Search for Common Ground

Search for Common Ground
Name	Search for Common Ground
Type	Nonprofit organization
Founded	1982
Founder	John Marks
Headquarters	Washington, D.C.
Area served	Global
Focus	Conflict transformation, peacebuilding

Search for Common Ground is an international nonprofit organization dedicated to transforming the way the world deals with conflict by promoting dialogue, negotiation, and inclusive problem-solving. Founded in 1982, the organization operates programs across Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, and the Middle East, collaborating with a wide range of partners to address violent conflict, social polarization, and post-conflict recovery. Its work intersects with diplomacy, humanitarian action, media engagement, and community-level peacebuilding.

History

Search for Common Ground emerged during the late Cold War era amid debates involving Reagan administration, Soviet Union, Cold War, United Nations, and Carter Center actors seeking alternatives to adversarial approaches. Early efforts connected practitioners affiliated with John Marks (peace activist), activists linked to Nonviolent Peaceforce, and mediators associated with Conflict Management Group and International Crisis Group. Throughout the 1990s the organization expanded alongside peace processes such as the Oslo Accords, the Dayton Agreement, and the post-conflict reconstruction efforts in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Rwanda, engaging with diplomats from United States Department of State, officials from European Commission, and civil society networks related to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. In the 2000s it adapted strategies developed during the Good Friday Agreement negotiations, drew on lessons from Truth and Reconciliation Commission (South Africa), and partnered with media initiatives inspired by producers connected to BBC World Service, NPR, and Al Jazeera. More recent history saw operational emphasis similar to programming by Médecins Sans Frontières, International Rescue Committee, and Mercy Corps in response to crises in Syria, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Afghanistan.

Mission and Objectives

The organization’s mission aligns with principles advanced by practitioners in United Nations Peacekeeping, African Union, Organization of American States, and advocates connected to Kofi Annan and Dag Hammarskjöld. Core objectives reflect commitments echoed in declarations from Geneva Conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and policy frameworks used by World Bank and United Nations Development Programme for conflict-sensitive programming. Specific aims include reducing violent confrontation reminiscent of patterns seen in Rwanda genocide, preventing escalation akin to Bosnian War, fostering civic dialogue comparable to processes in South Africa, and supporting reintegration efforts analogous to initiatives in Sierra Leone and Liberia.

Programs and Initiatives

Programs integrate methods used by truth commissions, community mediation networks, and media for peace projects, collaborating with entities such as BBC Media Action, Internews, Search for Common Ground (do not link), and local partners in countries like Nigeria, Kenya, Colombia, Iraq, Jordan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Philippines, Nepal, Uganda, Burundi, Mali, and Chad. Initiatives have included radio dramas comparable to productions by Telesur and Telefutura, community dialogue models resembling practices of CEDAW advocates and UN agencies such as UNHCR and UNICEF. Other projects mirror reconciliation programming seen in Peru and Guatemala, civic engagement efforts taking cues from Freedom House studies, and disarmament-assistance similar to operations by United Nations Disarmament Commission and Small Arms Survey. Training and capacity-building draw on curricula used by Harvard Negotiation Project, Princeton University conflict resolution centers, and practitioners from International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Organizational Structure and Governance

The organization is structured with a central office and national/regional offices modeled after nonprofit governance frameworks used by Amnesty International, Oxfam International, CARE International, and Save the Children. Leadership roles mirror those in institutions such as United Nations Development Programme, with executive directors, country directors, and program managers who liaise with boards akin to those of Rockefeller Foundation and Ford Foundation. Governance includes advisory boards with experts from Columbia University, Stanford University, Oxford University, and former officials from United States Agency for International Development, European External Action Service, and retired diplomats from United Kingdom Foreign Office and Ministry of Foreign Affairs (France).

Funding and Partnerships

Funding sources resemble portfolios used by humanitarian and development organizations, receiving grants from entities like United States Agency for International Development, United Kingdom Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, European Commission, Open Society Foundations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and philanthropic arms of Carnegie Corporation of New York and MacArthur Foundation. Partnerships extend to intergovernmental actors such as United Nations, regional bodies like African Union Commission, and NGOs including International Rescue Committee, Mercy Corps, CARE International, Plan International, and World Vision International. Corporate and media collaborations have involved broadcasters akin to BBC, CNN, and Al Jazeera, and academic partnerships with institutions such as Georgetown University, Yale University, and Johns Hopkins University.

Impact and Evaluation

Impact assessment follows evaluation standards used by OECD Development Assistance Committee, World Bank Independent Evaluation Group, and Independent Commission on Aid Impact, employing quantitative and qualitative methods similar to studies by Harvard Kennedy School and London School of Economics. Reported outcomes parallel results seen in programs by Mercy Corps in stability metrics, echo evaluation themes from International Crisis Group analyses on conflict reduction, and reflect indicators used by United Nations Development Programme on human development. Independent evaluations have compared peacebuilding effectiveness with case studies from Sierra Leone, Colombia peace process, and Mozambique, while academic collaborators from University of Oxford and Tufts University have published peer-reviewed analyses on programmatic learning and long-term societal impact.

Category:International non-profit organizations