By Jenny Willmott (Co-CEO, STiR Education) and Modern Karema (Country Director Uganda, STIR Education)
Introduction
Over the past few years, there has been no shortage of conversation about localisation and shifting power in international development. Yet, from what we’ve seen, few organisations have gone the full distance; moving their programmes to become fully independent entities. As STIR takes that step in Uganda and Indonesia, we have struggled to find many case studies which detail the steps of a similar journey.
We’ve been working closely together since 2020 as Co-CEO and Country Director, both based in Uganda. This shared context has given us a unique perspective on what meaningful localisation might look like in practice.
So, in the spirit of humility and collaboration, we’re sharing our journey so far, not because it’s finished or perfect, but because we believe there’s value in learning together. Localisation can feel complex and messy, but we hope our reflections offer insight for others travelling a similar path.
Why localisation matters
At STiR Education, we exist to build a world where teachers love teaching and children love learning. For more than a decade, we have partnered with governments in India, Uganda, and Indonesia to embed the science of motivation into education systems.
Our approach is rooted in intrinsic motivation; built on the principles of autonomy, mastery, and purpose. These principles have always underpinned not only our programme but also our approach to people, culture, and organisational change. They are a key reason we are, as part of our new organisational strategy, transitioning our Uganda and Indonesia programmes to become fully independent entities. We have repeatedly seen firsthand why these intrinsic motivation principles matter, unleashing people and systems to achieve their desired goals. That lies at the heart of meaningful localisation.
Localisation is also an ethical and strategic choice. It shifts power closer to where impact happens and ensures that approaches are locally owned, context-specific, and sustainable, at a time when more funding is rightly flowing to locally led organisations.
Our guiding principles
For localisation to be meaningful, we believe it must go the full distance. That means not just adjusting structures or staffing patterns, but fundamentally shifting how power and accountability are held. Many organisations make valuable steps, giving local teams greater decision-making power, reducing expatriate leadership, or adding country representatives to boards, but there’s a danger that these can remain surface-level changes unless they’re backed by a deeper, fully devolved, shift.
For us, “going the full distance” is about recognising that power should sit locally, for ethical, strategic, and sustainability reasons. This is aligned to our values. It’s about humility to step back, openness to learn, ownership by country teams, all focused around a shared purpose.
We have set a number of principles that are guiding our localisation journey:
- Locally led: Country teams must drive the process; the global team plays a supportive role.
- Flexibility: Timelines are not fixed. Each country will move at its own pace.
- Two-way learning: Localisation is not a handover, but a joint journey of growth.
- Context-specific: Country contexts are different and the transitions will subsequently be different and based on local context and culture.
- Responsible transitions and setting up for success: Independence requires strong governance, resilient finances, and sustainable operations.
Our journey so far
This is not a new journey, nor are we at the start; these principles have emerged over the course of a decade. Since 2018, STiR has been moving from a centralised model to one where country teams increasingly shape their own strategies.
Pre-2018: STiR worked to support education systems but through creating parallel structures alongside government delivery. This helped demonstrate what was possible, but it also raised questions of sustainability.
2018-2020: we shifted to a systems partnership approach; working directly with governments rather than in parallel, and beginning to embed programmes and approaches in existing structures to sustain them long term. But most decisions were still taken centrally, with programmes rolled out more or less uniformly across countries. Local leadership teams made few decisions.
2020–2024: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated change. Different governments’ strategies and priorities shifted and in different directions. Our programme therefore became more contextualised, more responsive to government priorities, and local leadership teams gained greater autonomy.
Now: Since 2020, Uganda and Indonesia have developed their own country strategies and decision-making power has shifted substantially to local leadership. The next step is to establish fully independent organisations with their own governance, fundraising, and operational systems.
We are also building on our experience in India. STiR India transitioned to become an independent entity in 2024 and later merged into an existing India organisation. That journey was not always easy and there were a whole range of challenges along the way. But it provided rich learning which we are now applying in Uganda and Indonesia; from the importance of strong governance to the need for clear transition plans and financial sustainability.
In Uganda, a transition group led by the country team is driving the process. A capacity assessment has been completed, and a business plan for a new independent entity is underway. The programme itself has scaled significantly: today it reaches 90% of secondary school districts and 60% of primary school districts, in partnership with the government. This is a co-designed and co-financed initiative with the Ministry of Education and Sports; a strong foundation for independence.
In Indonesia, the team has a signed-off business plan. While the original plan was to move quickly, we deliberately chose to slow the pace. This reflects our principle of flexibility: independence should only happen when the timing and conditions are right.
Learning along the way
Several lessons stand out from our experiences so far:
- As Pauline Wambeti put it in her excellent article on Nuru Kenya’s localisation journey, “Localisation is about taking the leadership journey together, not handing over”. This captures our own belief that localisation must be a shared, iterative process.
- We have learnt that getting the right governance structures in place is hard. It takes time to build well-developed and clear shared expectations of success. It is natural that different parties will have different views. Taking the time to properly navigate this is critical. Independence requires strong boards with the right skills, values, and time commitment, especially from the chair.
- Clarity and communication matter. Transition plans must be explicit, shared, and regularly reviewed. Clear internal and external communication helps everyone understand the process and feel part of it.
- Culture over structure. Legal registration and new policies are important, but culture is even more so. We learnt through our experiences in India that it’s important to create spaces deliberately for reflection and to actively ask for feedback. Throughout the process, team members need to feel safe to ask questions, raise concerns, and contribute ideas.
- The language and lexicon is important as it sets the tone and the terms of relational engagement. Dr Moses Isooba’s (who we have learnt much from) article on this is really worth a read. We need to immunise ourselves against jargon. For example, move from “capacity building” to “capacity sharing”, which recognises that learning is a two-way process
- Financial sustainability is important and must be realistic. The question is not ‘complete security’ but ‘good enough’: a diverse funding base, the ability to build reserves, and a clear plan for growth.
- Speed creates risk. Arbitrary deadlines undermine sustainability. Taking time builds confidence, ownership, and long-term stability is important.
The evolving role of STiR globally
As Uganda and Indonesia become independent, the global organisation is also evolving. As Results for Development has observed, ‘The role of INGOs must shift from doers to convenors, connectors, and supporters’ We see our role as:
- Scaling impact differently. Rather than setting up new country programmes, we will work alongside local partners and organisations, sharing our expertise from 12+ years of embedding motivation in systems. This approach not only aligns with our values but is also right for the current aid climate, where collaboration matters more than ever.
- Continuing support for Uganda and Indonesia. We will remain a partner for as long as needed, whether through advocacy, grant management, or mutual capacity strengthening.
- Amplifying motivation science. We will continue to share insights globally, through partnerships, advisory work, and a learning community focused on motivation in education.
In this future, STiR globally will not be the centre, but one partner in a wider ecosystem. Our relationships with Uganda, Indonesia, and India will be based on collaboration and mutual learning, not hierarchy.
Looking ahead
Localisation is already strengthening our impact. Since country teams have had more ownership, we have seen Uganda scale its programme dramatically in partnership with the government. Across the organisation, we are learning and adapting together. As we move forward to establish fully independent national entities in Uganda and Indonesia, there are some key questions we are grappling with:
- How can we design governance structures that balance independence with continued stewardship and appropriate support, including when is the right moment for board handover from the global to the national entity, ensuring continuity, legitimacy, and alignment of purpose?
- What level and duration of seed funding will best set up the new entities for success, balancing what’s needed for a strong start with what is affordable and sustainable for STiR globally
- How can we protect space for reflection and learning, within teams and between global and country levels, even as the work accelerates?
- How do we manage the pace of transition, ensuring momentum without compromising sustainability and quality, whilst also delivering our implementation work?
- What does financial sustainability look like beyond independence, and what steps do we need to take now to ensure it endures in the long term?
- If, longer term, STiR globally continues to support areas such as brand and grant management, what is the right balance of assurance and mutual accountability to uphold shared values while ensuring full independence?
An invitation
We know many others are also grappling with localisation. We have benefited from the experience and advice of a number of organisations (HelpAge International, Komo Learning Centres and the Stopping As Success consortium to mention a few). We know we don’t have all the answers upfront, and localisation is a continuous learning journey. One of STiR’s core values is humility, and that’s why we’re sharing these reflections, in the hope they spark dialogue, collaboration, and learning. If our experience resonates, or if you’re exploring similar transitions, we’d love to connect and learn together.
