Saving Mothers, Giving Life Governance Strengths and Weaknesses Compared With Established Success Factors

Success FactorsSummary of Partnership Literature2,3,13,14SMGL Findings
Governance structureLow participation from countries and NGOs on governing bodies but boards are becoming more representative.
Partnerships require dedicated staff to support them.
The partnership developed a defined governance structure with voting and clearly identified organizational points of contact.
Composition size was seen as a positive.
MOHs were not included on the Leadership Council during Phase 1. They were invited to join during Phase 2, but country factors inhibited their participation.
SecretariatThe Secretariat plays a vital role in the effectiveness of the partnership; the costs of coordination and communication are often not well understood or resourced.The Secretariat provided stability to the partnership and was praised for its leadership.
Governance process: M&EAgreement on common metrics, data collection approaches, and partner roles are essential.
It is important to have indicators that reflect the outcomes as well as the partnership processes.
Rigorous M&E enabled the partnership to demonstrate success and make program adjustments.The Phase 1 evaluation touched on the partnership, but the partnership did not have any metrics that measured the partnership processes.
Governance process: decision makingDominant decision makers are usually related to the size of funding.Regular (technical, results, and financial) updates were provided via the Operations Committee and Leadership Council.The partnership was largely seen as Washington-driven and USG-funded.
There were some conflicts of interest and power dynamics between larger and smaller partners.
  • Abbreviations: M&E, monitoring and evaluation; MOH, Ministry of Health; USG, United States Government.