Accountability is when the resources are used for what its meant to be achieved. Financial management, program operations, administration, governance, networking and VMG (defined as PCNC evaluation areas) are functional areas comprising another level. Accountability is doing activities based on principles that are espoused by the organization.
the public, but it will be limited by the available resources and circumstances that formed the basis of resources.
- Need for clear and public disclosure of hierarchy, as it is easy to mislead stakeholders.
The more NGO expands, the wider the reach to which it is accountable for. NGOs are not doing things for the public, but are doing things with them, thus they should ensure meaningful participation from the public.
NGO should not only be accounting for resources but for the consequences of its actions as they redound to public good
- the stakeholders e.g. donors, community, government -- people who are affected by the sector's actions. Must have a hierarchy of people to which the NGOs are accountable to, as they cannot be equally accountable to all.
- to the whole sector -- based on recent PEACe Bond controversy, each is accountable to the whole sector given its effect to the sector.
- It is important that the sector be clear of what/who they are. NGO is govern by set of principles (or their reasons for being) and the principles are used to keep going back to the very reason of its being.
Therefore, NGOs are accountable to multi-publics or hierarchy of publics that are defined in their principles and mandates. There's an inter-relationship between/among publics that makes accountability easier.
The issue: How accountable are NGOs to their Boards? How can they claim accountability to others when they are not accountable to their Boards?
How to manifest accountability? (Moving to concrete process to ensure that resources are being used properly)
- Public standards -- NGOs' principles have to be expressed into standards that are known publicly (beyond the consideration of resources).
In the case of CODE-NGO controversy --- it is an opportune time in the Philippines to make standards known to public, to the members.
Issue/Problems:
- Coming out with standards that are not applicable or practicable. There is fear of imposing system that is not within the culture of the sector.
- Management issue -- no manager can sacrifice generally acceptable procedures/principles
- NGO having no principles or standards.
- the quality of the board -- the quality of accountability depends on the Board, hence the process of Board selection is critical. The Board should be accountable to take measures.
Public disclosure could be done in other ways and could be limited within the circle of those covered/served.
What is Sustainability?
Sustainability is the continuation of what the organization is doing and producing outcomes beyond the support, couple with its ability to generate internal income.
- Financial sustainability is just one of the tripod, and NGOs must go beyond financial sustainability.
- Organization as an on-going concerns --> it has reason to continue its being if there are external forces in the environment that will require it, and at the same time it can respond to the needs outside (external environment).
- Good work is important element of sustainability. NGO contributes to the understanding of human conditions and it participates in the development of social knowledge/theories. These should be captured to support sustainability. It is not only a large store of capital but sustainability should include good works done (as part of the capital).
- At the organizational level, building capability of human resources and upgrading of technologies are added factors in sustaining organization's life. With them, organization can continue to work and deliver based on its mission/mandate even without external funding.
Sustainability for whom?
- for people that NGOs are serving. This could relate and cannot be separated from the issue of governance
- on issue of NGOs having outlived its usefulness à it must reinvent itself and redefine its vision to be relevant. Sustainability is sustainability of impact.
Country Plan Discussion
- Accountability
- CODE-NGO to build capacity of members on research. The network will tie up with the academe.
- the network to develop the implementing rules of the code of ethics and disseminate the code of ethics to its members.
- PCNC to ensure that CODE-NGO members to eek certification themselves and that the network help build their capacities to be able to be certified.
- On gross income taxation for corporation, there's a need to build up the knowledge on this issue, educate and get support of business sector. On the extreme, for PCNC to seek mandate that would go beyond requiring NGOs certification for tax purposes alone.
- Sustainability
- There is opportunity to replicate the debt swap agreement.
- There is continuing need to map what NGOs are doing, where they are and what role they are playing in the country. It will involve mapping of their stakeholders as well.
- Know what social entrepreneurship breadth of experience in the country. One direction CSOs can take is to do some cases on social entrepreneurship. This will be pursued together with the Asian Institute of Management, League of Corporate Foundation and CYFP. With the case studies, discourse on social entrepreneurship could be started.
- Integration of CSOs -- meaning CSOs, NGOs, CSROs and church groups coming together.
- On the PEACe Bond issue, there is a willingness to assist so that the money raised could go down to the intended beneficiaries.
Top
The Indonesian Group
- YAPPIKA, LP3ES should lead discussion with NGO network on NGO directory for certification and NGO Code of Ethics.
- Regular CSROs forum to share information and experience.
- NGO works in cooperation with media.
- Together with business sector, corporate foundations to advocate with DBR or Parliament for tax incentives.
- Engage ODA for greater flexibility for operational expenses and money for fund raising efforts.
Top
The Thai Group
The first mistake CSROs will take is plan among them. Participation of our stakeholders is more important. The Thai group has no concrete plan, what came up is a conceptual idea of what Thai CSROs need to do.
If one study ancient history, 300 years back during the Egyptian period, they were talking of the same things we are talking about now, but with different language and vocabulary. The underlying motive is: we want to provide a community where everybody can sleep and wake up with hope. But what role shall everybody play? CSROs should think that in some period of time, the ancient Egyptian played that role; in some period of time the merchants played that role; in some period of time the civil society is doing that role.
Everybody is doing his work well. But the poverty gap is wider. The problem gets bigger. Somehow we are seeing things in one dimension. Somehow, we're doing fine in one dimension; somehow we don't link a dimension to one that its accountable for; somehow in introspection, we question why we are here. The vision is: we are trying to figure out accountability and sustainability. If we think of its every aspect and parts, accountability will be good. But does society need other form of accountability that lead to bigger impact. Somehow there is none. What is the missing part then? What is the ideal CSRO that our society needs?
It is hard to figure out. We need bridge to connect 2 buildings. But what kind of bridge, what is the greatest bridge of all? The greatest bridge is to bridge without bridge. This answers the sustainability question. The final goal of sustainability is not the CSRO but the mission. At the end, CSROs have to be eliminated. The important thing is to promote friendship and mutual understanding in the community and around the world.
In the immediate period, we need to bridge. In the final stage, there is need to plan to eliminate CSROs and let the system go. How can we get to that point? If we are doing the job well, we could retire early.
If we go back to the analogy of the brain cell, it tells a lot about CSOs. It develops very fast in early age. But it doesn't develop easily. It needs to be aroused. The role of CSROs is not only to bridge but to arouse to do something.
Thailand group believes that they are not the ones who shall do the planning. Their role is to bridge the right one to the different parts of society to do the plan. The Thai group will:
- to try to organize another organization that would be called "barefoot ambassadors foundation." The ambassadors will be linked to the community, so Thailand will have grassroots speaker, who will link people to people.
- to organize a "think tank." There should be more of thinking and less implementation. The group needs to think and plan more.
- to create boardroom for intelligent information and to do strategic planning in several scenarios because the world is moving very rapidly.
In the future, the group hopes to come up with big national plans or regional plan or even do global planning, which could be good starting point in ending poverty.
