Partner-led programmes
Where the agreement permits, THESO works through local organisations and appropriate public institutions. Partner selection, contracting, support and oversight are part of the agreed management role.
Our operating model
Responsible funding. Practical delivery. Clear accountability.
We connect the funding agreement to the people, decisions and evidence needed for effective implementation.
THESO manages development and humanitarian funding through partner-led programmes, direct implementation or a combination of both. The funding agreement defines which arrangement applies, the responsibilities each party carries and the conditions that must be met.
A clear operating model gives funders a way to understand the delivery chain and gives local partners a usable framework for implementation. The goal is proportionate control: enough structure to protect resources and people, with practical support for the organisations doing the work.
Choose the delivery arrangement that fits the assignment.
Direct implementation
Where the agreement requires THESO to deliver defined activities, we take responsibility for those components and their associated operational and reporting requirements.
Combined delivery
A programme can use different routes for different components. A shared results framework and clearly assigned responsibilities keep those components connected.
Seven stages. A documented path from agreement to closeout.
Agree the purpose
Define the outcomes, budget, delivery responsibilities, approval points and reporting requirements together.
Funding agreement and results frameworkAssess the delivery route
Select partner-led delivery, direct implementation or a combination based on the agreement and the operating context.
Delivery plan and risk assessmentSelect and prepare partners
Review organisational capacity, governance, financial management and safeguarding requirements before commitments are made.
Due-diligence and partner assessmentContract and release funds
Use approved budgets, documented authorisations and staged funding. Carry the funder’s applicable conditions into sub-grants and define the requirements for each release.
Agreement and payment authorisationDeliver with communities
Connect implementation with local priorities, service quality, practical supervision and opportunities for people to give feedback.
Activity records and community feedbackVerify and adapt
Reconcile financial reports and check delivery evidence before subsequent tranches. Record exceptions, required corrective action and the decisions on any changes.
Financial reconciliation and verificationReport and close responsibly
Bring financial and programme reporting together, complete agreed assurance work and plan for continuity beyond the funding period.
Consolidated reporting and closeout records
Build assurance into the agreement.
Start by defining the assurance the programme actually needs. Agree the financial reporting format, procurement responsibilities, partner eligibility criteria, safeguarding requirements, verification methods and audit arrangements before implementation begins.
Match the intensity of oversight to the context and the assessed risks. Capacity support, clear budget guidance and timely discussion of exceptions can be as important to sound delivery as formal checks.
Costs and any agreed cost recovery should be visible in the programme budget. Changes to the scope, budget or implementation arrangements should follow the approval process established in the agreement.
Controls in practice.
Partner assessment and risk
Review legal status, governance, financial capability and relevant screening requirements. The assessed risk informs tranche limits, reporting and the level of verification.
Independent authorisation
THESO’s published operating model requires multiple payment authorisations, including an authoriser outside the programme team. The agreement and delegated authority define the applicable approval responsibilities.
Verification before later releases
Reconcile financial reports and check delivery evidence before subsequent tranches. Record exceptions and corrective actions so that a release decision is supported by an identifiable record.
Conditions carried into sub-grants
Reflect the funder’s applicable requirements in partner agreements, with clear responsibilities for procurement, reporting, safeguarding and the handling of changes or exceptions.
Request the records needed for your appraisal.
The operating model describes responsibilities and controls. An institutional assessment should also examine the current records and programme-specific arrangements relevant to the proposed role.
Organisational evidence
Registration information, governance arrangements, applicable policies and the current institutional information needed for your assessment.
Delivery evidence
A defined results framework, work plan, partner roles, risk assessment and a realistic account of the operating context.
Financial evidence
The proposed budget, reporting arrangements, authorisation responsibilities and supporting records relevant to the engagement.
Make the first discussion specific.
Tell us the intended geography, sector, funding instrument, likely duration and outcome. Indicate whether you require a fund-management role, implementation, technical collaboration or a combination. We can then identify the appropriate next discussion and the documents needed for mutual due diligence.
THESO manages programme funding; it does not offer investment products or promise financial returns. A partnership conversation does not constitute a funding commitment or a sub-grant award.
The next step
Start with the outcome. Build the delivery model around it.
Discuss your requirements and request the information needed for due diligence.