Calls
for NGO accountability have grown louder in recent years, some to improve
performance and others on a desire to muffle advocacy activities. For a long
time, NGOs have been demanding accountability of governments, extractive
companies and the corporate sector. This stems from the fact that NGOs
represent absentee owners, most NGOs collect money on behalf of the poor and
trust the NGOs to deliver on the promise.
The
increased cost of living, compounded by the mushrooming NGOs coupled with the
awareness on civil liberties and increased education in most developing
countries has led to donors and communities demanding value for money.
Governments have also realised that there are many NGOs that have emerged in
the name of supporting the vulnerable but in essence have no reach or impact.
In
response to the Daily Monitor editorial of December 2, “NGOs should also be
Accountable”, my view is that NGO accountability should not be for mere
compliance. Being accountable is a good thing to do.
By
their nature, NGOs stand on the moral pedestal, which is reason enough for all
NGOs in ensuring efficiency and effectiveness of their work. Just being moral
crusaders without demonstrating authenticity, integrity, capability and
inclusiveness in their work is playing double standards. NGO accountability
should be about value addition to the households and communities where NGOs
work.
NGOs
complain when local governments demand ‘another’ registration; they say they
are already registered by the central government. I presume the local
government authorities want to ensure that every NGO operating in the district
is registered for accountability and coordination purposes. Submitting externally
audited financial reports to central governments is not enough.
To
some NGOs, accountability is about community participation in the different
stages of the project cycle. While participation is an important step for
project ownership and sustainability, in itself, it is not the best measure for
accountability.
Project
participants should be able to influence the direction of the NGO based on the
feedback that they provide. Involvement and empowerment is key, space for
transformative conversations with project participants and other stakeholders
should be encouraged.
In NGOs where accountability is for compliance, they put
emphasis on accountability to donors and governments. As for NGOs where
accountability is beyond compliance, they equally place significance on
downward accountability or what is known as accountability to beneficiaries
(citizens).
For the World Vision Uganda Citizen Voice and Action approach, accountability
is not just to donors and government but also to the communities where we work.
We focus on both downward and upward accountability.
Through
Citizen Voice and Action interventions, local level governance has been
strengthened. Demand for better service delivery has been strengthened and at
the same time, utilisation of these social services has also increased.
The
community members are not just demanding accountability from government
agencies but also from World Vision and other NGOs who are working in the areas
where World Vision works.
Giving
the people the voice to express their opinions on the quality of the project
deliverables is one way for ensuring accountability is beyond compliance.
The
contribution of NGOs in eradicating poverty cannot be disputed. The governments
of developed, developing or emerging economies cannot dispel the work of NGOs.
The third sector (as NGO sector is referred to) has its place in our society
today. NGOs reach many places or sections of society, which governments cannot
effectively reach. This comparative advantage for NGOs should, however, not misplace
accountability and transparency. Demanding accountability from governments
without demonstrating accountability beyond compliance is unacceptable.
