While the quality and volume of funding reaching LNAs is a central dimension of localisation, the quality of partnerships between international and national organisations is also critical to facilitating a locally led response. Respectful and equitable partnerships with reciprocal transparency and accountability is a fundamental foundation of localisation. ^[1]

Previous research has highlighted the prevalent ‘subcontracting’ nature of partnerships between international and national actors in Türkiye. ^[2] For some L/NNGOs interviewed, their position as second or third recipients in a funding chain reinforces this experience of an ‘employer–employee relationship’. However, experiences differed and most L/NNGOs interviewed could give examples of partnerships where they felt they were subcontractors, and partnerships they considered to be more strategic . Generally, larger, more well-established L/NNGOs had better partnership experiences than smaller, local organisations. Ultimately though, most L/NNGOs interviewed did not feel they were completely equal partners with their international counterparts. While some international organisations interviewed have moved toward more of a strategic partnership approach, for example by working with the same partners over the long term and co-designing projects together, others did still view local organisations as implementing organisations. In other words, though the ‘how’ was increasingly being handed over to L/NNGOs, the ‘what’ remained in the control of the international organisation.

The compliance requirements and constant monitoring of L/NNGO cash management and activity was flagged as a key issue. This not only puts a large administrative burden on organisations but also strains the sense of trust between international and national partners. The intense scrutiny is at odds with the level of input L/NNGOs feel they have in budgetary decisions and the level of risk they are expected to take on in implementation. This limits a sense of empowerment, as one organisation said, “we don’t feel very autonomous because we need to justify our activities all the time”.

Despite this, partnerships between international and national actors have clearly evolved over time, and many L/NNGOs have worked with the same international partners for many years. Some L/NNGOs gave positive feedback of more strategic partnerships that have developed with international funders, though it was common for L/NNGOs to have different experiences of the same funder. Characteristics of these more strategic partnerships described by L/NNGOs include being involved in programme strategy planning and priority setting, joint problem-solving, transparency around the overall funding grant received from the donor by the intermediary and being able to participate in knowledge exchange activities, rather than just receiving capacity building, for example partnership evaluation workshops. Having greater autonomy and joint decision-making within programmes was considered an important element of strategic partnerships. One example of this was an L/NNGO that, rather than having to return underspend on a project because of exchange rate fluctuations, was able to use it for new activities. A national NGO interviewed also gave the example of two grants that came from the same back donor: while one international intermediary kept them informed of the overall grant and looped into updates with the donor and wider partners, the other only communicated to them about their sub-grant, which reduced their sense of being an equal partner.

International organisations also reflected on the changes in their partnership approaches over the years. One INGO reported that, in the past, it would not have included its local partners in project design and would have only identified partners after securing a grant. Now they seek to co-design projects with local partners, recognising the added value of their contextual knowledge and experience. Most international organisations interviewed expressed a commitment to enabling more productive, strategic partnerships and to supporting the development and sustainability of L/NNGOs. Some demonstrated this with country-level partnership strategies and targets as well as global organisational strategies committed to localisation . International organisations see the benefits in working with local partners, especially organisations with niche specialisms, refugee-led organisations and civil society organisations in peripheral areas which allow them to access and support hard-to-reach beneficiaries. International organisations also rely on the good relationships their partners have with the Turkish authorities to facilitate operations.

Most L/NNGOs interviewed received some form of ‘capacity building’ activities from international organisations as part of typical project grants . Intermediary organisations emphasised that capacity building is an important part of their active partnerships with local organisations, and that they undertake activities such as monitoring and training to build the long-term capacity of organisations to administer funds, which donors would not be able to directly provide. While some international organisations provided resourced capacity building, others provided it on a more ad hoc basis, often specifically linked to the project, such as support with financial reporting. In some cases, international organisations have facilitated peer-to-peer capacity building and mentoring schemes. Most L/NNGOs interviewed reported that they were able to identify their own needs and decide on the type of capacity building they would receive from international partners. Other L/NNGOs had fewer positive experiences and were provided with capacity building activities that they felt was irrelevant to their real organisational needs. L/NNGOs interviewed reported that partnerships with international organisations also provided less tangible support to organisational capacity, such as expanding networks, contacts and funding opportunities. In some cases, these partnerships and capacity building helped local actors access funding directly from UN agencies or even donors and bypass at least one intermediary.