Frequently asked questions: Global Learning Hub for the Women’s Voice and Leadership Learning Partnership
Scope & Expectations
1. Can you clarify the relationship and division of responsibilities between the Global Learning Hub and the future Regional Learning Hubs?
The Global Learning Hub’s responsibilities are detailed in the ‘Objectives and key activities’ section of the detailed call for proposals. As for the Regional Learning Hubs, a key responsibility will be to implement the learning agenda with a specific focus on addressing key learning questions that are most relevant and needed for the regions. This will be co-determined with the renewed Women’s Voice and Leadership (WVL) partners.
More specifically, it is envisaged that Regional Hubs play the following roles:
- Advance learning priorities by commissioning research activities (research papers, trends analysis, literature reviews, case studies) to gather data, evidence and knowledge.
- Offer skills and resources to help renewed WVL partners take up learning efforts identified on the agenda. These could take different forms and shapes, depending on what is most relevant for the renewed WVL partners.
- Build regional solidarities, mutual support, and build a sense of common purpose among regional organizations, including with other feminist organizations and leaders from the region.
- Lead collaborative advocacy in the region by sharing learning and results with the wider community and connecting renewed WVL projects with broader learning and action toward gender equality in the different regions.
2. What are the geographic locations where you would want the hub to operate? Where would the Regional Learning Hubs be located?
There will be four regional hubs, comprising the 20 renewed WVL projects.
- Latin America and the Caribbean (five projects: WVL Caribbean, WVL Central America, WVL Colombia, WVL Peru, WVL Guatemala)
- West and Central Africa (four projects: WVL Ghana, WVL Nigeria, WVL Democratic Republic of Congo, WVL Senegal)
- East and Southern Africa (seven projects: WVL Ethiopia, WVL Kenya, WVL Mozambique, WVL Somalia, WVL South Africa, WVL South Sudan, WVL Tanzania)
- Southeast Asia and Eastern Europe (four projects: WVL Bangladesh, WVL Indonesia, WVL Sri Lanka, WVL Ukraine)
3. May we have a list of organizations already implementing the renewed WVL projects globally, regionally and within the country?
The full list of projects funded by Global Affairs Canada (GAC) through the renewed WVL program will be made available soon on this page: Women’s Voice and Leadership Program. In the meantime, an overview will be provided at the online information session on June 3. The recording will be made available on the funding page shortly after. Further details as relevant will be shared with the shortlisted applicants in due course for further refining of their proposal.
Learning Agenda and Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (MEAL)
4. Are there any specific learning questions or themes already emerging from the renewed WVL projects that should be built into the learning agenda?
Strategic learning questions from the original WVL program included the following:
SLQ #1: How do WVL’s unique funding modalities and program design features contribute to strong and resilient women’s rights organizations and movements? To what extent do GAC’s organizational structures, policies and processes enable WVL to operationalize the feminist values and principles underpinning the program?
SLQ #2: What project strategies are most effective in building strong, resilient and sustainable WROs? In what contexts?
SLQ #3: In what ways is the WVL Program contributing to greater understanding of how to identify, foster and measure innovation in Women’s Rights Organizations (WROs) and networks?
SLQ #4: What project strategies are effective in fostering stronger movements?
SLQ #5: What are the change pathways through which stronger WROs and stronger women’s rights movements contribute to the increased enjoyment of human rights by women and girls and the advancement of gender equality in WVL countries and regions? And how do these changes in turn support poverty reduction?
The Learning Partnership may want to explore whether these questions are still relevant, or if we need new questions. These decisions will be made through participatory, inclusive consultation and decision-making processes with the renewed WVL projects.
5. Does IDRC have a preferred or recommended approach to feminist MEAL that applicants should be aware of?
We don’t believe we should dictate a recommended approach. The proposed feminist MEAL approach should, however, be rooted in intersectional, participatory approaches, including amplifying structurally excluded voices on what works and doesn’t work. It should value the design of monitoring processes, including paying attention to power dynamics, as much as the data collected, to ensure that these processes are empowering and not extractive for project participants. It should furthermore challenge the idea that “monitoring” is value neutral.
6. To what extent should the Learning Hub evaluate the effectiveness of different funding/programmatic modalities (as mentioned in the call)?
The answer to this question will depend on the learning priorities that are to be co-identified with renewed WVL partners. Should the effectiveness of specific funding and programmatic modalities come up as learning priorities, then the Learning Hub should think about different ways to contribute to reflective learning and sense-making on these topics. This said, the Global Learning Hub shouldn’t see itself as having an evaluative function, i.e., to commission reviews or evaluations.
As part of the Learning Partnership, there will be two formative, thematic evaluations (on topics to be determined later) that will be carried out, as well as a formative and final evaluation, to be carried out by external feminist evaluation firms.
7. Is there a pre-existing theory of change or methodological framework from IDRC to guide the Learning Agenda and feminist MEAL system, or is the consortium expected to propose one from scratch?
IDRC can provide the overall WVL Learning Partnership’s theory of change to the selected applicant so they can see where the Global Learning Hub fits in, but at this stage, this information will not be shared. We wish applicants to focus on the Global Learning Hub project’s own theories of change, so we can learn about applicants’ visions to outcomes and impacts as well as assumptions and planned potential risks.
8. What are the expectations regarding the integration of findings from the participatory action-research grants into the Global Hub’s work?
We anticipate that much learning will emanate from the participatory research-action projects, probably from year 3 onwards, which could contribute to the development of answers to the main learning questions. It is also hoped that lead organizations for these grants will contribute their knowledge to the renewed WVL community in various ways, such as participating in webinars, contributing to collective deliverables, and providing data and insights to synthesize efforts, as needed. This will be clarified once we know the Learning Agenda’s priority questions.
Collaboration & Governance
9. Will the Global Learning Hub be involved in the selection or support of the Regional Learning Hubs in any way?
As mentioned in the call document, the Global Learning Hub will be consulted to help divide responsibilities with Regional Hubs shortly after selection (see question 1). The four Regional Hubs will be recruited through a similar open funding process to be launched in September 2025. The Global Learning Hub will not, however, be taking part in the selection process itself.
10. What kind of balance do you expect between global-level synthesis vs. regionally grounded learning?
(See answer to first question). It is correct to assume that global-level syntheses will be performed by the Global Learning Hub, while regionally grounded learning activities will be conducted by the four Regional Learning Hubs.
11. How closely will IDRC be involved in content review or approval of outputs like toolkits or convenings?
IDRC tries to be an active and supportive funder. Beyond the approval of technical and financial reports, we like to review key outputs and contribute resources and advice where helpful to maximize outcomes and impacts.
12. Is there an expectation of forming an advisory group or steering committee, and if so, what would IDRC’s role be?
Indeed, an Advisory Committee is being set up. IDRC’s role will be to chair the Advisory Committee. A representative from Global Affairs Canada will also be sitting in the committee.
Knowledge-translation questions
13. Is there a preferred platform or tool IDRC recommends for the online knowledge repository/community of practice?
We leave this question to applicants’ preference as they will be responsible for the design, creation and maintenance of the learning portal/platform. Again, this platform will be closed to renewed WVL partners.
Applicants will need to liaise closely with the Regional Hubs – to be recruited shortly – to ensure they play an active role in stimulating engagement and sharing emerging insights and lessons on the platform.
We also strive to make lessons and insights coming out of the Learning Agenda public so that they can inform the efforts and impacts of other WROs, LGBTQI+ groups and feminist movements. Therefore, applicants will be required to collaborate with the hosts of the Learning Partnership's public website – supported by a communications firm that will soon be recruited – to feed key outputs as they become available so that they can be accessed in an open access manner.
14. Regarding the online portal for virtual exchanges between partners, what kind of virtual exchanges are you anticipating (e.g. library, webinars, others)?
We don’t have fixed requirements; however it would be interesting to have different sections on the portal such as a place for news, a place to upload and share resources, blogs, pictures, provide feedback and comments, a place for regional hubs to have specific exchanges, etc. Recordings of webinars should also be made available in the resources section. Wherever possible, it would be important to make chat and comment functions available to promote discussions.
15. Are there specific accessibility or localization guidelines that should be considered for the digital platform (e.g., screen readers, low bandwidth options)?
Applicants are encouraged to think about a range of measures to ensure the platform can be used by all renewed WVL partners, including those with disabilities. This includes providing alternative text for images, ensuring sufficient color contrast, making sure the platform/chat functions are navigable by keyboard, and using proper heading structures.
16. Does the “knowledge translation” component refer exclusively to language translation (English, French, Spanish), or does it also include the interpretation, adaptation and accessible dissemination of content to diverse audiences?
Knowledge translation refers to the process of moving research into action. To learn more about the concept, we invite you to consult this page: Strengthening knowledge translation at IDRC
17. What types of content are expected to be translated or reinterpreted? Are these technical reports, impact narratives, toolkits, or multimedia products?
Technical reports are among the funding requirements of IDRC. These will not be shared publicly, apart from the final technical report. These can be submitted in English or French and do not need to be translated. As for other outputs, see the answer to the question below.
18. Is there a language preference hierarchy for the learning products — should all content be in English, French and Spanish, or only core outputs?
Official working languages of the Learning Partnership are English, French and Spanish, with the main language being English. English is the working/contracting language of 16+ renewed WVL geographic projects and therefore will be central in all communications.
Communications and key outputs should be available in all three languages (English, French and Spanish) at a minimum. It is, however, possible that for some publications, the main output is in English with shorter versions (abstracts, summary notes) in the other two.
We, however, encourage applicants to think about the value-add of having resources and publications available in more languages. Learning in multiple languages can only lead to improved comprehension, greater engagement and, ultimately, better learning outcomes.
Inception Phase & Timeline
19. What are the expectations for deliverables during the Inception Phase (first three months)?
A workplan will be expected at the end of the first three months, to be based on a series of first consultations with renewed WVL partners. It is hoped that they are consulted in various ways – individual conversations, focus groups, online surveys – to co-create a common set of learning questions and the overarching learning agenda with key hypotheses and theories of change. The ideal plan is that a first draft of the Learning Agenda is made available within six months.
20. Is there a more detailed timeline or milestones template available for applicants to use or adapt?
We wish to provide applicants with the flexibility they need, in line with the feminist principles of locally led and flexible programming. We therefore hope to hear from applicants themselves about how they would implement this project.
21. How are you defining a host in the Global South? Are you envisioning a consortium spread across your geographic priorities?
It is up to the applicants to determine the scale and size of the consortium, based on the global nature of the Learning Hub. As for how we define the Global South, we refer to the ODA list as an imperfect but available definition.
Global Meeting Questions
22. Can you share any guidance on the expected size, format, or purpose of the global in-person convening? Is there a preliminary estimate of the number of participants or regions expected to be represented at the Global Meeting to be organized by the Hub?
It is expected that at least three participants from each of the 20+ renewed WVL projects take part in the global meeting, ensuring representation from implementing partners and local partners. There will also be few additional participants including strategic advisors, feminist experts, IDRC and Global Affairs Canada representatives. A rough estimate would therefore be about 90-100 participants.
As for the format or purpose, we believe there are benefits from in-person convening to cement working relations, build trust and advance a feeling of solidarity. Our initial thinking on the timeline was that mid-way through the project implementation may be a suitable timing, but other options such as toward the end of the project are possible. Likewise, it is possible to think about planning the convening on the sidelines of a major conference or event to maximize the presence of all partners and increase connections with other networks of feminist and gender-equality allies.
A note that Regional Learning Hubs will have funds to organize two in-person convenings in their own regions across the four-year projects’ duration.
23. For the global in-person meeting, will the donor cover logistical costs (venue, interpretation, catering, technical equipment), or is the consortium also expected to cover travel expenses for participants?
Logistical costs (venue, interpretation, catering, technical equipment) are intended to be covered in the CAD1.2 million total budget. Travelling expenses for individual participants (airfares, per-diem, visa fees, local transportation) should be covered by renewed WVL projects themselves.
Budget & Operational Clarity
24. What level of detail do you expect in the proposed budget breakdown at this stage?
We expect applicants to use IDRC’s budget template. It is, however, important to note that proposed budgets will not be considered final. There will be opportunities to rework and refine the budget of the selected applicant in future steps of the proposal development process.
25. Can funds be sub-granted to regional partners for co-implementation, or are there restrictions we should be aware of?
Funds can be sub-granted to consortium members or partner organizations. These fall under the responsibility of the lead organization, with whom a grant agreement will have been signed. It is therefore the policies and practices of the lead organization that will apply. IDRC does not review or monitor these sub-grants; they fall under the lead organization’s responsibility.
26. Can a portion of the budget be used for platform maintenance and ongoing tech support beyond initial development?
Yes, this is expected.
27. Does the budget of up to CAD1.2 million cover all consortium costs (fees, digital platform, learning tools, translation, events, etc.), or are some categories restricted?
All costs should be considered in the CAD1.2 million budget. Some restrictions exist. We invite you to read the instructions and guidance provided in the proposal budget.
28. What is the maximum allowable percentage for indirect or general administrative costs?
The maximum allowable percentage is 13%. See details in the proposal budget (linked above).
29. Should the budget include the production of multimedia content such as podcasts, videos, or interactive platforms?
Yes, all costs should be included.
30. Will IDRC provide templates for the budget, timeline, theory of change, or is each consortium expected to propose its own formats?
The proposal budget template is available. We don’t intend to provide templates for timeline, nor for theory of change. As for logframes, IDRC typically doesn’t require grantees to submit or report against logframes. Reporting requirements will be discussed during final proposal development and at project inception.
31. Can you provide guidance on expected budget allocation across activities? Is there flexibility in reallocating funds between budget lines as the project evolves?
There will be an opportunity to revisit the budget in the proposal development stage as well as once the project is ongoing.
32. Does the CAD1.2 million budget include GST/HST, or is it the budget + GST/HST?
There are no applicable taxes. This will take the form of a grant agreement, not a consulting contract.
33. What will be the payment mechanism for the selected organization or consortium? Will disbursements be made based on milestones, quarterly, annually, or via another structure?
As per IDRC practices, disbursements will take place every six months following the acceptance of technical and financial reports.
34. To what extent would some of the learning costs be covered by the 20 geographic renewed WVL projects? Or should all costs be considered in the proposal?
Correct, all costs associated with the design and implementation of the learning agenda, the peer-learning and the community of practice should be included in the CAD1.2 million. The main contribution from geographic renewed WVL projects will be to contribute staff time to take part and shape learning efforts.
35. Let’s use a scenario of a primary applicant in South America and a co-applicant organization in Canada. If funds need to be sub-granted to the Canadian institution, do funds get converted into the South American currencies then back to Canadian funds? Should applicants take the exchange rates and fees into consideration with respect to the budget?
IDRC’s grant will be in one currency as per the one used in the proposal budget. This can be the currency of the choice of the lead applicant. Funding flows between sub-grantees are not under IDRC’s responsibilities. As per IDRC’s general terms and conditions, IDRC limits its liability to the Canadian currency value stated in the agreement. You can read more here.
36. What kind of institutional and financial documentation should be anticipated for the post-selection institutional risk assessment?
The proposing institution must possess a legal status (or “legal personality”) and have the ability to enter into contracts independently and under its own name. Additionally, any applicant selected to receive IDRC funding must be financially solvent and will be subject to a financial and administrative assessment before the grant agreement is finalized.
Furthermore, the selected applicant will be requested to provide the following documents:
- Most recent audited* financial statements, including but not limited to:
- Statement of Financial Position (also known as Balance Sheet);
- Statement of Comprehensive Income (also known as Statement of Operations, Statement of Income and Expenses, or Statement of Profit and Loss);
- Complete notes to the financial statements;
- Auditor’s Report/Opinion and
- Management Letter/Internal Control Letter.
If financial statements do not have comparative information (include two years), please provide the previous year’s financial statements.
*If audited financial statements are not available, the institution must provide the latest financial statements duly authorized by a financial officer of the organization.
- Current organization chart;
- Table of contents of all policy and procedure manuals;
- Finance and administration policies and procedures (complete manuals); specifically those addressing procurement, travel, accounts payable, grant management, and financial monitoring and reporting;
- Human resource policies and procedures (complete manuals);
- List of current external donors and their contributions;
- Latest annual report;
- Proof of registration to a social security scheme;
- An updated Institutional Profile Questionnaire [IPQ] – to be provided by IDRC.
37. In the project budget template, under the "Personnel" tab, it states that “Salaries should not exceed 25% of the project budget.” Based on a total project budget of CAD1.2 million over four years, we have calculated this to be CAD300,000 in total. Could you kindly confirm whether this interpretation is correct - that CAD300,000 is the total allowable budget for all personnel over the full project term?
This is correct. However, exceptions to this ceiling of 25% can be made when properly justified.
Eligibility questions
38. Can research institutions apply and collaborate with local NGOs across countries?
Yes, research institutions are eligible for this funding opportunity. It is, however, recommended to check the other eligibility criteria and desired qualifications to ensure a good fit.
39. Is it correct that no UN agencies are eligible?
Correct, UN agencies are not eligible for IDRC funding.
40. Do applicants need to have a Canadian partner (in some sort of capacity) to apply?
No. Please refer to the desired qualifications where it says that ‘this call is meant for women’s rights organizations or feminist organizations, or consortia of organizations, that are primarily governed, led and directed in the Global South’.
41. Is there a limit to the number of organizations that can apply under the same consortium?
We leave applicants to determine the profiles and expertise needed when forming a consortium.
42. Is this correct that this call is limited to women's rights organizations operating globally, and therefore organizations working solely within a single region — such as East Africa — are not eligible? And that we should instead look out for the smaller, regional calls expected to launch in September?
An organization working in East Africa would be deemed eligible, as it is based in the Global South. However, as rightly pointed out, it is likely that the organization alone would not score well for all desired qualifications. A consortium would likely be more suitable.
Correct. A separate call for proposals to recruit the four Regional Learning Hubs will be opened in September 2025.
43. Are ongoing or past WVL implementing partners eligible for this call?
Yes, there are no restrictions related to receiving funds from GAC directly to implement a past or present WVL project.
Administrative questions
44. Will IDRC provide templates for the budget, timeline and theory of change, or is each consortium expected to propose its own formats?
The proposal budget template is available. We don’t intend to provide templates for timeline, nor for theory of change.