How can we build equitable, meaningful partnerships across sectors, geographies, and power dynamics? Over the past year, the SVRI, Chrysalis, and the Family Health Bureau (FHB) of Sri Lanka’s Ministry of Health have been working together on the Collaborative Evidence Building for Impact at Scale project.  Through a co-creation model, SVRI, Chrysalis and FHB are adapting an intimate partner violence (IPV) prevention intervention to integrate it into the health services in Sril Lanka. Through the process, we  have learned what it takes to partner in ways that are both effective and equitable. Here are five key insights from our journey during our first year of collaboration.

1. Harness the power of external facilitation

When the consortium first convened in January 2024, many of us were meeting for the first time. Bringing in an external facilitator was a deliberate way to acknowledge and address, from the outset, the potential power dynamics that could derail transparency and relationship building in a meeting with a funder and an implementing partner working together. The facilitator was able to ensure that the session was planned in an unbiased way, with attention being paid to all parties being equally heard and perspectives being substantively included.

Additionally, the facilitator’s carefully planned agenda, reviewed and agreed upon by all parties beforehand, ensured that the meeting stayed focused and productive. This structure allowed the team to follow the schedule, without requiring any individual member to take responsibility for managing others in the process. The facilitator played a neutral role—holding the space, guiding the process, and reinforcing the idea that this was a shared journey. Feedback confirmed that national partners felt seen, heard, and included in the process—a strong foundation for what was to come.

2. Acknowledge power dynamics to build stronger relationships

Building trusting relationships takes time, consistency, and intentional effort. From the outset, we prioritised moments to connect—online and in person—and created space in meetings simply to get to know each other. But more than just spending time together, building trust also meant acknowledging the power dynamics at play and actively working to address them.

With state partners, the process came with a steep learning curve. These actors are essential for integration and scale-up, bringing legitimacy, reach, and long-term sustainability. Yet they operate within formal systems and bureaucratic processes that they must adhere to. When these constraints aren’t well understood by others, it can lead to frustration or misaligned expectations. To work through this, we focused on building relationships grounded in open, respectful, and solutions-oriented diplomacy and dialogue—recognising that power flows through these interactions, influencing who sets timelines, how decisions are made, and where flexibility exists. In-person engagement, such as the SVRI Forum 2024 in Cape Town, was especially helpful in deepening mutual understanding and creating space for honest conversations beyond institutional roles.

At the same time, we were conscious of the power we held as a funder in the relationship with Chrysalis. From the beginning, we aimed to foster an environment of mutual respect and collaboration, where the financial role did not overshadow the collaborative spirit of the partnership.  A pivotal moment came during an implementation planning meeting in August 2024, when we dedicated time to openly reflect on what may not have worked in the preceding six months. At this time, Chrysalis shared concerns about uncertainty that they had felt over intervention design during the proposal development phase.

These honest reflections revealed that—despite best intentions—co-creation of the proposal hadn’t been as inclusive as it should have been. Facing this together, and being willing to hear and respond to critique, became a turning point for the partnership. Looking back, we could see that  members of the team on both sides struggled with fully understanding the contours of the project and introducing structured tools like the ADAPT framework early on could have provided helpful scaffolding for shared understanding [1].

The lesson? Equitable partnerships require naming and navigating the power imbalances embedded in our ways of working, and doing so throughout the process, committed to doing better, together.

3. Build in enough time for meaningful government engagement

As mentioned above, government engagement is rarely linear and procedural delays as well as the need to pivot and be flexible In Sri Lanka, changes in leadership following the 2024 elections—and the retirement of key contacts—meant starting over in some respects. Relationships that had been carefully cultivated had to be re-established, approvals had to be re-sought, and expectations re-aligned.

Chrysalis played a leading role here, using their deep understanding of the political landscape to maintain momentum. Their local leadership was key to keeping things moving while navigating these shifts with care and sensitivity. Building initial buy-in from key allies within the Family Health Bureau also helped keep the project grounded as these allies were able to advocate internally and guide us through procedural hurdles. This experience reinforced a broader truth: engaging with government stakeholders means planning for uncertainty, staying flexible, and working in stages.

Developing the project has also taught us a lot about implementing “pragmatic research”—that is, research embedded in the realities of everyday systems. This approach demands time and flexibility during implementation, while it provides outcomes that are more relevant and valuable for informing policy and practice, ultimately contributing to meaningful and sustainable impact. It also has implications for how research is funded. We know that we need more flexible, collaborative funding models including transition grants, especially when working at scale through government systems. This was reiterated at SVRI Forum 2024  in several sessions that were held on integration and scale up [2].

4. Plan for capacity strengthening as a cornerstone

Too often, research in low- and middle-income countries is shaped by unequal partnerships and underinvestment in local capacity. If we’re serious about shifting power and creating lasting impact, we have to invest in sharing skills, knowledge, and resources more fairly with researchers and practitioners in the places where this work matters most but which may have fewer resources. We need to show up differently, ready to learn from each other, and to invest in building strong research ecosystems together-working towards conditions where everyone can lead, adapt, and grow. That’s how we build research that lasts, and that truly serves the communities it’s meant to.

This project is grounded in a collaborative learning model, where each partner contributes distinct and equally valuable strengths. SVRI offers technical expertise in adaptation and integration of IPV prevention interventions. Chrysalis brings deep local knowledge and experience navigating complex systems at community and state levels. The Family Health Bureau provides critical national-level insight, drawing from its medical and policy perspective. It’s the mix of these different strengths that really gives the project its power and potential to make a difference in IPV prevention.

From the beginning, the Impact at Scale project aimed to build a cohort of skilled leaders in IPV prevention adaptation and programming in Sri Lanka. That meant designing capacity strengthening as an ongoing and connected process of mutual learning, which includes a regular and consistent engagement between the technical specialists working with the projects and the team.

A key aspect of the continuous capacity strengthening approach was the participation of team members from Chrysalis and FHB at SVRI Forum 2024. This was a highlight of the year, giving national partners a chance to connect their work to broader global efforts on ending violence and helping to foster a sense of belonging in the international research and practice community on IPV prevention and response. Two dedicated days of capacity-building following the Forum solidified relationships among the whole team as well as with the technical experts supporting the project moving forward.

5. Design transparent and open processes from the start

Equity in partnerships isn’t only about values, it’s also about transparent and open processes, which, when done well, ensure clear communication and promote joint ownership for a project. We established early norms for communication, decision-making, and documentation, which included:

• Co-creating boundaries around communication tools and channels such as agreements over comfort levels with Whatsapp or direct messaging channels.
• Holding and documenting regular check-ins to maintain connection and momentum and ensuring that we use these to review actions carried out and plan next steps.
• Using shared drives to review documents and share resources.

These seemingly small practices played a big role in building processes encouraging accountability, transparency, trust and mutual respect. As we move into the implementation phase, we’re exploring new tools—like shared calendars and task boards (such as Trello or Jira)—to help us stay aligned.

Looking ahead: Equitable partnerships are the foundation for impactful, scaled-up interventions

After a year of work, we can proudly say that the foundation for equitable and meaningful partnerships has been laid. Relationships have been built, work practices/processes have been agreed upon, and the first signs of collective ownership are starting to take root. However, this is just the beginning. With a new government in place and a renewed national commitment to ending gender-based violence through Sri Lanka’s second Multi-Sectoral National Action Plan to Address Sexual and Gender-Based Violence (2024–2028) [3] new opportunities—and new challenges—are emerging.

As the project moves forward, our focus will be on staying flexible while remaining true to the goal: adapting and testing a scalable IPV prevention intervention that is rooted in local realities, driven by shared expertise, and capable of delivering meaningful change. Equity in partnerships is not a destination—it is an ongoing practice. And through this work, we’re learning, adjusting, and deepening our commitment to doing things differently.

Let’s keep discussing how to build equitable partnerships

While this experience has been key to establishing key insights and best practices on how to build truly equitable partnerships for research and violence prevention and response interventions, we’re committed to continue learning and sharing what works for whom, why and in what context. If you’ve faced similar challenges or have strategies that have helped, we’d love to hear from you. Reach out to us at ayesha@svri.org.

If you found this interesting and would like to learn more, read our Knowledge Exchange on What Works to Create Equitable Partnerships!

This blog was written by Ayesha Mago, SVRI Global Advocacy Director and Coordinator of the Impact at Scale project.

[1] Strengthening knowledge within the team on adaptation and integration of IPV prevention programmes is an integral part of the project’s design.

[2] Scaling Bandebereho in Rwanda: Factors enabling success.

[3] Ministry of Women, Child Affairs and Social Empowerment: Multi-Sectoral National Action Plan to Address Sexual and Gender-based Violence (SGBV) in Sri Lanka – II 2024-2028, December 2024.