SOME time ago, I wrote about the growth of the NGO community and the need for establishing an enabling regulatory framework to maximize the potential of that growth.
The other major concern I have regarding non-governmental organisations and their increasingly crucial role in the operation of a number of key state sectors is the issue of continuity.
The vast majority of the NGOs operating in the Third World are operated on unprecedented levels of support from agencies whose major contributors are the world’s most powerful economies , many for whom there is a level of expediency in ensuring that aid is disbursed within a particular time frame, and without too many hiccups along the way.
Most NGOs serve simply as conduits for pre-existing donor funds to flow through, without conceiving, at least in policy, what is going to happen once current funding, probably within a maximum of a five year cycle, runs out.
With the sheer unprecedented levels of funding available, there is no imperative at present to establish sustainable operations in addressing what will most likely be enduring problems – the need for capacity building, for example, will most certainly outlast the current funding scheduled for it.

Quote: ‘Most NGOs serve simply as conduits for pre-existing donor funds to flow through, without conceiving, at least in policy, what is going to happen once current funding, probably within a maximum of a five year cycle, runs out’

As I’ve said before, the spirit of volunteerism seems to have largely gone of out the NGO community in Guyana. Whereas the lack of resources might have once fostered ingenuity and cooperation within the sector, today’s environment of well-supported and virtually prepackaged programmes being made available to the entities most well-versed in the language of project proposals has fostered a competitiveness that does not bode well for cooperation outside of a donor-defined framework.
Being spoon-fed support means that NGOs often lose sight of their individual comparative advantage in delivering their mandates.  And this is presuming that either their original mandate has not changed to take advantage of available funding, or was not tailor-made to access that funding in the first place.
Indeed, it may be said that some NGOs serve less to directly address a local need from the ground than they act as consulting agencies for the implementation of the international aid element of the foreign policies of more developed nations; that is, in addition to support received by the International Financial Institutions.
In some respects, increased donor support has proven to be a mixed blessing.  For example, it has skewed the remuneration environment to the degree that many NGO staff, former volunteers, now receive salaries and benefits that are often above par of both public and private sector employees engaged in similar tasks.
Additionally, with some NGOs now engaging in quasi-commercial activities, while still accessing grant support (which can cover anything from annual overheads to staffing), what we have is subsidized competition with private as well as public sector service providers.  This has the particular potential danger in that it weans persons who access such services off of the more enduring or viable alternatives, which would in turn lead to the downgrading of the latter; if the source support were to suddenly be cut off, what we would have is an overall depleted service sector and the possibility of critical shortfalls in the delivery of services.
The centrality of donor support to the core operations of NGOs, many of which have not only started but sustained themselves for some years without any significant international aid, compromises the long-term sustainability of their general progammes, particularly in as turbulent a time in the world economy as we are now experiencing.
If we are to suppose that another sudden economic crunch hits the sources of support, what then is going to happen to long-term sustainability of the NGOs who currently benefit from the current generosity?  How many of the now eminently qualified principals of these NGOs are going to be willing to take the drastic reduction in salaries and benefits they would have enjoyed over the past few years and continue their work at a fraction of current remuneration?
Equally as important as regulation to the survival of non-governmental organizations is restructuring towards sustainability.
Granted that most NGOs – unless they are imbued with some enormous grant at their beginning – are reliant on external support, contingency must be made for the possibility of a drastic reduction of the sort assistance that the NGO sector is currently accustomed to.
What they need are innovative ways of reengaging the local economy – both the citizenry and the business community – into contributing to the support of the organization while still taking advantage of external support in a way in which what is given does not define the programme.
NGOs, as I started off the first article by saying, play a crucial role in the developing world.  Their cause would be best served by changing their operational environment to reflect contemporary growth, fine-tuning how they engage support in the implementation of their mandate, and, perhaps more importantly, fostering a return to some of the basic pillars of volunteerism. (Adapted from a previous article carried in this column)