This checklist translates the Charter for equitable relationships between NGOs/funders and grassroots groups principles into concrete, measurable actions. We encourage funders and NGOs to periodically assess and document their adherence to these items to ensure equity, transparency, and shared power with grassroots partners.
How to Use This Checklist
- Review bi-annually or annually depending on partnership duration.
- Use this as a mutual accountability tool—both grassroots and NGO/funder sides can use it.
- Track progress over time, and use gaps as a basis for honest dialogue and improvement.
1. Let Community Needs Lead
☐ Grassroots groups were involved from the outset in strategy and planning.
Evidence: Meeting agendas, co-created planning documents, early involvement logs, etc.
☐ Partnership structures recognize grassroots groups as autonomous equals.
Evidence: MOUs showing equal decision-making roles, shared governance models, etc.
☐ Accountability flows toward communities, not only upward in institutions.
Evidence: Community feedback mechanisms, participatory evaluation reports, etc.
☐ Campaigns respect collective leadership and avoid individual hero narratives.
Evidence: Messaging guidelines, community-approved communications, etc.
2. Be Transparent About Where We’re Coming From
☐ A ‘shared values’ document was co-developed at the start of the partnership.
Evidence: Signed shared values or partnership principles.
☐ Each party shared their origin stories and motivations.
Evidence: Partnership onboarding materials, meeting notes, recorded introductions, etc..
☐ All parties were clear about their goals, timeframes, and constraints.
Evidence: Project briefs, expectations documents, etc.
☐ Exit or review strategies are in place if trust breaks down.
Evidence: Co-developed conflict resolution protocols, offboarding processes.
3. Invest in Deeper, Long-Term Relationships
☐ Time and space were invested in building personal, trust-based relationships.
Evidence: Regular check-ins, relationship-building activities, etc.
☐ Conflict is handled through transparent, empathetic dialogue.
Evidence: Conflict management procedures, facilitated sessions.
☐ Funding is designed to be multi-year or renewable when possible.
Evidence: Multi-year grant agreements, renewal criteria outlined.
☐ Delays in fund transfers are minimized or addressed transparently.
Evidence: Timely disbursement records, explanation logs for delays.
☐ Emotional labor and movement fatigue are acknowledged and supported.
Evidence: Wellness stipends, trauma-informed practices, etc.
4. Commit to Addressing Rising Fascist/Authoritarian Threats
☐ Open dialogue with grassroots groups on risks and challenges is ongoing.
Evidence: Meeting notes, risk assessment discussions.
☐ Innovative strategies are developed collaboratively to mitigate political risks.
Evidence: Scenario planning outputs, protective protocols.
☐ NGOs/funders advocate for grassroots groups facing repression.
Evidence: Public statements, support letters, legal aid partnerships, etc.
☐ Funding mechanisms account for National legal restrictions.
Evidence: Flexible disbursement models, alternative channels explored.
5. Prioritize Learning and Be Willing to Change
☐ Regular reflection and learning spaces are part of the partnership.
Evidence: Learning logs, co-learning workshops, etc.
☐ Power dynamics are explicitly discussed and addressed.
Evidence: Power mapping exercises, internal DEI training.
☐ Feedback from grassroots partners informs organizational change.
Evidence: Policy updates, internal memos referencing grassroots input.
☐ Non-traditional knowledge sources (oral, lived experience) are valued.
Evidence: Inclusion of community narratives in reports, flexible impact indicators.
6. Proactively Discuss and Challenge Barriers to Inclusion
☐ Barriers to participation are identified and addressed upfront.
Evidence: Accessibility plans, needs assessments.
☐ Redistribution of power is a deliberate practice, not just a stated value.
Evidence: Leadership roles for grassroots members, participatory budgeting, etc.
☐ Support is provided for practical access (transport, childcare, mobility support etc.).
Evidence: Reimbursements, stipends, access support logs.
☐ Global South perspectives are centred in funding decisions.
Evidence: Diverse advisory boards, Global South-led processes.
☐ Facilitators or third parties support power-sensitive conversations.
Evidence: Use of trained facilitators, workshop outcomes.
7. Limit Financial Reporting and Funding Restrictions
☐ Reporting requirements are simplified and proportionate to capacity.
Evidence: Short-form templates, oral report options.
☐ Flexibility is allowed in how funds are used (within agreed values).
Evidence: Budget flexibility clauses, real-time amendment mechanisms.
☐ Outcomes, not bureaucratic compliance, are the focus of accountability.
Evidence: Outcome stories, impact snapshots instead of long reports.
Final Notes
☐ All of the above were co-designed or discussed with grassroots partners.
Evidence: Feedback loops, design session documentation.
☐ We have mechanisms in place for grassroots partners to evaluate us.
Evidence: Partner surveys, anonymous feedback tools.
