Name:
Lene Terp Beuchet
Organisation:
Danish Family planing assocaition
Response:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide written response to the Organisation Strategy for Amplify Change (AC). As DFPA we would like to acknowledge that Denmark is supporting AC as part of the commitment to SRHR and gender equality. Their work is highly important and support the work that DFPA is doing together with our partners internationally. As for the new organization strategy we would like to propose that the findings and recommendations from the Evaluation of support to gender equality in Danish development cooperation (2014-2021) commissioned by MFA (report yet to be launched) is taken into account. This can be done both in the actual organisaiton strategy for AC but also during the development of ACs new strategy where DK as a key donor can play a role in setting direction and priorities for ACs work in the coming years. We also want to recommend that DK is advocating that ACs strengthen its focus on the interlinkages between SRHR, gender and climate change. These interlinkages and strategic priorities are mentioned in both “the World we Share”.
Name:
Sofie Enstrøm
Organisation:
PlanBørnefonden
Response:
• PlanBørnefonden appreciates the Transition Framework for Denmark’s engagement in Mali 2024-2027 and the continued engagement of Denmark in Mali, despite the very complex and challenging situation. • PlanBørnefonden emphasize that it is key to continue support of vulnerable youth to generate income and economic opportunities, despite the very complex and challenging context. We thus acknowledge the continuation of the FAMOC and the FACEJ programmes under the Transition Framework for Denmark’s Engagement in Mali 2024-2027. • With regards to FACEJ, PlanBørnefonden wants to add the following points (These has also been submitted in a separate response): o It would be relevant to look at how future scenarios for Mali (identified in the Transition Programme) are anticipated to affect FACEJ II and the expected results. o It is very relevant with the unallocated funds of 1.8% that could be used as a crisis modifier to adapt to the changing context and needs during the programme period - but it would be relevant with a higher percentage to account for the very volatile and difficult context FACEJ II will be operating in. o The proposed project time frame of only 3 years will limit the possibilities for FACEJ II to conclude all activities and reach the expected results - it will be relevant to look at possibilities of prolonging FACEJ II. o It should be envisaged that FACEJ II takes over the ongoing engagements from FACEJ I at the level of the entrepreneurs, facilitators, and banks and are not possible to close before the start of FACEJ II. • PlanBørnefonden also recognize the importance of maintaining Denmark’s commitment to cross-cutting issues such as humanitarian principles, gender equality, human rights, and youth. These will continue to be critical issues to address in order to resolve underlying conflict and fragility drivers and to generate lasting development, peace, and stability. • In the Transition Framework a number of Strategic CSO Partners with Danida are mentioned. PlanBørnefonden wants to flag, that the Strategic Partnership with PlanBørnefonden in Mali is missing from the list. We suggest that this is added to the Framework.
File:
Response to Transition Framework Mali.docxThere are currently no accepted responses for this consultation.
Name:
Sofie Enstrøm
Organisation:
PlanBørnefonden
Response:
1. It would be relevant to look at how future scenarios for Mali (identified in the Transition Programme) are anticipated to affect FACEJ II and the expected results. 2. It is very relevant with the unallocated funds of 1.8% that could be used as a crisis modifier to adapt to the changing context and needs during the programme period - but it would be relevant with a higher percentage to account for the very volatile and difficult context FACEJ II will be operating in. 3. The proposed project time frame of only 3 years will limit the possibilities for FACEJ II to conclude all activities and reach the expected results - it will be relevant to look at possibilities of prolonging FACEJ II. 4. It should be envisaged that FACEJ II takes over the ongoing engagements from FACEJ I at the level of the entrepreneurs, facilitators, and banks and are not possible to close before the start of FACEJ II.
File:
FACEJ response.docx