Institutional Integration

Several development initiatives increase their self-sustainability by strengthening their institutional integration. 

Many projects have programs that cover a number of areas of development (health, education, housing and so on) because they are looking to provide comprehensive responses to the problems facing their target communities. But sometimes, the teams in charge of each of these areas work separately, perhaps because there is poor internal communication, because each area is individually accountable to donors, or because they are simply not aware of the multiple links between programs. For this reason, some initiatives come up with strategies to better integrate their teams so that all the different participants know what each is responsible for, how each area works and what resources it counts on, what difficulties, resources or beneficiaries they have in common, and who they can turn to in order to solve a given problem. 

This can favor project self-sustainability because having open channels between development programs prevents duplication of efforts and even allow funds and other resources (material, human, knowledge, infrastructure, etc.) to be distributed more flexibly among areas, especially to cover those that have a harder time getting support in the first place. This contributes to more efficient and effective resource management and allocation, but also helps strengthen the different development areas that the initiative targets, as well as their interconnection. If an initiative has both an education and a health program, for instance, it can partially integrate them both so that children learn to take care of their health in schools and are treated in clinics to stay healthy and learn better. In this scenario, both areas support each other and the benefit of each is multiplied. Comprehensive solutions of this sort better address the problems of a given community.

Many initiatives appoint teams to strengthen institutional integration; they ensure that the initiative’s different programs and administrative processes are designed, monitored and evaluated in coordination. Other initiatives use rotating management, in which participants change responsibilities from time to time so that everyone is thoroughly familiar with the project’s different goals and needs. And to improve communication between the initiative’s various members and areas, still others develop technological solutions (institutional e-mails, databases, etc.) or appoint “bridge builders” (people who can help improve collaboration thanks to their specific knowledge, skills or experience, such as speaking a specific language).