normally involved in relief and rehabilitation work. However, there may be extraordinary situations, when there are natural disasters or other emergencies in areas where partners of SF are working. In such cases SF can, where there is added value from SF’s participation in such interventions, consider assisting partner organisations to undertake relief and rehabilitation work with funds secured from various sources. Geographically, SF will primarily engage in relief work in its countries of its operation.