The research finds that IFAs’ intervention agendas seem to be coherent and complementary to peace constituencies’ agenda. Both sides of the relationship have applied a ‘complementary approach to peace building.’ CSOs conducted activities that contributed to the peace building process from both a bottom-up and middle out approach while IFAs strengthen CSOs at the middle leadership level as well as provide opportunities for them to empower more leadership from the grassroots level. CSOs connected more at their own level, yet were unable to connect their sub- networks with others. The contribution of partnerships varied among each group because they emerged and developed at different phases.