Saving Mothers, Giving Life Partnership Strengths and Weaknesses Compared With Overall Partnership Success Factors
| Success Factors | Summary of Partnership Literature2,3,13,14,16,17 | SMGL Findings | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strengths | Weaknesses | ||
| Shared vision/operational approach | At the vision level, there are often high levels of agreement, but it is more challenging to align operational approaches and resources. | The partners had a shared vision in terms of reducing maternal and newborn deaths. Initially, operational approach was not clear, but the partners successfully negotiated a mutually agreed-upon operational approach and budget. | Country governments had limited input in developing the initial goal, but goal expectations were later modified. Partners assumed it was easy to integrate PEPFAR and MCH platforms. |
| Trust | Gaining trust takes time and initially relies on personal connections. Staff changes can significantly destabilize a partnership. | While there were many changes in the partnership, organizations continued their commitment to the partnership, even if at a lower funding level. | The rapid startup limited time at the outset to develop trust and define roles and responsibilities. |
| Clearly defined roles and responsibilities | Often, lack of clarity in roles and responsibilities can delay activities, create duplication, waste resources, and lead to miscommunication/mistrust among the partners. | As the operational plan was clarified, the roles and responsibilities became clearer. | Initially, there was confusion over roles and responsibilities, which was particularly challenging for some of the smaller partners. |
| Resources | The partnership can mobilize additional resources, but often fails to be suffciently resourced to meet ambitious goals. There are high transaction costs. Due to inadequate use of country systems and poor harmonization, resources can be duplicated/wasted. Pledges are not always been realized. | The partnership facilitated the use of PEPFAR funds for maternal health activities. Presence of a private-sector partner provided more engagement with private service providers. Additional partners were leveraged to fill gaps and expand the approach. | The initiative was not fully funded, partners had to revise their pledges and recommit themselves to the partnership. The partnership was limited in its capacity to provide infrastructure support. |
Abbreviations: MCH, maternal and child health; PEPFAR, U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.