GEC Partnership Engagement Policy

COR908 V1

 

 

The purpose of this Policy is to provide the overarching principles and framework for ACEM to engage in partnerships in relation to its global emergency care (GEC) activities.

ACEM recognises that the College can more effectively achieve its vision, mission and strategic objectives by working in partnership. The College is committed to fostering and promoting cooperation and association with organisations which have similar objectives, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region.

ACEM is privileged to work with a diverse range of regional GEC partners to support locally-led capacity development to deliver safe and effective emergency care in the Indo-Pacific region and elsewhere.

ACEM’s GEC partners include

• Governments;
• Ministries of Health;
• National, provincial and district hospitals;
• Universities;
• International and local non-government organisations (NGOs);
• Other medical and nursing Colleges
• Regional/Global Agencies; and
• Volunteer deploying agencies.

In addition to the principles outlined in this policy, ACEM’s relationships with donors, and individual consultants and sub-contractors are subject to guidelines and procedures outlined in Procurement and Finance Manuals. 

This policy sets out the core ethical principles and partnership practices that guide ACEM’s GEC research and development activities. Ethical partnerships are those that:

• Are enriching for all parties;
• Do no harm, whether intentional or unintentional;
• Support mutual capacity development;
• Ensure the rights of all are considered in programming and power inequities are not inadvertently amplified; and
• Have a positive impact on health equity.

 

2. Terminology

ACEM/the College

means the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine.

College member

means a person admitted as a member of the College pursuant to the provisions of the ACEM Constitution and associated regulations.

Governing body

means the ACEM Board, the Council of Advocacy, Practice and Partnerships (CAPP), or the Council of Education (COE).

Trainee

means trainees enrolled in and undertaking the FACEM Training Program and, for the purposes of this policy, also includes Emergency Medicine Certificate, Emergency Medicine Diploma, Emergency Medicine Advanced Diploma and Diploma of Pre-Hospital and Retrieval Medicine (DipPHRM) trainees, and Specialist International Medical Graduates (SIMGs) undertaking College requirements for the purpose of attaining eligibility for election to Fellowship of the College.

Low- and Middle-Income Country

Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) are countries classified by the World Bank as low, lower-middle or upper-middle income based on gross national income (GNI) per capita in current USD of the previous year. These classifications are updated annually.

High Income Country

High Income Countries (HICs) are countries classified by the World Bank as high income based on gross national income (GNI) per capita in current USD of the previous year. These classifications are updated annually.

Majority World / Minority World

means those countries combined which hold most of the world’s population. Majority World is the counter-term to Minority World, which refers to those countries described as ‘The West’.

Equality

means each individual or group of people is provided the same (equal) resources or opportunities for participation.

Equity

means each individual or group of people is allocated the resources and opportunities needed to ensure an equal outcome. Equity recognises that each person has different circumstances and therefore requires different levels of support.

Formal partner

Means the governments, Ministries of Health, national, provincial and district hospitals, Universities, international and local non-government organisations (NGOs), other medical and nursing Colleges, regional/global agencies or volunteer deploying agencies that ACEM has entered into a contractual and/or funding relationship with.

Intersectionality

means the interconnected nature of social categorisations such as race, class, gender identity, sexual identity as they apply to an individual or group. Intersectionality is regarded as creating overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination/privilege and disadvantage/advantage.

Subcontractor

means an individual or organisation that signs a contract with ACEM to perform part or all of the obligations. For the purpose of GEC, when partnering with an organisation the term 'implementing partner’ supersedes the use of the term subcontractor.

Supplier

means an individual or organisation that provides physical or digital products, goods, or services that facilitate the services we provide. Suppliers are managed under ACEM’s procurement policies.

 

ACEM ensures the following values and practices underpin GEC collaborations and partnership engagement. Ethical GEC partnerships should:  

1. Be built on mutual trust;
2. Work together to foster relationships that are equitable, respectful, collaborative and uphold integrity;
3. Demonstrate a commitment to joint learning and mutual support;
4. Share information and develop stakeholder networks;
5. Create transparency and engage in open dialogue and decision-making with partners;
6. Encourage regular feedback and sharing of ideas for activity improvement;
7. Ensure respective roles, responsibilities and accountabilities are clear;
8. Respect and adhere to laws of all partner countries;
9. Promote financial transparency;
10. Manage financial risk and respond promptly to suspected financial wrongdoing;
11. Ensure the rights of all are considered in programming and power inequities are not inadvertently amplified; and
12. Commit to deliver development activities, as defined in ACEM’s Development and Non-Development Policy.

In keeping with ACEM’s External Funding Application Policy and Investment Policy, the College will not partner with organisations or (high-profile) individuals that are inherently unethical or with which an association may result in reputational damage. This includes organisations involved in:

• Pharmaceuticals;
• Armaments;
• Pornography
• Alcohol;
• Tobacco;
• Gambling; or
• Fossil fuels and the mining thereof.

 

4. Defining Partnerships

4.1 Equitable partnership

ACEM’s partnerships in GEC are underpinned by principles of inclusion and equality, and based on the ACEM core values of equity, respect, integrity and collaboration.

Together with our principles of accountability, transparency and shared vision we promote reciprocal, sustainable and mutually beneficial partnerships. Partnerships should also ensure inclusion and representation of those who are vulnerable and those who are affected by the intersecting drivers of marginalisation and exclusion¹.

ACEM acknowledges the disparity between Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) and High-Income Countries (HICs) as a potential risk to equitable partnership. This includes disparities in access to:

• Information (e.g. scientific literature, digital connectivity);
• Human resources for health and training opportunities  
• Financial resources and funding opportunities;
• International conferences; and
• Opportunities to publish research.

These disparities are compounded by:

• The dominance of Anglo-languages;
• The dominance of, and HIC partner valuing of, Minority World knowledge and methods over Majority World knowledge and methods; and
• The disproportionate influence of HIC partners in project/program administration and budget management, including inappropriate and non-consultative Key Performance Indicators; and
• Limited commitment of HIC partners to achieving cultural competency.

ACEM’s GEC activities seek to reduce disparities in access to emergency care and health outcomes. It is essential that our organisational arrangements and partnerships do not replicate the power differentials that are at the root of such disparities.

4.2 Formal partnership

ACEM seeks to collaborate with a wide range of organisations and institutions and recognises the autonomy of our partners. Our formal partnerships can be defined by:   

• A dynamic relationship and process which may or may not involve the transfer of funding;
• A longer-term relationship (typically three (3) years or more) that allows time to develop a meaningful partnership with shared goals, objectives, and outcomes for joint activities;
• Is grounded in a documented agreement that outlines the contractual obligations, irrespective of whether funding is provided, for example, a Memorandum of Understanding or Statement of Engagement.

 

5. Selection of partners

Due care and consideration must be taken when identifying new partner opportunities. ACEM will enter into partnerships with organisations that:

• Are registered in, and have legal authority to operate in, the country in which the project will take place;
• Are locally well-regarded and respected; and
• Are not subject to targeted sanctions by the Australian government.

5.1 How ACEM chooses partners

There are many factors that determine whether ACEM will form a partnership for international development activities, including where the project is initiated, the source of funding, existing relationships and expertise, and capacity to deliver. The GEC Procedure Manual provides tools for the GEC Desk to consider each unique partnership opportunity and the context of any proposed project.

5.2 Due diligence processes

Prospective partners must participate in a partnership due diligence assessment process to assess their suitability and capacity.

The partnership due diligence process verifies that a new partnership will have:  

• Shared principles, goals and ways of working;
• The appropriate technical and/or cultural expertise relevant to the partnership;
• The capacity to effectively monitor and evaluate shared activities;
• A commitment to learning and quality improvement;
• Mutual accountabilities for reporting, sharing information and communication; and
• Sufficient human and financial resource/capacity to achieve partnership outcomes.

When entering a formal partnership, the completed GEC Partner Due Diligence Check will accompany OPR593 Contract Authorisation Checklist. The due diligence checklist is a tool intended to assess whether prospective GEC partnerships are consistent with the principles outlined in the GEC Partnership Engagement Policy.  Given the resource constraints that some prospective partners may have, it is recognised that the checklist is aspirational and some partners may not be able to meet all the criteria in the checklist.  This should not necessarily preclude them from consideration as potential GEC partners.

Further details of ACEM’s partnership management processes are outlined in the GEC Procedure Manual, and ACEM’s commitments to its implementing partners are documented in each of its partnership agreements.

5.3 Decision to discontinue partnership

Should either party decide that the proposed activities no longer align with the principles set out in this policy, then this would be formalised in writing and the partnership discontinued. Periodic review of engagement of partnerships will be conducted by the GEC desk to ensure alignment with the principles set out in this policy.

 

This Policy should be read in conjunction with the following ACEM documents:

• ACEM Constitution;
• Regulation A: Governance;
• S738 Gender Equity;
• COR133 Discrimination, Bullying and Sexual Harassment Policy;
• TOR380 Global Emergency Care Committee Terms of Reference;
• Global Emergency Care Photography/Video Informed Consent Confirmation Checklist;
• OPR593 Contract Authorisation Checklist;
• COR907 GEC Partner Due Diligence Checklist;
• Development and Non-Development Policy;
• Development Principles in ACEM Global Emergency Care Policy;
• CF501 External Funding Application Policy;
• COR194 Investment Policy
• GEC Procedure Manual.

 

7. References

World Bank. World Bank Blogs. New world bank country classifications by income level: 2021-2022. Available: https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/new-world-bank-country-classifications-income-level-2021-2022 [Accessed 11 October 2022].

Alam S. Majority World: Challenging the West’s Rhetoric of Democracy. Amerasia J 2008;34:88–98