Non-governmental organizations

1. Non-governmental organizations Workshop II Anna Grudzińska

2. Projekt : „Odpowiedź na wyzwania gospodarki opartej na wiedzy: nowy program nauczania na WSHiP”. Projekt współfinansowany ze środków Unii Europejskiej w ramach Europejskiego Funduszu Społecznego.

3. Global Civil Society • DEFINITIONS/BASIC QUESTIONS: • 1. What is civil society? • 2. What is „third sector”? • 3. What is a non-profit organization? • 4. What is a non-governmental organization? • 5. Can „non-profits” be called a sector? • 6. What is the relationship between: third sector, civil society and public administration? • Basic conceptual models of the relationship between public administration and ngo`s

4. Civil Society • Gellner: • „[Civil] society is that set of non-governmental institutions, which is strong enough to counterbalance state, and, whilst not preventing the state from fulfilling the role of the keeper of the peace and arbitrator between major interests, can, nevertheless, prevent the state from dominating and atomising the rest of society”. (Gellner 1994)

5. „Global”? http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/interactive/2011/oct/18/occupy-protests-map-world

6. For/Against GCS • Network of intergovernmental organization • Non-state transnational pressure groups • Cross-cultural global trends in consumption • Human rights regime • „North Atlantic” civil society – „yes”, „global” – „no” • Quantitative argument (web too small)

7. What is civil society? • ALAN FOWLER – problems/classifications/etc. • A „collective noun” – just seen as a „set of institutions” • Citizen groups driven by shared values and norms • A „space” for action • A historical process („in the West”) • Anti-hegemonist approach • Anti-state approach – stresses the autonomy of non-state institutions

8. „civic” /2/ From this perspective, civic agency is a value-based imperative; itis what citizens do when they apply their energy to affecting theway society functions. It is a self-directed capability for purposeful action where past experience is brought together with ideasabout creating a desired new situation, assessed against thepracticality and risks involved. ISS-CDC Policy Brief #1, October 2008

9. „civic” • The core of civicis normative behaviour. Important civic values: • are a broad understanding of inclusion, tolerance of differenceand a concern for the whole of society. In the modern era, such aconcern includes the environment and nature. • ‘Uncivic’ behaviourwould be intolerant, exclusionary and indifferent or hostile to justice in public life or shared well-being. • ISS-CDC Policy Brief #1, October 2008

10. NGO?

11. Identity of NGOs Different from Privte sector: do not exist to generate profit Different from Government 1.Values and Mission (purpose, funtion) 2.Legal form (formal or to some extend institutionalized) 3.Source of Income (support by members, service provison, etc.) 4. Structure 5. Voluntary participation („to some degree”)

12. What kind of „sector”? • Third sector • Charitable sector • Independent sector • Voluntary sector • Tax-exempt sector • NGO • Social economy • Nonprofit sector

13. Salamon, Hems, Chinnock For What and For Whom? • The service role • The innvation role • The advocacy role • Leadership role • Democratization role

14. PARTNERSHIP? • Organizational autonomy (maintaining two different identities – self-interest & collective interest) • A. self-interest – achieving individual organizations mission/maintaining identity • B. collective interest – achieving joint goals and accountability • Mutuality (each partner has resources that other needs) A. contribution to their shared aims B. „Complementary” or Shared Values C. „Need to acquire resources from other organization that they do not have, but are critical for their continuing functioning (Chen, Graddy, 2005)” • Norms of trust & reciprocity

15. PARTNERSHIP ? • Norms of trust & reciprocity „It is very energy intensive. You have to be willing to invest inordinate amounts of time at low productivity to establish relationships and trust building. Organizations dont initialyy start with a cost-benefit analysis. They start with a kind of idealism. Then, as they start to accomplish things, they realize they`re going to have to pay a cost. When organizations are willing to make the cost that is when you have moved to collaboration (Thomas, 2001)”. „ When personal relationships supplement, formal organizational role relationships, psychological contracts substitute for legal contracts, and formal organizational relationships may be sustained over time (Ring and Van de Ven, 1994)”.

16. Model by Brinkerhoff

18. CSOs – the „extension ladder” of the state? Is cross-sector partnership possible? Major challenges for CSOs: • Access to resources (funds) 2. Legal framework (red tape) • Conflicting values (accepting public funding threatens independence of the third sector, change in the way CSO operate affects their mission – too much bureaucracy– less time for the core activity) • Legitimacy of CSOs toward their members and beneficiaries

19. Allies? Most typical problems when CSOs and government work hand in hand

20. Freedom from.. • For the third sector, independence from the government can be defined as having freedom from control and influence by the government, but also as having a positive freedom to set priorities and values and challenge the government. • Third sector organizations can often deliver effective and responsive services and help to shape them, but to do so they need to have enough freedom to use their distinctive experience and expertise. This requires them to be independent from the state. Just as the third sector is an essential component of a healthy democratic society, so independence is an essential component of an effective third sector. • Source:http://www.compactvoice.org.uk/sites/default/files/independance_matters_guidance.pdf

21. … • In other words, independence is the ability organizations have to: • Agree values based on their own experience and vision and not external pressures • Carry out work that delivers the stated purpose of the organization • Negotiate robustly with funders and partners • Challenge others and engage in public debate. • These freedoms are essential for third sector organizations to decide how best they can further their mission and support their members or beneficiaries. • Source:http://www.compactvoice.org.uk/sites/default/files/independance_matters_guidance.pdf

22. Funding and Independence: • „A local charity that campaigns for the legal rights of immigrants and others receives grant funding from the • council in recognition of the work that it does. At a public event, the director of the charity stands up and criticizes the council’s attitude to its service users, causing much embarrassment for the council. The charity is warned that its funding could be cut if it doesn’t change its attitude”. • Source:http://www.compactvoice.org.uk/sites/default/files/independance_matters_guidance.pdf

23. „Critical friend” Government: „Desire not to be publicly criticized” Third Sector: Right to represent users and members views regardless of funding relationships

24. Legitimacy of CSOs • When the council is determining local policy priorities, a community group argues that the needs of its constituent group are being ignored and petitions the council to change its policy. The council’s response is to challenge the community group’s legitimacy when it says that it represents a whole segment of the population. • One councillor says that he has been democratically elected by thousands of residents to represent the community and that he therefore has more legitimacy than a group with only a couple of hundred members.

25. Legitimacy of CSOs: • „Third sector organizations thinking about their own legitimacy and representation. The example described here demonstrates the importance of third sector organizations thinking about the legitimacy of the voice that they provide. Third sector organizations need to consider who they are representing and how they involve those whom they represent, for example engaging them in their decision-making processes. This will enable a third sector organization to stand up to any challenge to its legitimacy and defend the authenticity of its voice”.

26. Whose voice? Government „Need to ensure representation of community as whole” Third sector „Need to ensure representation of membership and beneficiaries”

27. Who determines the service delivery? • A purchaser puts out a tender for a service, but a third sector organization disagrees with the nature of the service being tendered and thinks that the terms of the contract are too prescriptive. The third sector organization would like to bid to deliver the service but is put off by the terms that are being offered.

28. Design of services Government: Need to determine services in accordance with government priorities Third sector: Need to design services consistent with organisational objectives and appropriate to member and beneficiary needs

29. Service delivery process: • 1. Consultation of the program design; • 2. Transparency and Accountability; • 3. Discussion and Dialogue; • 4. Learning from previous work; • 5. Third sector confidence about negotiating; • 6. Third sector considering whether delivering a contract is relevant to its mission and values.

30. Red Tape: problems • A statutory body is running a complicated funding application process, with detailed procedures and paperwork for third sector organizations to apply for funding. Once successful organizations have got funding, they will then be expected to meet strict requirements around monitoring and evaluation. Small community groups [migrant NGOs, women support groups, etc.] are worried that they cannot cope with the paperwork involved and so do not apply for funding, even though they are well placed to deliver appropriate services to the intended beneficiaries.

31. Monitoring Government: Need for financial accountability Third Sector: Need to focus on delivery and avoid overly burdensome funding conditions

32. Red Tape – solutions: • Focus on outcomes • Ensure processes are in proportion to the amount of money involved • Manage risks • Consistency and coordination • Good financial management

33. Sustainability: shared responsibility? • A charity relies on local government for 50 per cent of its funding. However, it has only managed to get one year contracts from the statutory bodies that fund it. This has resulted in instability for the charity, which employs staff without knowing whether it can sustain their posts beyond the next funding round. The charity also provides help and services to its beneficiaries without knowing whether it will be able to continue to do so next year. When the charity talks to the local authority – its main funder – it has been told that longer contracts are difficult because the authority’s budget is tight and it doesn’t know what resources it will have in future years.

34. Planning? Government: Need to prioritize within restricted and often uncertain budgets Third sector: Need to provide services and plan ahead in an uncertain economic climate

35. Sustainability: solutions • Dialogue between the funder and the third sector organization • Funders passing on the benefits of longer term planning and three year budgets to third sector organizations. • Diversifying funding streams

36. … • „Recognizing the right of a third sector organization to challenge government policies. The Compact commits the government to recognize and support the right of the sector within the law to campaign against or challenge government policy, irrespective of any funding relationship that might exist. • Presenting views to government effectively. When challenging government policy third sector organizations should try to do so constructively, by focussing on the needs of end users of services and being clear about whom they represent and how they came to their views”.

37. … • „Providing guidance to alleviate any concerns. Funders can spell out their commitment to third sector independence in guidance to organizations that they fund. Guidance should never be a substitute for action but it can help to demonstrate to third sector organizations that their concerns about losing their independence are recognized and understood. • Offering opportunities to contribute views. Funders can offer formal opportunities for third sector organizations to contribute their views to policy development as a ‘critical friend’”.

38. … • „Presenting views to government effectively. When challenging government policy third sector organizations should try to do so constructively, by focusing on the needs of end users of services and being clear about whom they represent and how they came to their views.”

39. Welfare state Service: Voluntary?, Professional?

40. In the liberal model: represented by the US and the UK, a lower level of government social welfare spending is associated with a relatively large nonprofit sector. middle class elements are clearly in the ascendance, opposition either from traditional landed elites or strong working class movements has either never existed or been effectively held at bay. This leads to significant ideological and political hostility to the extension of government social welfare protections and a decided preference for voluntary approaches instead. The upshot is a relatively limited level of government social welfare spending and a sizeable nonprofit sector. Liberal model

41. Social democratic model The social democratic model: Represented in Sweden state-sponsored and state-delivered social welfare protections are extensive and the room left for service-providing nonprofit organisations quite constrained. historically, this type of model emerged most likely where working class elements were able to exert effective political power, albeit typically in alliance with other social classes. nonprofit sector performs a different function in social democratic regimes ( advocacy, self-expression)

42. Corporatist model • The corporatistmodel: • represented in France and Germany; • the state has either been forced or induced to make common cause with nonprofit institutions; • in late nineteenth century Germany, when the state, confronting radical demands from below, began to forge alliances with the major churches and the landed elites to create a system of state-sponsored welfare provision that over time included a substantial role for nonprofit groups, many of them religiously affiliated (Anheier and Seibel 1998, Seibel 1990). • a state-dominated social welfare system • sizeable religious presence (Germany: Diakonie, Caritas) • “subsidiarity” as the guiding principle of social policy

43. Statistmodel represented by Japan state retains the upper hand in a wide range of social policies exercises power on its own behalf, or on behalf of business and economic elites, limited government social welfare protection does not translate into high levels of nonprofit action Statist model

44. Welfare state and CSOs – changing perceptions Service provision: the role of CSOs in the public policy design/implementation Case study: UK Case study: Poland Social economy Case study: Sweden Case study: Poland

45. NGO – service provision • Health care • Education • Social services • Culture • Environment protection • Advocacy

46. Service provision in NGO sector • Service provision as a source of funding for NGOs • John Hopkins study – 35 countries • Mexico: 85% • Kenya: 81% • Brazil: 74% • Philippines: 92%

47. Welfare state, social policy chaning place of CSOs • 19th c. beginning of CSOs in response to social needs (weak state response): mutuals, foundations, associations • 20th c. the rise of the welfare state (different models of social policy – according to national or local traditions) • 70s: economic crisis – slow collapse of the welfare state („fiscal illusion”, „absence of choice: the advance of market models of welfare”, ‘insensitive to special needs’) • 1973: Oil crisis - new models of economy - deeper structure of disadvantage – race, class, gender, etc. • New Right Agenda: market model of welfare • U.K: 1979 – reform of the welfare state (Margaret Thatcher)

48. Privatization • Market model approach to welfare state reform • „role for the state was to protect the individual against infringement of their freedom”; • „third sector was seen as an attractive means of outsourcing (or “dumping”) state functions”; • “active citizen”, who did not leave to the state the responsibility of seeing to their own welfare” • „compensation for state failure through charitable activity”

49. Decentralization • Administrative reorganization approach to welfare state reform; • state is too far from problems – „needs a more local level of public service provision”; • „vehicle for the empowerment of citizens and communities” • „citizen was to be empowered as a participant in local decision making” • Emphasis on small community CSOs

50. New Institutionalism • Welfare state reform through structural reform of institutions • „chronic ineffectiveness of traditional bureaucratic methods”; • „promoting more rationalforms of decision taking and implementation”; • Examples : planned programming and budgeting systems (PPBS); Methods: policy analysis, strategic planning and coordination. • „In this model, citizens are seen as merely voters (although occasionally engaged in consultation)”. • third sector is an „addition” – a potential adjunct to administrative reform or a source of critical feedback