Global Analysis
The global analysis included interviews with 55 global actors involved in global partnerships that address education in emergencies and an analysis of 227 organizational documents. Together these provided insights into key themes relating to the research questions, including private sector engagement, coordination, and participation.
Our interviews with global actors revealed a notable rise in EiE partnerships, driven by a consensus on the need to collaborate in order to reach educational goals in crisis contexts. As well, global organizations have increasingly seen the private sector as an important partner primarily due to private resources, and not without some criticisms relating to the practices and motivations of businesses.
“It’s great to have the resources, capacities and innovation that private sector can bring, on the other hand, it can actually be a bit distracting, a bit gimmicky and not necessarily really contributing to the overall response.”
Respondents agree that coordination remains a challenge for the sector, despite the rise in partnerships. Some interviewees discussed how competition in fact characterizes the sector.
“In an emergency specifically, there’s really not a lot of support in terms of financial support, so there’s this natural competition between agencies. Coordination is trying to help that, but it’s challenging for folks to share information when they have yet to secure funding to operate.”
Although global partnerships widely advocate for participatory practices, it appears that actors from the Global South, recipients of funding, and members of affected communities do not participate to nearly the same degree as those from the Global North, and are sometimes tokenized in partnership spaces. This limited participation reflects ongoing and deeply entrenched power hierarchies in EiE global partnerships.
“The power dynamics in humanitarian response are fraught with problems.”
In global documents community or “local” stakeholders were rarely referenced as equal partners in the same manner as UN agencies, INGOs, governments, and private actors. Rather, local actors were commonly referred to as a group to be engaged, consulted, or empowered, with partnership activities requiring their “buy in.” And yet organizations with global scope generally advocated a localization agenda in their published documents, whereby community participation was associated with programmatic success.
Our study revealed some significant changes in global EiE partnerships over the course of our study. COVID-19 spurred a new narrative within many global organizations on the need to “build back better,” although some actors took this as merely rhetoric.
“I see this as an opportunity for sure, because from my perspective, COVID has just laid bare tremendous inequalities within education that we knew existed, but now they’re right in your face. So it gives us an opportunity to say, hey, we can’t turn a blind eye to this anymore.”
The pandemic also may have accelerated localization efforts in EiE due to the lack of travel and absence of international actors within crisis-affected countries.
“This pandemic has emphasized the organic resilience that exists within communities and reminded us that we as international NGO workers, we have a limited view into what will work in a given context.”
The Black Lives Matter movement appears to have brought about a global reckoning on racism, including within the education and development and humanitarian sectors, although to a greater degree in the US-based organizations than elsewhere.
“There’s been a big internal reckoning, and a cry from people of color within the organization and the allies to take anti-Black racism seriously.”
Network Analysis
Database and Data Collection
For this research, we created an original database of organizations engaged in Syria refugee education in Lebanon and their partnership arrangements. The purpose of the partnership database was three-fold:
- To compile a comprehensive list of the organizations and activities in the country and sector
- To conduct a network analysis that allows us to understand and analyze relationships between organizations
- To observe changes to the network structure over time, and in particular, following a period of acute political, economic, and health-related crises causing devastation to life and physical infrastructure
The data were collected in two phases and included a total of 440 unique organizations engaged in Syria refugee education in Lebanon.
Phase 1 of data collection took place from November 2018-February 2019, corresponding to the research period prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and included 357 organizations. Phase 2 of data collection took place two years later from November 2020-February 2021 and included 404 organizations, 83 of which were new additions. Between the two phases of data collection, several organizations left their partnerships and others joined or created new partnerships.
The Partnership Network, 2019 and 2020
The two visuals above show the connections between different organizations involved in Syria refugee education in Lebanon, the position of various organizations by type based on shape and color, the overall distribution of ties, and how closely connected the entities are to one another. Those organizations with the highest number of partnerships are densely clustered near the middle of the figure. Comparing the two sociograms shows that the network expanded to include more organizations and more partnerships between them. Additionally, the organizations and partnerships in Phase 2 are more densely clustered than in Phase 1, which shows greater centrality of more organizations, meaning more partnerships between more actors.
New Links in 2021
The visual above isolates the new links, showing a high number of new organizations, of all different types, engaging in Syria refugee education in 2021.
Technology Activities, 2019 and 2021
The types of activities in which the partnerships were engaged changed between the two Phases as well, most significantly relating to a rise in educational technology activities. The figure above shows a clear shift between Phase 1 and Phase 2, where several more partnership activities focused on educational technology, as can be seen through the red lines that denote ties between different types of many partners.
Global vs. Local Organizations
This figure displays the analysis conducted in Phase 2, highlighting in dark shapes all those organizations considered “global,” or headquartered outside of Lebanon, in contrast to the light shapes of national, Lebanese organizations. This visualization makes clear the dominance of global actors within a national context in terms of both number and connections to other organizations.
Lebanon Country Study
Partnership A
Partnership A includes a non-profit, non-governmental, non-political, Syrian-led organization in partnership with an international non-governmental organization, based in the Global North. The partnership-based initiatives operate in Bekaa and Beirut. They involve: English education in nonformal learning centers to support Syrian student integration into public schools where English is required to follow the Lebanese official curriculum and professional development for Syrian teachers. The Lebanon-based Syrian partner has been involved in multiple concrete, short-term partnerships and identified this partnership for investigation because of its direct involvement with the teaching and learning of Syrian refugees and its ongoing nature.
A network visualization of the two organizations, indicated by red dots, demonstrates their position within the network structure and ties to other organizations working on Syria refugee education within Lebanon.
Despite multiple challenges over the course of this study, Partnership A persisted through multiple compounding crises to deliver English education and professional support to Syria refugee teachers, with promising outcomes in terms of their English proficiency, classroom usage, pedagogy, and reported confidence. The partnership also had an observable impact on student learning. We outline the principles behind partnership practices that led to their success prior to the onset of these crises, and that also sustained the partnership and its activities through political, economic, and pandemic crises.
“The higher thing is trust. Because after having that, everything else can be surpassed. When trust and transparency are established, you can then create a successful partnership.”
Partnership B
This partnership is between a Lebanon-based non-profit, non-governmental organization (non-sectarian, non-politically aligned) with a long-term presence in Lebanon of over 25 years and two of their sustained partners. The first partner is a large international organization. The second partner is a private foundation based in the Global North. Based in Lebanon and working in diverse areas, including Akkar, Bekaa, Beirut, South and Mount Lebanon, the partnership activities focus on basic literacy and numeracy and support for student retention. The Lebanon-based organization selected the two partnerships for the study because they viewed them as successful in terms of impact.
A network visualization of the three organizations demonstrates their position indicated by red dots within the network structure and ties to other organizations working on Syria refugee education within Lebanon. Although both partnerships within Partnership B served the goal of preparing young Syrian learners for successful entry into Lebanon’s public schools over many years and did so with measurable success, their partnership practices differed, and these differences were magnified as the non-profit persisted through Lebanon’s multiple compounding crises.
Reflecting on what partnership practices sustained them as an organization and as individuals, they referred to the private foundation as an exemplar, citing trust and respect between the two partners; open, ongoing, and transparent communication; space for mutual learning and self-reflection; and care. The practice of transparency and open communication with the foundation contrasted with the lack of transparency and strict reporting measures of the international organization, and allowed for more collaborative planning and problem-solving, in turn reinforcing equitable relationships among partners.
“[The foundation] take our opinion and feedback. They request our feedback about other NGOs and any kind of training that took place. They are with us; they include us in their thinking about the future of [education].”
Partnership C
Partnership C includes a non-profit, private faith-based school, a Lebanese faith-based NGO, and a faith-based international NGO. The partnerships operate in Beirut. Activities include: a nonformal, afterschool program that supports the integration of Syrian students into formal schools and funding to support the integration of Syrian students directly into the private, faith-based school, alongside other students. The director of the faith-based private school identified the two organizations as their sole partners. The partnerships are based on shared faith and personal relationships.
A network visualization of the three organizations demonstrates their position within the network structure, shown as red dots, and ties to other organizations working on Syria refugee education within Lebanon.
Lebanon’s compounding crises deeply impacted the operation and community of the faith-based school and its partnerships. These challenges included logistical, financial, educational, and partnership-based issues. We provide some examples of these impacts; the ways that the school attempted to overcome difficulties to sustain the school; and the response of the partners.
The faith-based school clearly prioritized the integration of Syrian students; even when Lebanese fee-paying parents complained and even left the school due to the new population of refugee students, the school continued to support the Syrians.
The partnership had a positive impact on Syrian student enrollment, retention, and grade progression. Their core principles buoyed the partnerships prior to the onset of the crises and supported the school’s mission “to be a loving community.”
Like other partnerships in this country study, individuals within Partnership C identified trust and respect through equitable relationships, as being important features of successful partnerships.
“Trust is important. I can’t have [a partner] behind my back all the time asking for reports and numbers. If they don’t trust me, I don’t want to work with them… I prefer that they know us and trust us. That’s when a partnership can be successful. A partnership that is based on mutual sharing of knowledge, expectations, and trust.”
Partnership A
Partnership A includes a non-profit, non-governmental, non-political, Syrian-led organization in partnership with an international non-governmental organization, based in the Global North. The partnership-based initiatives operate in Bekaa and Beirut. They involve: English education in nonformal learning centers to support Syrian student integration into public schools where English is required to follow the Lebanese official curriculum and professional development for Syrian teachers. The Lebanon-based Syrian partner has been involved in multiple concrete, short-term partnerships and identified this partnership for investigation because of its direct involvement with the teaching and learning of Syrian refugees and its ongoing nature.
A network visualization of the two organizations, indicated by red dots, demonstrates their position within the network structure and ties to other organizations working on Syria refugee education within Lebanon.
Despite multiple challenges over the course of this study, Partnership A persisted through multiple compounding crises to deliver English education and professional support to Syria refugee teachers, with promising outcomes in terms of their English proficiency, classroom usage, pedagogy, and reported confidence. The partnership also had an observable impact on student learning. We outline the principles behind partnership practices that led to their success prior to the onset of these crises, and that also sustained the partnership and its activities through political, economic, and pandemic crises.
“The higher thing is trust. Because after having that, everything else can be surpassed. When trust and transparency are established, you can then create a successful partnership.”
Partnership B
This partnership is between a Lebanon-based non-profit, non-governmental organization (non-sectarian, non-politically aligned) with a long-term presence in Lebanon of over 25 years and two of their sustained partners. The first partner is a large international organization. The second partner is a private foundation based in the Global North. Based in Lebanon and working in diverse areas, including Akkar, Bekaa, Beirut, South and Mount Lebanon, the partnership activities focus on basic literacy and numeracy and support for student retention. The Lebanon-based organization selected the two partnerships for the study because they viewed them as successful in terms of impact.
A network visualization of the three organizations demonstrates their position indicated by red dots within the network structure and ties to other organizations working on Syria refugee education within Lebanon. Although both partnerships within Partnership B served the goal of preparing young Syrian learners for successful entry into Lebanon’s public schools over many years and did so with measurable success, their partnership practices differed, and these differences were magnified as the non-profit persisted through Lebanon’s multiple compounding crises.
Reflecting on what partnership practices sustained them as an organization and as individuals, they referred to the private foundation as an exemplar, citing trust and respect between the two partners; open, ongoing, and transparent communication; space for mutual learning and self-reflection; and care. The practice of transparency and open communication with the foundation contrasted with the lack of transparency and strict reporting measures of the international organization, and allowed for more collaborative planning and problem-solving, in turn reinforcing equitable relationships among partners.
“[The foundation] take our opinion and feedback. They request our feedback about other NGOs and any kind of training that took place. They are with us; they include us in their thinking about the future of [education].”
Partnership C
Partnership C includes a non-profit, private faith-based school, a Lebanese faith-based NGO, and a faith-based international NGO. The partnerships operate in Beirut. Activities include: a nonformal, afterschool program that supports the integration of Syrian students into formal schools and funding to support the integration of Syrian students directly into the private, faith-based school, alongside other students. The director of the faith-based private school identified the two organizations as their sole partners. The partnerships are based on shared faith and personal relationships.
A network visualization of the three organizations demonstrates their position within the network structure, shown as red dots, and ties to other organizations working on Syria refugee education within Lebanon.
Lebanon’s compounding crises deeply impacted the operation and community of the faith-based school and its partnerships. These challenges included logistical, financial, educational, and partnership-based issues. We provide some examples of these impacts; the ways that the school attempted to overcome difficulties to sustain the school; and the response of the partners.
The faith-based school clearly prioritized the integration of Syrian students; even when Lebanese fee-paying parents complained and even left the school due to the new population of refugee students, the school continued to support the Syrians.
The partnership had a positive impact on Syrian student enrollment, retention, and grade progression. Their core principles buoyed the partnerships prior to the onset of the crises and supported the school’s mission “to be a loving community.”
Like other partnerships in this country study, individuals within Partnership C identified trust and respect through equitable relationships, as being important features of successful partnerships.
“Trust is important. I can’t have [a partner] behind my back all the time asking for reports and numbers. If they don’t trust me, I don’t want to work with them… I prefer that they know us and trust us. That’s when a partnership can be successful. A partnership that is based on mutual sharing of knowledge, expectations, and trust.”
