This is our second briefing and reflection paper on intermediaries. It contributes to an ongoing critical reflection in the aid sector.The behaviours of notably international aid agencies, acting as ‘intermediaries’ for the funding to local and national actors (LNA), have come under scrutiny, given the international commitments to better support and reinforce national and local actors. Several INGOs have also been developing their ‘localisation’, ‘partnering’ and at times ‘anti-racism’ and ‘decolonisation’ policies.
The first paper ‘Intermediary Organisations under the Spotlight. Why?’ looks at what we mean with ‘intermediary’ and why ‘back-donors’ or ‘funding partners’ use them. Most organisations playing an intermediation role with aid money are international, but there can very well be, and are, also national ones. That paper unpacked how intermediaries can add value but can also abuse their power over national and local actors they sub-grant to. It also stated that intermediary organisations make choices about how they handle their ‘intermediation’ position: Do they see themselves as merely an executive instruments of the donor’s plans, putting pressure on the LNA to fall in line with those? Do they see themselves as primarily a supporter of LNA, pushing back at the funder’s unhelpful demands? Do they see themselves as brokers who try to manage, if not resolve, tensions and discrepancies between the donor’s ideas and requirements and the LNA’s ideas and capabilities? Do they want to maintain the intermediation role, because it is a valid business model and offers quite some power and resources?
