NGO, for layman, is a non-governmental formal organization
aiming at the larger public interest especially of the downtrodden stratum of
the society. NGOs were once good alternatives to public sector organizations
for donors, who wanted improvement in certain sectors especially in the
developing countries. The public sectors were accused of financial
irregularities, unfairness and red-tapism, the NGOs on the other hand provided
a comparatively fair and speedy operation. But with the mushrooming growth of
NGOs, the spirit of NGOs underwent drastic changes: corruption, politics, formalism and lack of
meritocracy penetrated into the fabric of NGOs and these factors culminated
into the formation of a new culture.
NGOs have virtually turned form non-profit and social
services oriented organizations into semi profitable organizations and thereby corruption
found its way into the very bodies of NGOs. Instead of raising funds by their
own through larger public awareness, they have hell bent on securing funds from
other donors and prefer to work as implementing partners (IP). Most of them
even allegedly pay bribes to some of the officials of the donor agencies who in
turn favor them by selecting them as IP for the proposed projects. Tip of the
hush money is repeated when their project is monitored and the NGOs get their
project completed in record despite numerous pitfalls and substandard
operations on the ground.
Recruitment of the NGOs is yet another area which is full of
irregularities. As there is no monitoring and across the board system of their
recruitment, therefore jobbery, nepotism political and personal references have
become order of their recruitment process. Although advertisement of vacancies
is meant for fulfilling the formalities, yet in most of the NGOs need of the
same is rarely felt.
Political dictation in operation of the projects is order of
the day. In some of the NGOs recommendation letter from the concerned political
figures is essential for executing the developmental project. Thus the projects
are thrown at the will of the politicians, and they necessarily show thier
likes and dislikes in the recommendation of the projects. A merit based project
may not get approved if the same is against the will and political interest of
the concerned political figure, and he do the other way round, and the same is
preferred by the NGOs at the cost of larger public interest. In this case it is
usually the downtrodden segments of the society which suffers the most, because
they lack their voice in the discourse dominated by the key social and political
figures. The NGOs knowingly or unknowingly hereby violate the spirit of NGO and
the very rationale behind their existence.
In such a scenario NGOs have adopted the culture of
formalism. Which includes cumbersome
documentation, public gatherings, expensive advertisements, and a host of other
tricks which create a verisimilitude of public relief and transparency. Piling file atop
files with snaps taken from different angles of the so called activities is
given more importance than ensuring results on the ground. Such record is handy
when it comes to the presentation of the performance of their projects and
satisfy the donors who don’t directly happen to visit the sites.
The faulty recruitment system has resulted into the brain
drain from the ranks of NGOs’ workers. An NGO worker is supposed to be a change
agent and therefore he is required to be a creative, responsive and capable to mould
things in the desired direction and must not be a blind imitator or a yes-man. Adaptability
of the project components is of area wherein his expertise is required. But due
to the faulty recruitment system the NGO sector is by and large deficient in
such competence which results into severe pitfalls in the execution of the
projects.
What is relevant for Rwanda and Balfour may not be relevant
for Dir and Shangla. Components of most of the projects are generally designed
and a ready- made package is handed over to the IPs for implementation. In
majority of the cases the components are not relevant to the needs of the
areas. But due to the lack of creative talent in the rank of IPs, they take the
words and plan of the donors as revealed words and try to implement the same,
which certainly results into wastage of resources and unsustainability. In the
aftermath of 2010 flood in Pakistan, UNHCR projects for the early recovery of
the victims are examples of such operations.
The project aimed at the rehabilitation of the flood victims
by providing them with shelters. Neither the design nor the materials of the
shelters were suited to the needs, climate and architectural designs of the areas
especially in the areas which are subjected to a heavy snowfall. The IPs
lacking in the analytical competence paid no attention to the feasibility and adaptability
of the project and therby rushed to the field, shelters were no more on the
ground before the project itself could phase out. The same is true in many other projects on
which million of rupees are spent, but at the end of the day yields no result.
There is a dire need for improvement in the NGO sector.
Ranging from their recruitment to the field operation everything needs
improvement. Apart from the donors’ monitoring, government needs to chalk a
strategy of its own which can check the irregularities prevailing in the
sector. Jobbery and nepotism, corruption, lack of technical expertise and meritocracy,
and a high scale negative political interference are of the few prevailing
faults from the long list.
CLICK TO FOLLOW US ON FACEBOOK.
CLICK TO FOLLOW US ON FACEBOOK.
READ ALSO
Political issues of Pakistan.
SOCIAL ISSUES.
CRITICAL CURRENT ISSUES