Page 1Webinar on PCAs and SSFAs with CSOs in Country Offices (Q&A)23August 2011
Questions and Answers
Questions / AnswersWhat are the differences between MoUs and PCAs? / MoUs are used for collaborations which do not involve the transfer of resources (cash or supplies) while PCAs are used to regulate partnerships involving the transfer of such resources.
Is there a standard template for MoUs? / There is no standard template for MoUs, however, examples of UNICEF's MoUs with International CSOs are available on the Intranet.
When should an SSA be used instead of a PCA? / If the nature of the relationship is contractual, then issue an SSA – Institutional, even if the work is to be undertaken by a Civil Society Organization (CSO). However, if the relationship between the CSO and UNICEF is a partnership which involves the transfer of resources, then issue a PCA. The nature of the relationship is what dictates the type of agreement to use, not the legal status of the organization (e.g. private sector, non-governmental organization, etc).
If a CSO desires to work with UNICEF yet does not make a contribution or share resources, what type of agreement would be appropriate?
Does a threshold for financial contributions exist? / If no contributions are made nor resources shared, an SSA should be used for services conducted by the CSO. To form a partnership or collaborate with UNICEF, the CSO should provide some form of resources, which can take the form of cash, materials or knowledge resources. An example of the latter can be described by a Community-Based Organization (CBO) whose members bring detailed information and knowledge of the community which can be used for planning, implementing and monitoring and evaluating programme activities. In this context, the contributions of the CBO are valuable and important to achieving the common goals of the partnership.
As noted above, there is no requirement for a CSO to contribute financial resources in order to enter into a partnership with UNICEF. The CSO may make substantial contributions to the partnership in other ways, as for example in terms of technical or academic knowledge resources (e.g. university) used to achieve a common goal or result.
How can a financial assessment be conducted on anInternational Non-Governmental Organization (INGO) whose office is not located in the country / Before establishing a PCA with an INGO whose operations exist completely outside the programme country, consider conducting a financial management assessment in two stages. During the first stage, the CO should seek information about the INGO from a variety of sources, namely the Internet, via the Regional Office (if located within its geographical area of responsibility), HQ (DPP/PD), and from other organizations (e.g. UN System Agencies, IFIs, bi-laterals, etc.). Among the documentation to consider include: audit reports, certified financial statements, tax statements and publically available documents which speak to the organization’s integrity, programmatic and financial capacity, etc. Once the INGO establishes operations in the programme country, the CO should review the local financial management systems using the checklists provided under the Framework on cash transfers to implementing partners or the modified checklist provided for partnerships whose value is less than $100,000.
For PCAs with universities, does the guidance address the intellectual property rights derived from data and information funded by UNICEF? / The guidance does not address this issue, but after collecting additional details from concerned country offices, DPP will work with the Division of Communication and the Office of the Executive Director (Legal) to find an acceptable solution. In the meantime, the CO may insert language into the Programme Document which addresses the concerns of both parties.
Is it necessary to obtain a letter from the government for permission to form a partnership with CSO? / The CPAP, Part V on ‘Partnership Strategy’ should contain language permitting UNICEF to collaborate with CSOs. It recommends that the role and involvement of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) as programme partners, including Non-Governmental Organisation (NGOs) or Community Based Organisations (CBOs) be mentioned wherever possible and relevant. If such language was not inserted into your CPAP, a letter may be necessary depending on local practice.
Should the activities in a PCA be carried over into a workplan signed by the government? / The Programme Document of the PCA should relate to the larger major activities and budget lines of the relevant UNICEF workplan signed by the government. This workplan should include the activities to be implemented, the timing, amount of funding and reference the CSO as the implementing partner.
Is it necessary to obtain reference letters to attest that a certain CSO is the best partner for a specific partnership? / The guidelines provide a checklist to assess an organization’s capacity and integrity and financial management capacity to conclude a PCA. A separate checklist is used to assess organizations to conclude an SSFA – usually with Community-based Organizations (CBO). A Country Office may use any other sources of information to make an informed decision on the choice of a partner. Triangulating information from a variety of sources, including references from other organizations, is a good strategy to improve the quality of assessment. However, any additional steps needs to be weighed against the time and effort required to collect additional information.
As the RO operates on a 2 year programme cycle, is it possible to implement an activity inscribed in a PCA or SSFA which cuts across 2 such cycles? / The PCA can include an activity which cuts across 2 programme cycles. In such a case, develop a way to measure progress and a budget for each of the 2 programme cycles separately. Stipulate in the agreement that the budget for the second cycle will only become effective once the Executive Board approves the RO’s biennial budget and satisfactory implementation of the activity during the previous period.
Can an existing SSFA valued at less than $20K be amended such that its total exceeds $20K?
What if value of all SSFAs exceeds 10% of the country programme budget? / An SSFA cannot have a value of more than $20K. In addition, the total amount of a Country Office's SSFAs cannot exceed 10 % of the total programme budget within a year.
If the Country Office wishes to expand a partnership with a CSO which currently has an SSFA, a separate PCA should be developed as the increase in value increases risks requiring a more comprehensive agreement.
The issue should be discussed by the CMT with a focus on creating/strengthening a system to monitor and report on the value of all SSFAs. A report of the circumstances and plans to address the problem should be shared with the Regional Office.
What do the guidelines on PCAs and SSFAs say about procurement? / Authority to approve a civil society partner’s off-shore procurement of supplies and equipment using funds provided by UNICEF rests with Director, Supply Division Copenhagen, taking into account the recommendations of the head of the office issuing the PCA.
A CSO partner with the appropriate capacity may undertake local procurement, however, some specialized supplies (e.g. vaccines, drugs, etc.) may only be procured by the SD. Country Offices should assess the capacity of the partner to procure programme supplies and manage relevant aspects of in-country logistics (see: Logistics Counterpart Assessment)
Can funds be transferred from one budget line to another? / The projected cost of any single input in the budget included in the PCA Programme Document funded by UNICEF can be adjusted provided that (a) the variation is no more than 20%; (b) the total amount of Direct Programme Support Costs does not exceed 25% of the total amount of the budget; and (c) the total budget included in the PCA Programme Document and the amount of Cash Transfer remain the same. However, exceptions should be considered by the Head of Office and minuted for the record, where reasonable and appropriate based on changed circumstances.
If full amount of funding for PCA is not available, is it acceptable to conclude a PCA for full value or should amendments be prepared each time funding becomes available? / It is simpler to develop a PCA covering the full cost of the partnership if there is a strong expectation that funds will be forthcoming and/or there are other strategies to fill any funding gaps. In approving a PCA without full funding, the Representative should acknowledge that the risk of insufficient funding is manageable. If there is reasonable doubt about the availability of future funding, amending the PCA each time new funding becomes available is an option.
Under what circumstances can the Direct Programme Support Costs (DPSC) exceed 25% of the total value of funds and supplies? / The total of DPSC should not normally exceed a maximum of 25% of the total funds and value of supplies (net of indirect programme costs) provided to the CSO under the PCA. Each UNICEF Office is responsible to clearly assess, together with the partner organisation, what is “reasonable” considering the local context and typical costs for administering local activities. As a guideline, up to 25% of the total budget to be transferred by UNICEF – including the value of supplies; and excluding indirect programme costs - is allowable for such costs. Normally, the amount will be less than the 25% limit. The limit could exceptionally be exceeded depending on the justifiable costs in the proposed budget for the local context. In exceptional cases, which will usually be crisis situations with very high logistics, access and/or security costs, the Representative must sign a written justification to be filed with the PCA for any percentage of DPSC above 25%.
Are there minimum standards for risk assessment? / For risks related to a partner’s financial management capacity, the Framework on cash transfers to implementing partners (HACT) provides several checklists to help you establish a level of risk. A similar checklist is provided in the guidance for partnerships valued at less than $100,000. The country office may conduct these assessments or consider engaging the services a private audit company to conduct them. Checklists provided in the guidance can be used to assess other risks related to the integrity and programmatic capacity of the partner.
Our CPD is being extended till end of 2012, but we don't have the official approval from the Board until June this year. However, we have a number of PCAs that are under development that have a one year or longer time frame - extending into 2012. What is the recommended practice in these situations - do we sign the PCA for the required duration (e.g. one year) even though it extends past the current end date of the CPD? Or do we sign it only for the 8 months left in this CPD, then extend it once we have the extension request approved in June? / The ExDir states that: “PCAs and their budgets cannot be agreed for a period that goes beyond the life of the approved Country Programme or Humanitarian Response." A related footnote further specifies that: "An existing PCA that runs out at the end of the current Country Programme or Humanitarian Response cycle could be extended by mutual agreement once a new or extended cycle comes into effect."
You may sign a PCA for the 8 months left in the current Country Programme and then extend the PCA once you have the CP extension request approved by the Board or Executive Director depending on the specifics of the request (e.g. 1 or 2 years). This PCA must state that the end of the Agreement coincides with the end of the CP (e.g. 31 Dec 2011) but the expected results, activities, budget and timeline in the Programme document can be drafted in such a way as to show what is required for the first 8 months and what is required in the following period. This way, you will only need to amend the new dates (start and end) of the PCA at the beginning of the new CP. This should reassure partners that work will not be interrupted by a slow revision and review process.