Organisational Review of the Norwegian Refugee Council

Executive Summary

In 2006 Norad, together with the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), did a comprehensive organisational performance review of the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC). The report was published in April 2007 with the title “Durable Management for Durable Solutions.” NRC presented a follow-up plan after the review. Some processes have taken longer than expected indicating that the deadlines were too ambitious, but in general we can state that NRC has taken the follow-up very seriously. The report from the review has been used actively and seems to be well known in the organisation. NRC staff interviewed has largely corresponding views on challenges and strengths of the organisation. We observed a self-critical and conscious staff when speaking about the challenges, and at the same time self-confident and enthusiastic about their work.

The team’s impression is that the efforts made after the previous review has lead the organisation closer to an “NRC way” in the sense of a common approach and appearance. These efforts include the introduction of new tools, consolidating practices streamlining approaches to thematic areas of intervention, and systematic training of staff. We conclude that NRC has reached a higher level of professionalisation in its appearance, and has laid a good foundation for increasing its effectiveness and efficiency in reaching planned results. We have taken special note of the work NRC has done on gender and anti-corruption since the previous review. Based on the information we have been able to acquire from interviews in Oslo and document studies, NRC seems to be well aligned with priorities in Norwegian development policy.

Some processes initiated demands particular attention and additional efforts before they can give results in terms of improved performance. We think that the process of elaborating a strategy on partnerships and implementation models has gone somewhat slowly, and stress the importance of completing this work. There is more awareness in the organisation about the importance of risk analysis and risk management, but this is an area which needs further improvement. Although much effort has been put into improved reporting systems, it still remains to develop this further and integrate it fully in the organisation. Reporting to Norad has however improved in quality from 2007 to 2008 when it comes to documenting results.

NRC receives funding from several donors and is constantly exploring new sources of funding. Better donor coordination could contribute to the efficiency of NGOs such as NRC. There is also a potential for better coordination between Norad and MFA. While Norad provides a relatively limited annual amount of long term funding to NRC, MFA provides considerable funds to NRC for humanitarian interventions each year. NRC does not separate clearly between its humanitarian and long term interventions, but rather stresses the concept of “durable solutions” as a goal in its assistance to refugees and IDPs. The team finds that the durability concept is a key entrance point for exploring how NRC fits into a long term development scheme (as managed by Norad), and is relevant for the various points under “Scope” in ToR.