Support models for CSOs at country level: Ethiopia country report

How can civil society and NGOs be supported by donors? This paper reviews experiences in Ethiopia, looking at different models for supporting civil society and investigating possibilities for improving and increasing effectiveness of direct support to NGOs/CSOs. The authors consider how this can be done through country level support models and consider different examples of donor joint funding, which is helping other donors who might not have capacity to deliver their programmes to CSOs directly.

The document focuses specifically on the strategic policy framework of the Nordic+ donors (Canada, Finland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden and the UK). The authors identify and analyse different support models, while reviewing possibilities for improving direct support to NGOs/CSOs through country level support models. The paper sheds light on constraints and possibilities of different types of support models, and explains how to increase outreach to a wider range of civil society organisations and reduce transaction costs. Conclusions include:

• in Ethiopia there are several well qualified CSOs that traditionally worked well on service delivery with broad donor support and in close cooperation with government
• government has shown an attitude of skepticism and direct hostility to CSOs involved in advocacy and promotion of sensitive political issues. At the same time, government does not have a clear policy on civil society development, and the legal framework for CSOs to operate is missing
• given the volatility and uncertainty of the situation and the vulnerability of important CSOs, there is a case to argue for continued core funding of these organisations. The way this has been done jointly by the Nordic+ donors in Ethiopia is a good example that should be continued
• the number of CSO is limited and these CSOs have shown a tendency of high dependency on a few donors. There is therefore a clear case to extend the outreach through intermediaries with lower transaction costs for the donors and a higher potential for broader outreach, diversity and flexibility.