Manual For Standards

Copyright
and Registered 1999, Raquel Marti 1

Manual For Applying The Standards To

Non Governmental Organizations
(NGOs)
Non Profit Organizations
(NPOs)

Copyright and Registered 1999, Raquel Marti 2

International Development: Standards for NGOs
Copyright and Registered 1999, Raquel Marti
Manual Revised and updated: June 2012
For more information contact Raquel Marti at raquelmo21@gmail.com


Table of Content
Page

Introduction 3
Purpose. 7
Justification 8
Definitions.. 10
Applicability.. 10
Point Scale 10
Categories of Selection Criteria 12
Levels of Organizational Sustainability 13
Literature Review 14
Instrument: International Standards for NGOs. 30
Points on Selection Criteria 45
Levels of Organizational Sustainability.. 46
Developmental Sustainability Action Plan (DSAP)... 46
References . 47


Introduction
The International Standards for NGOs are designed to serve as an instrument to
determine the level of capacity and sustainability that a Non-Governmental Organization/ Non-
Profit Organization in meeting their mission. These Standards are a product of a though
literature review and pilot tested on the nonprofit sector and by governments. The author of
the International Standards for NGOs is Raquel Marti, who holds a Master Degree in
Philanthropy from the Philanthropic Center of Indiana University. The International Standards
for NGOs was Ms.Marti, thesis on Philanthropy. Her interest on this topic started from her
experience with NGOs of Nicaragua where she served as advisor to the US AID Mission of
Nicaragua on the topic of Sustainability and Fund Raising. During a two year period, data was
collected on the financial status prior to capacity building and later collected after two years.
The results of financial growth were dramatic and impressive in which all NGO surpassed over
250% growth and one even had a 715% increase. Also, the analysis of funding sources
demonstrated the diversification of fund raising strategies that were effective with each
participating NGO.
The successful outcome of the capacity building in Sustainability and Fund Raising lead
to investigate the different International Funding Sources and determine the selection criteria
that are used to grant funding to NGO. The main research was focused with the Organization of
Economic Cooperation Development (OECD).
The 21st Century Partnership Strategy of the Organization of Economic and Cooperation
Development (OECD) highlights NGOs and civil society roles in supporting sustainable and
poverty reducing development. There is universal recognition that poverty alleviation,


eradication of hunger, protecting the environment, grassroots development, and safeguarding
the poor from the debt crisis are governmental priorities.
In SHAPING THE 21ST CENTURY, DAC (Development Assistance Committee) member
countries of the OECD reconfirmed the Contribution of Development Cooperation, a number of
specific targets agreed on UN Conferences (OECD, 1997), these included:
a reduction by one-half in the proportion of people living in extreme poverty by 2015;
universal primary education in all countries by 2015;
demonstrated progress toward gender equality and the empowerment of women by
eliminating gender disparity in primary and secondary education by 2005;
a reduction by two-thirds in the mortality rates of infants and children under age 5 and a
reduction by three-fourths in maternal mortality, all by 2015;
access through the primary health care system to reproductive health services for all
individuals of appropriate ages as soon as possible and no later than the year 2015; and
the current implementation of national strategies for sustainable development in all
countries by 2000.
The 21st Century Partnership Strategy of OECD, 1996 highlights the strategic role NGOs
and civil society play in supporting sustainable and poverty reducing development.
The Millennium Declaration signed on September 2000, by 189 countries adopted the
Resolution by the General Assembly of the United Nations and was further agreed by member
states at the 2005 World Summit. The Millennium Development Goals and targets are
interrelated and should be seen as a whole. They represent a partnership between developed


countries and developing countries to create an environment- at the national and global levels
alike-which is conducive to development and the elimination of poverty.
Effective January 15, 2008 the following Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were
agreed by 23 international organizations and 192 countries to be achieved by 2015:
Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger.
Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education.
Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women.
Goal 4: Reduce child mortality.
Goal 5: Improve maternal health.
Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases.
Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability.
Goals 8: Develop a global partnership for development.


Purpose
As part of a major contribution to the funding efforts being made by different unilateral,
multilateral, donor agencies and foundations, provides a series of eligibility criteria that can
offer objective elements for deciding local NGOs eligible for funding. Also, the Standards for
NGOs- Non Profits serve as a self-assessment instrument to determine the developmental
capacity that the organization has towards sustainability.
The main interest in offering these eligibility criteria to facilitate to the donor countries a
direct relationship with local NGOs that have the capability, skills and knowledge to bring
forward the priorities established by the Office of Development Assistance (ODA). Since
numerous objectives are directly related to reducing or solving global problems that are at the
level of people-to-people organizations, it would be of benefit for international donors to
redirect their funding to organizations that work directly with the affected community. Official
development assistance (ODA) is a necessary and complementary source of finance for
development over the past decade, ODA donors in the OECDs Development Assistance
Committee has been on an overall rise. A changing international landscape including emerging
donors, philanthropic organizations, special purpose funding initiatives, innovative financing
instruments and sovereign wealth funds has created new sources of development finance and
new challenges to understanding the patterns and systems of aid flows.
The effectiveness of aid in eradicating poverty depends both on the quality of the donor
aid programs and on the capacity of the recipient governments/NGOs to use the aid wisely.


Justification
The principal objective of development must be eradication of poverty and its
underlying causes (Clark, 1993).
Development is a process by which the members of a society increase their personal
and institutional capacities to mobilize and manage resources to produce sustainable and justly
distributed improvements in their quality of life consistent with their own aspirations. It
embodies the principles of justice, sustainability and inclusiveness. It acknowledges that only
the people themselves can define what they consider to be improvements in the quality of their
lives. (David C. Korten, 1990).
The Millennium Declaration signed on September 2000, by 189 countries adopted the
Resolution by the General Assembly of the United Nations and was further agreed by member
states at the 2005 World Summit. The Millennium Development Goals and targets are
interrelated and should be seen as a whole. They represent a partnership between developed
countries and developing countries to create an environment- at the national and global levels
alike-which is conducive to development and the elimination of poverty.
Effective January 15, 2008 the following Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were
agreed by 23 international organizations and 192 countries to be achieved by 2015.
Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger.
Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education.
Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women.


Goal 4: Reduce child mortality.
Goal 5: Improve maternal health.
Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases.
Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability.
Goals 8: Develop a global partnership for development.


Definitions
International NGOs: International NGOs are non profit organizations based in developed
countries.
National NGOs: These are non profit organizations based in the South, whose principal function
is to implement development projects favoring the popular sectors.
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs): Refers to those non-profit, voluntary, organizations

that carry a broad range of social development functions with and on behalf of people.
Popular organizations: Popular organizations are composed of members and are in some way
accountable to them.
Sustainable development: Can be defined as meeting the needs of the present without
destroying resources that will be needed in the future.
Applicability
The eligibility criteria will be most applicable to local NGOs, NPs and GROs.
APPLICABILITY OF THE NGO SELECTION AND EVALUATION CRITERIA MODEL
The selection criteria model presented can be used by NGOs, NPs or donors including all
ten criteria or one might use a combination of the selection criteria depending on interest. This
model provides flexibility and allows one to make objective as well as subjective judgments.
Also, the donors can measure the level of success of an organization quantitatively and
qualitatively.
Point Scale
The Likert scale is used; a scale developed by Renis Likert which is used in many evaluation
instruments. This scale consists of a series of items presented in affirmative form in which
there is a reaction to the question posed. Each point has an assigned numerical value. This way


the organization obtains a mean score by item. The final score can then later be given to the
donor to rate the NGO to which the donors investment will be directed.
The Likert scale used is as follows:
Alternative 5: Definitively Agree
Alternative 4: Agree
Alternative 3: Not Agree nor Disagree
Alternative 3: Disagree
Alternative 1: Definitively Disagree


Categories of Selection Criteria
The ten selection criteria are divided in the following manner:
Selection Criteria Number of items Total sub-points
1. Registration and # 3 15
compliance with local law
2. Non-profit organization # 5 25
3.Transparency/Accountability #9 45
4. Community Representation #11 55
5. Leadership #20 100
6. Mission Statement # 10 50
7. Financial self- #8 40
sufficiency/sustainability
8. Past Performance #14 60
9. Service Provider # 6 30
10. Professionalism # 6 30
Totals # 90 450


Levels of Organizational Sustainability

The total items and points obtained by an organization can offer the donor a scale on which to fund.
One application could be as follows:
Level I Highly successful NGO 450-375 $1,000,000. and over
Level II Successful NGO 374-300 $999,999. 750,000.
Level III Functional NGO 299-225 $749,999. - 500,000.
Level IV Surviving NGO 224-150 $499,999. - under
Level V At Risk NGO 149-0 At risk NGO.


Literature Review
The following pages present the supporting literature for the ten eligibility criteria that has
identified for a donor to use as guidelines in the process of identifying NGOs that have the
capability to carry out the activities and services that will be sponsored by a donor. These
eligibility criteria are suggested as guides and do not intend to be exclusive.
1. Registration and compliance with local law
Legal, any organization operating in accordance with the provisions of the law is legitimate.
But of course, legitimacy is not simply a matter of legality; it also rests on the role and
contribution of NGOs, and their relevance and effectiveness in the local socioeconomic context
(Edward and Hulme, 1996).
This criterion ensures the legality of an organization within the country of service. The
process of local registration in many countries requires compliance with various prerequisites
which allow for the donor to enter in a relationship with organizations that fulfill the local
governmental requirements. In many countries local NGOs are required to maintain and
submit documents annually or within specific periods in order to continue operation. The local
governments review these documents and expedite the necessary permissions and licenses.
This eligibility criterion of registration is required by seven of the seventeen OECD countries
under this study. These countries are Canada, Germany, Ireland, Norway, Portugal, Sweden
and United States.
2. Non-profit organization


This criterion is the most common factor of any NGO. Upon registration of a local NGO
most countries condition the operation of the organization on a non-profit status. According to
Handmann (1980,1981d), the criterion of non-profit is also the factor of non distribution
constraint that prohibits the distribution of residual earnings to individuals who exercise
control over the firm, such as officers, directors or members.
This criterion ensures the donor that the organization invests its financial resources in areas
directly related to the mission and services delivery approved by the local government. There
is no personal financial interest from internal or external sources. Non-profit organizations are
geared to reduce problems which affect certain sectors. Their work and services are driven by
the mission established by the organization.
Most non-profit organization provides services at a lower cost than the private sector and in
a more efficient manner than the government sector. The main goal of the profit sector is
financial gain for distribution among its stockholders. The government is limited to provide
services at a low cost and to be efficient in accessing needed communities.
According to Kanter and Summers (1987) the one critical test of whether the organization
can obtain a non-profit status is whether it claims to be doing good in one of the areas that
society, or some segment of it, recognized as valuable.
Non-profit organizations remain a vital force in most of the nations. They do not have
profit-conscious private investors like for-profit companies and can tap significant reservoirs of
voluntary effort to assist with organizational tasks.


In modern society, the right to associate, to form nonprofit organizations, has come to be a
critical prerequisite for democratic governance and a functioning civil society, as basic as the
right of free expression and in some sense a necessary corollary of it (Salamon and Anheier,
1987).
3. Transparency/Accountability
Transparency is an element that maintains openness to the different parties involved in the
non-profit organization. Transparency can be seen from the dimension of financial openness.
Transparency is an element of trust; once a person or party loses confidence in the level of
transparency, then the organization can become at risk.
As donors expect regular financial and progress reports from the projects they fund,
Southern NGOs are starting to ask their donors to report to them on the actions they are taking
to educate Northern publics and to tackle the international causes of global poverty (Clark,
1997).
Accountability is the other side of the publicly contributed coin (Clark, 1997). All
organizations, including NGOs are accountable to different branches of government (donor
agencies, revenue and taxation departments). They are accountable to individual donors, staff,
the media, host governments overseas, counterpart and partner organizations and
beneficiaries (Helmich, 1998).
Transparency and consistent mechanisms are necessary for the channeling of official funds
(Clark, 1997).


Accountability is generally interpreted as the means by which individuals and organizations
report to a recognized authority (Edwards and Hulme, 1994). Effective accountability requires a
statement of goals, transparency of decision making and relationships, honest reporting, an
appraisal process and concrete mechanisms for holding accountable those responsible for
performance. GROs and NGOs have multiple accountabilities downward to their partners,
beneficiaries, staff and supporters and upward to their trustees, donors and host government.
NGOs can and should be able to account for the way they use their resources within the
framework set (Edwards and Hulme, 1994).
Accountability is generally understood as a means by which individuals and
organizations report to authority (Edwards and Hulme 1994). However, in development
programs at the grassroots level, accountability related to the wider process of information
exchange, decision making, management, negotiation, and bargaining that takes place between
decision stakeholders (Smillie, 1996).
The organizations have to be accountable to their government not just for the increasing
proportion of funds they derive from this source, but also to comply with the provisions of
accountancy laws, not-for-profit regulations or the equivalent. This accountability is quite
rigorous regarding the publicly contributed funds but oriented to protecting the donor, not the
recipient (Clark, 1997).
It is also important to acknowledge that the Northern countries must be accountable to
their tax payers and the public as well as to the stakeholders that they represent. This guide


can be an additional piece of data and information that the donors can present as evidence to
their stakeholders and evaluate the level of meeting their goals and objectives.
4. Community representation
The driving force for these movements is the voluntary coming together of men and women
in a common purpose to improve the society in which they live by demanding change from
their rules ( Clark, 1997).
A crucial factor in the effectiveness of organizations is their perceived legitimacy, linked to
participation and transparency in their decision-making processes and to the representative
nature of bodies that exercise authority (Spiro, 1995).
NGOs could do more than simply reach the poor, they could help to organize and motivate
successful and sustainable community self-help efforts. One reason that NGOs work as well as
they do is the level of commitment, energy and perseverance that their employees, volunteers,
and supporters apply to an issue (Helmich, 1998).
As Southern NGOs have grown, then the preferred operational mode for many has been
mobilizing village organizations and community based organizations according to a standard
format which the SNGO believes to be optimal (Hulme and Edwards, 1997).
Non governmental organizations (NGOs) may provide instruments which, whether invited
or not by governments, emphasize the participation of the poor. They are moving beyond a
supply side approach, concentrating on the delivery of services or development projects, to a


demand side emphasis, helping communities articulate their preferences and concerns so as
to become active participants in the development process (Clark, 1997).
Evidence suggests that direct funding has encouraged the emergence of opportunities
organizations that call themselves NGOs but have no popular base at all. The balance of
evidence and evaluations suggests that NGOs tend to be better than government at fostering
popular participation (Bebbginton and Thiele, 1993).
In their core activities, Grassroot Support Organizations (GRSOs) confront what David
Korten (1983) calls the central paradox of development influencing people to build capacity
to act on their own behalf. Because this paradox is based on an unequal power relationship,
the autonomy, as well as the accountability of GRSOs, ultimately depends on their success in
empowering ordinary people at the grassroots level (Fischer, 1998).
Yet membership of NGOs throughout the world is giving attention to the definition and
projection of a people-centered development vision that embraces the transformation agenda.
This vision looks to justice, sustainability and inclusiveness as the defining principles of
authentic development (Korten, 1990).
The legitimacy of community-based organizations rests on two key features: closeness to
the poor and popular support. Popular support through processes of participation is a key
legitimizing factor. Participation through self-financing is also a key factor in legitimizing
Community Based Organizations (CBOs) interventions (Edwards and Hulme, 1996).
Voluntary organizations will only achieve their full potential if they develop a more
strategic, coordinated way of working. Using them as a basis of experience and knowledge,


voluntary organizations should help to challenge governments, official aid agencies,
international companies and other to change their ways (Clark, 1997). The voluntary
organizations often work in the areas of greatest poverty; have direct relationships with the
needy communities. A donor can require a certain degree of popular participation and
consultation in the design of projects, (Clark, 1997).
Their legitimacy depends on their popular base, and on their potential through influence
with governments or sheer might-to become agents of social change (Clark, 1997).
Beyond their actual utility in improving program effectiveness, in this view, participation
and organization of poor communities serve an additional empowerment function, enhancing
the dignity and self-determination of the poor and enabling them to present a united front
against attempts at exploitation by the wealthy and powerful. Participation of the poor in the
design and delivery of basic services, as well as in specific, targeted programs, is crucial.
5. Leadership
There are various theories of leadership in the literature that offer characterization of
leaders in their performance within an organization (Yurl,1998). The path-goal theory of
leadership explains how the behavior of a leader influence the satisfaction and performance of
the subordinates. On the other hand, the situational theory of leadership developed by Hersey
and Blanchard (1977) support that the leadership behavior relies on the maturity of the
subordinate. By maturity the situational theory refers to job maturity which related to task-
relevant skills and technical knowledge and psychological maturity which related to self-
confidence and self-respect.


In 1977, Houses theory of charismatic leadership has a profound and unusual effects on
followers. Yurl explains that the followers of a charismatic leader perceive that the leader are
correct, accept the leader without question, obey the leader willingly, feel affection toward the
leader, are emotionally involved in the mission of the group or organization, believe that they
can contribute to the success of the mission, and have high performance goals.
According to Clark (1997) good leadership is critical to the success of an NGO, he mentions
two distinct types of leaders in NGOs:
1. Charismatic people of deep commitment and vision who lead by inspiration and by their
personal qualities, but who maintain an ill defined structure and tend to be somewhat
dictatorial in decision making. These are typically NGO founders.
2. Leaders committed to participation, who share influence and functions with other staff
and who like decision making to be by a collegial process, within a tight management
structure.
The key to successful projects is almost invariably its leadership-people of vision, charisma;
courage and stamina are inevitable found at the helm (Clark, 1990).
In 1978, Kerr and Jermier defined the theory of leadership substitutes that identifies aspects
of a situation that reduces the importance of leadership by managers and other formal leaders.
Initially Kerr and Jermier focused in indentifying substitutes and neutralizes for supportive and
instrumental leadership. Supportive leadership refers to consideration and instrumental
leadership to initiating structure.


The transformational and cultural leadership theory initially presented by Burns (1978) and
alter proposed by Bass (1985) refers to as an exchange of rewards for compliance. Bass (1985)
supports that that leaders transform and motivate followers. The original formulation of this
theory included three transformational behaviors charisma, intellectual and individualized
consideration.
6. Mission statement
The good NGO should have a clear mission statement which guides all its activities
from field work to fundraising techniques to advocacy roles. The mission statement should
describe the NGOs development philosophy, define its own potential contribution to this
process, and set out its strategy for realizing this potential through its various departments.
The mission statement positions the NGOs project works in the context of marco development
issues showing how it at times supplements and at times opposes trends. It requires the NGOs
to invest in on-going analytical work, both to be better placed to seize the opportunities for
forwarding the development process it has defined together the various departments of the
NGO in a spirit of common endeavor (Clark,1997).
Donors need to be clear on what development objectives they seek through supporting
southern NGOs, and only then determine the most appropriate means of achieving this goal.
Donors need to be clear on what development objectives they seek through supporting
southern NGOs, and only then determine the most appropriate means of achieving this goal
(Bebbington and Riddel, 1997). Donors have to identify those parts of the civil society whose
objectives and needs are consistent with their objectives.


Strategic planning and capacity building need to include interventions directed to making
NGO structures and processes of governance more effective ( Edwards and Hulme , 1998).
Strengthening civil society and the role and position of the poor in it remains a basic mission of
NGOs and is often spelled out in its constitution and mission statements.
It is possible to innovate and to retain a sense of mission, a high level of independence, and
an attachment to values and principles (Edwards and Hulme, 1998).
The good NGO should have a clear mission statement which guides all its activities, from its
field work to its fundraising techniques to its advocacy roles. The mission statement would
position the NGOs project work in the context of macro-development issues (Clark, 1997).
7. Level of financial self-sufficiency (sustainability)
A diversification method is issued to obtain assistance from several foreign donors.
Controlling cost is the flip side of financial sustainability for GRSOs (Fischer, 1998).
When NGOs develop a strong internal commitment to autonomy, diversify their funding,
and cultivate strong grassroots ties, they are likely to enhance both their own autonomy and
their influence on government (Fischer, 1998).
Just as empowerment and development depend on each other at the local level, the more
autonomous, proactive NGOs promote both democratization and sustainable development at
the national level in their relationship with government (Fischer, 1993).
There is a crucial need to move to long-term self-sufficiency and the exploitation of local
financial resources ( Edwards and Hulme, 1997)


A sustainable project must address problems and aspirations identified by the poor and
must have a management and decision-making structure in which the stakeholders have
confidence (Clark, 1997).
8. Past performance
The challenge for NGOs is to seek ways of maximizing their impact and of maximizing the
value of the lessons drawn from their experience without sacrificing the quality of their
program (Clark, 1997).
World Bank experience (Cernea, 1988), drawn from a survey of 25 Bank financed projects,
indicates correlation between project success and the participation of grassroots organizations.
NGOs need to be more results oriented and become much more focused on impact
(Helmich, 1998). Good planning, good monitoring and good reporting are all part of the
expectation (Helmich, 1998).
Some suggest that only NGOs with a track record should be funded. This in effect creates a
cartel that allows the established organizations to monopolize funding and makes it impossible
for the new NGOs to develop. I am uncomfortable with the idea of competition and am much
happier talking about collaboration. Generally, there is no reason why NGOs are exempt from
the general rule that competition stimulated performance (Hodson, 1997).
It is important to develop local standards for performance assessment (Edwards and Hulme,
1997). Effective management of such organizational transformation requires sound and timely
information about achievement (Edwards and Hulme, 1997). There is a growing realization that


organizational effectiveness is positively correlated with an ability to learn from experience
(Senge, 1990).
Ultimately, however, the survival of an independent NGO community as a source of
development learning and as a genuine weapon against poverty will depend on its own
willingness to confront questions of quality, cost effectiveness, and impact on hand-on, openly
and by itself ( Smillie, 1996).
The NGO first step should be to record carefully its direct experience indicating the need for
reforms ( Clark, 1997). The NGO experience is almost wasted unless it is used to change the
attitudes and practices of decision makers ( Clark, 1997).
Through strategic use of their experience, NGOs can make an invaluable contribution to
understanding development. They can demonstrate how present strategies affect poor people,
and they can also describe alternative strategies which, while in keeping with national
priorities, better serve the needs of the poor ( Clark, 1997).
9. Service providers/cost
The trend of NGO as contractors of the government may transform NGO from
representatives of civil society into service providers and inexperience government executing
agencies ( Helmich. 1998).
The NGO as contractor to official programs, particularly in specialist areas such as
emergency relief and post-conflict rehabilitation and reconciliation, has grown. The growth of


subcontracting may encourage some NGOs to become instruments in development programs
which should place at risk their independent character (Helmich, 1998).
Grassroots Organizations Southern Service (GROSS) are included as Service organizations
in Uphoffs model (1986), he places them in the private sector because, like businesses, they
have clients instead of members. Paying customers can be used to assure high- quality service
for all. The funding agency takes the available pool of resources and tries to use it to assure
efficient, high-quality charitable operation. The people who operate funding agency have
difficulty both discovering a charitys cost function and monitoring service quality, but they do
know that all charities can be quality efficient.
A higher subsidy rate would permit the charity to raise quality levels, lower price and attract
more paying customers. In the process of helping the needy, paying customers end up
obtaining part of the benefit of the subsidy ( Rose-Ackerman, 1980).
According to Korten, the features that donors look for when seeking to engage NGOs as
implementation of projects are technical competence, well-developed management systems
and a concern with cost effectiveness ( Robinson, 1997).
An important distinction competitive tendering and subcontracting on a non-competitive
basis. The contract is awarded on the basis of the quality of the proposal and cost
consideration. This is the mechanism employed by the USAID and the World Bank in awarding
their contracts to the NGOs. In general, however, contracting through NGOs is carried out on a
non-competitive basis with the donor or government agency commissioning inputs from
organizations selected for their track record in implementing projects and programs. The ODA


in Britain also employs competitive tendering in awarding consultancy and research contracts,
although the principal means of funding NGOs is through grants rather than contracts. Aid
donors have also been promoting increased NGO involvement in the delivery of public services,
usually through grants rather than contracts. For this reason, NGOs especially church-based
organizations, account for significant proportion of health and education services in Africa
( Robinson, 1997).
This high level of provision is all the more significant in view of the fact that NGOs tend
to concentrate their activities in rural areas and service to the poor, and the disadvantaged; but
no evidence was found of a trend towards government contracting of service provision
(Robinson, 1997).
Some NGOs function as government service providers. Autonomous organizations are
well aware that they more likely threaten as institutional identity that in some sense
resembles their past, if they pursue a link with government in which they develop innovations
for presentation to government, rather than one in which they implement public programs
( Farrington and Bebbington, 1993).
NGOs are seen as the preferred channel for service provision. Under the New Policy
Agenda, NGOs and GROs are seen as vehicles for democratization and as essential to the
success of the civil society, which in turn are seen as essential to the success of the agendas
economic dimension (Moore, 1993). The effect of the New Policy Agenda is to formalize, label
and use NGOs as service contractors, agents of democratization, or sources of innovation.


NGOs become instruments for the delivery of services, democracy, or innovation on the basis of
clearly defined inputs, outputs, and NGO interventions ( Edwards and Hulme , 1997).
In terms of service provision, there is certainly evidence that NGOs are able to provide
some services more cost effectively than governments (Edwards and Hulme, 1997). In the
mainstream approach, NGOs are viewed as cost effective instruments for the delivery of inputs
and the achievement of outputs.
10. Level of professionalism
NGOs must be professional, and they must be lean (Helmich, 1998).
The allocation of funding based on management capacity alone would favor the larger
organizations who have experienced staff with professional skills and capabilities. Many of the
small more local organizations whose performance is weak may take longer to improve but in
the long run may provide a distinctive service that may be of value in the overall development
process of the country ( Hodson, 1997).
In the 1980s there was a call from the Northern donor community for greater efficiency and
more professionalism, and it became clear that the era of unconditional funding born of
political solidarity was at an end (Edwards and Hulme, 1997).
Among the factors that enable NGOs to manage these dilemmas effectively and strong
sense of mission and attachment to values and principles, effective learning and action research
( Hasan 1993; Wils et al 1993); local level institution building and high levels of participation
(Riddell and Robinson 1992); effective management, strategic planning, and accountability


mechanisms, skilled and committed staff, and a favorable external environment ( Edwards and
Hulme, 1997).


Instrument: International Standards for NGOs:

The Likert scale used is as follows:
Alternative 5: Definitively Agree
Alternative 4: Agree
Alternative 3: Not Agree nor Disagree
Alternative 3: Disagree
Alternative 1: Definitively Disagree
Selection Criteria 1:
Registration and Compliance with local law 5 4 3 2 1 Sample Documentation
1. The organization has evidence of Registration document.

registration under the laws in the country it Good standing
is providing services. document. Certification
by country of service
provider.
2. The organization is up to date with legal Documents certified by
requirements. governmental agencies.
3. The organization is up to date with the Updated documents of
permits and licenses to operate. permits and licenses to
operate.
Criteria 1 sub-total:

Recommendations:_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Selection Criteria 2:
Non-profit Organization 5 4 3 2 1 Sample Documentation
1. The organization does not distribute The financial report.

residual earnings to individuals who control Check banking book
the organizations such as directors, board
members or members.
2. The staff has reasonable/comparable Salary and benefits are
salary compensation and benefits. comparable and
competitive within
similar organizations/
sector.
3. No person from the organization benefits Financial records.
personally from the funds or resources. Organization resource
inventory.
4. All funds and resources of the Annual Financial
organization are directed to the activities of Budget Plan and Report.
the mission of the organization. Annual Report.
Internal and External
Audit Report

5. The financial accounts evidence Financial Reports
transparency in the use of funds. Internal and External
Audit Report.

Recommendations:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Selection Criteria 3
Transparency/ Accountability 5 4 3 2 1 Sample Documentation
1. The organization has annual audit Audit Report

reports.
2. The organization submits an annual Annual Program
program report to the different Report.
stakeholders. Dissemination means of
Annual Report.
3. The reports are made by a recognized Annual Program
authority. Report.
Audit Report
4. The organization makes public disclosure Means of public
about development activities. disclosure
5. The organization has a high percentage of Annual Financial Plan
funds allocated to direct services. and Report.
Annual Report.
Internal and External
Audit Report
6. The donors have access to financial Means of accessibility to
records. organization reports.
7. The organization carries out honest Reports are sustained
reporting based on data. by reliable data.
8. The organization has communication Communication plan.
vehicles for exchanging information. Communication
strategies.
9. The organization maintains open Evidence of ways of
negotiation between decision stakeholders. communication with
stakeholders.

Recommendations:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Criteria 4
Community Representation 5 4 3 2 1 Sample Documentation
1. The organization has a significant number Roster of volunteers.

of volunteers. Volunteer activities.
Number of volunteer
hours.
Volunteer program.
2. Volunteers are representatives from the Volunteer profile and
local community. address.
3. Volunteers participate in decision making. Volunteer program.
Volunteer agenda
meetings and minutes.
4. The organization is capable of mobilizing Number of community
community resources. resources.
Community
contribution,
participation and
resources.
5. The organization encourages Profile of stakeholders.
participation of the poor people in the Stakeholders agenda
development process. meetings and minutes.
6. The organization has popular support and Community service
participation. acknowledgements.
Community activities.
7. The organization has a people-centered Organization Mission
vision. Organization Vision
Evidence of people-
centered vision.
Profile of beneficiaries.
8. The organization maintains closeness to Activities that evidence
the poor within the community it serves. support to poor sectors.
9. The organization has popular consultation Evidence consultation
in the design and delivery of processes.
project/services. Public hearings for
consultation.
Recommendations from
public hearings
incorporated into
organization
projects/services.
10. The organization empowers the poor to Annual Strategic Plan
implement development activities. Annual Organization
Report
Empowerment
activities
11. The poor people have participation in Developmental
self-financing development. activities.
Profile of participants.
Increase in self-
financing activities


Recommendations:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Selection Criteria 5
Leadership 5 4 3 2 1 Sample Documentation
1. The board members are representative List and address of

volunteers from the community. Board Members.
Citizenship / passport
document.
2. Board members are accessed easily. Roster of
communication.
3. Board members maintain direct Roster of
communication with the director of the communication.
organization. Minutes of meeting with
director.
4. The majority of the board members Board meeting
attends and participates in the Board invitations.
meetings. Board meeting
attendance sheet.
Board meetings agenda.
Board meeting minutes.
Board meeting approval
of minutes.
5. The board members establish, approve Board members
and monitor organizational policies. approval of policies.
Board member
committees.
Board meeting agenda
and minutes.
Board meeting Annual
Report.
6. The board approves the mission of the Board meeting minutes
organization. of approval of mission.
7. The board approves the strategic plan of Board meeting minutes
the organization. of approval of strategic
plan.
8. The board oversees the financial stability Board minutes.
of the organization. Finance Committee
minutes.
Board financial
decisions.
9. The board reviews the financial audit Board minutes on audit
reports of the organization. reports.
10. The board makes decisions on significant Board financial
financial investments. decisions.
Organizational financial
investments.
11. The board members are spokespersons Board members
of the organization in the community. participation in
community events.
Board members attend
organization activities.
Board members
dissemination
organization mission


and vision to the

community.
12. The board members seek resources for Evidence of board
the development activities of the members activities that
organization. render in resources.
13. The board and staff project commitment Organization activities
to the mission and purposes of the are focused on the
organization. mission.
14. The leaders of the organization are Organization leadership
committed to people participation. motivates and
encourages input.
15. The decision process is made as a Evidence the process of
collegial and team process. decision making.
16. The director of the organization has a Credentials and trust of
transparent reputation within the the director among the
community. internal and external
community.
17. The vision of the organization is people The vision focuses on
oriented. improving the quality of
life of people.
18. The leaders of the organization are Document problem
problem solving oriented. solving strategies by
leaders.
19. The organization has a management Organizational Chart.
structure. Organizational
administrative manuals
and procedures.
20. The leaders of the organization List of activities in
participate in community activities beyond which leaders
the organization. participate.
Recommendations:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Selection Criteria 6 5 4 3 2 1 Sample Documentation
Mission Statement
1. The organization has a clear mission Review mission

statement directed to development. statement focused on
development and/or
reduction of poverty.
2. The organization has a developmental Document that evidence
philosophy and culture. organization
commitment towards
development.
3. The organization has a written vision Copy of vision
statement. statement.
4. The organization has a strategic plan with Copy of strategic plan,
goals and objectives. goals and
attainable/measurable
objectives.
5. The strategic plan incorporates and Strategic Plan
responds to internal and external factors. incorporates internal
and external factors
that intervene
development.
6. The organization has identified areas of Community needs
needs. prevail in organization
mission.
7. The mission of the organization is Mission incorporates
directed to reducing poverty. strategies to resolve
poverty.
8. The organization has outlined plans for Copy of plans.
development activities.
9. The organization has outlined strategy to Organization
diversify its revenues. documents that
evidence strategies of
revenue diversification.
List of funding
revenues.
List and types of
funding sources.
10. The plans of the organization are Copy of evaluation
evaluated and revised regularly. reports.
Frequency of evaluation
reports.
Type of evaluation
reports.
Recommendations:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Financial self-sufficiency/ Sustainability
1. The organization has a balanced financial Copy of financial

diversification system. statements.
Sources of revenues.
Number of proposals
submitted and
approved
Fund Raising
Plan/Activities
2. The organization has a well-established Copy of Strategic Plan
cost control system. and Cost Analysis
Copy of Cost
Expenditures
Organization
operational budget
Audit Reports
3. The organization has a commitment to Financial Reports
autonomy. evidence potential of
self-sufficiency.
4. The organization makes use of local List of local resources
financial resources. (in-kind, cash,
donations).
5. The organization has a fund raising plan. Copy of fund raising
plan that evidence
different revenues
sources.
Fund raising plan
includes attainable
financial goal.
Fun raising includes
board participation and
responsibilities.
Fund raising plan
incorporate
organization and
community members in
different committees.
6. The organization has commercial activities. Type of commercial
activities (sales, fee for
service, patents,
others).
7. The organization has a solid endowment. The endowment can
financially sustain the
operational budget for
a period of six months.
8. The organization has a reasonable The amount of
percentage of revenues that are unrestricted. unrestricted revenues
are twice the amount of
restricted funds.


Recommendations:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Past Performance
1. The organization has mechanisms for The board has a planning

planning. committee.
Copy of organization plans.
Organization plans direct
operational activities.
2. The organization has mechanisms for Type of administrative
monitoring. monitoring activities
(reports, meetings,
monitoring procedures,
monitoring visits,
monitoring reports,
information systems,
others).
3. The organization has mechanism for Types of reports.
reporting. Frequency of reports.
Use of reports.
Dissemination of reports to
internal/external
community.
Reporting to
stakeholders/constituencies.
4. The objectives and activities of the List objective that reduce
organization focus on impact towards poverty.
reducing poverty. Activities directed to reduce
poverty.
5. The organization maintains a track Tracking data.
record on performance. Tracking information
systems.
Data analysis systems.
Use of data systems for
decision making.
6. The organization complies with local Compliance with
performance standards. performance standards.
Action Plan on non-
compliance performance
standards.
7. The organization disseminates The organization
information about performance. disseminates performance.
Internal/external
dissemination strategies.
Communication means with
internal/external publics.
8. The organization learns and The organization has in
incorporates recommendations made by place means for community
different stakeholders. input.
Evidence that
recommendations are
considered and incorporated
in plans.
9. The organization maintains Evidence that activities are


effectiveness in the activities and services. effective.

Type of measurable
instruments that evidence
effectiveness.
10. The organization has established Indicators of performance.
performance standards and measures. Quantifiable performance
indicators.
11. The organization carries out activities The budget operational plan
in a cost effective manner. is aligned with expenditures.
Operational costs are
anticipated.
Cost is within market value.
Expenditures are allowable,
reasonable and justifiable.
12. The organization makes maximum use Resources are used to year
of the resources. of life.
Resources offer a long term
utility.
List of inventory resources
and equipment.
Inventory is updated and
source identified.
Organization has updated
resources (date of
purchase).
13. The organization impacts its List of beneficiaries.
beneficiaries directly. Service offered to
beneficiaries.
14. The organization has strategies to Type of service to the poor.
better serve the poor. Alternatives of financial
sources for the poor.
Recommendations:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Service Provider
1. The organization has defined parameters Definition of quality

for quality service. service.
Indicators of quality
service.
2. The organization can measure levels of Type of measurement
impact on beneficiaries. instruments (survey,
interviews, focus groups,
others).
Evaluation design to
measure impact
(experimental, quasi
experiential, logic
evaluation model).
Summative evaluation
reports.
3. The organization monitors service quality Monitoring systems.
system. Type of data collected
for monitoring.
Frequency of
monitoring.
Use of data/reports for
areas of improvement.
4. The organization has evidence of quality Documents that
by different stakeholders. evidence stakeholders
input on quality of
services.
Mechanisms for input of
stakeholders.
5. The organization has defined inputs and Activities are defined
outputs. with expected results.
Logic Evaluation Model
Strategic Plan evidence
inputs and outputs.
6. The organization maintains low cost Operational budget is
services. cost effective and
efficient.
Cost are controlled and
approved by various
organizations members.
Cost service are market
value and competitive.
Costs are allowable,
reasonable and
justifiable.


Recommendations:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Professionalism
1. The staff has the needed professional Copy of professional

credentials in the area of service. credentials.
Professional credentials
are active.
2. The staff has the needed experience Staff leaders resume
working with development programs. reveal experience in the
field of development
programs.

3. The organization has qualified leaders Resume evidence
(CEO, board members, and management qualifications needed for
staff). development.
4. Staff complies with professional Staff complies with
standards/licenses. professional
requirements to
perform.
Documents of continuing
education of staff.
5. The organization is member of Evidence of professional
professional associations. development of staff.
Evidence of membership
in professional
association related to
organization mission.
6. The organization has a professional Copy of professional
development plan. plan.
Budget allocation for
professional activities.
Frequency of
professional activities.
Internal professional
developments activities.
External professional
development activities.

Recommendations:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________


Points of Selection Criteria:

The ten selection criteria are divided in the following manner:
Selection Criteria Total sub-points NGO/NPO Points
1. Registration and compliance 15

with local law
2. Non-profit organization 25
3.Transparency/Accountability 45
4. Community Representation 55
5. Leadership 100
6. Mission Statement 50
7. Financial self- 40
sufficiency/sustainability
8. Past Performance 60
9. Service Provider 30
10. Professionalism 30
Totals 450


Levels of Organizational Sustainability:

The total items and points obtained by an organization can offer the donor a scale on which to fund.
Level I Highly successful NGO/NPO 450-375 $1,000,000. and over

Level II Successful NGO/NPO 374-300 $999,999. 750,000.
Level III Functional NGO/NPO 299-225 $749,999. - 500,000.
Level IV Surviving NGO/NPO 224-150 $499,999. - under
Level V At Risk NGO/NPO 149-0 At risk NGO.

Based on the Recommendations the organization will design a

Developmental Sustainability Action Plan (DSAP).
The Developmental Sustainability Action Plan (DSAP) includes intervention strategies and
activities for each of the areas of selection criteria and the recommendations on the instrument
of Standards for NGO/NPOs. There needs to be concert and measurable indicators to assist the
organization to increase their level of sustainability. The format and activities identified in the
DSAP should be result of the dialog and participation of internal and external stakeholders of
the organization in order to provide for ownership of the actions that will be taken.


References
Ackerman, Susan Rose. 1980. The charity market: paying customers and quality control. PONPO, no. 19
New Haven: Program on Non-Profit Organizations, Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale
University.
Ackerman, Susan Rose. 1983. Regulating the quality of subsidized day care. PONPO, no. 69. New Haven:
Program on Non-Profit Organizations, Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale University.
Anheier, Helmut K. 1987. Private voluntary organizations and development in West Africa: Comparative
Perspectives. Photcopied.
Arnold, Guy. 1996. Historical Dictionary of Aid and Development Organizations. International
Development. London: The Scarecrow
Balance, Frank. 1986. State of the aid mandate in the United States and Canada. Washington, D.C.:
World Bank.
Barnet, Richard J., and John Cavanagh. 1994. Global dreams: imperial corporation and the New World
Order. New York: Simon& Schuster
Bass, B.M. 1985. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Bebbington, Anthony and Roger Riddell. 1987. Heavy hands, hidden hands, holding hands? Donors,
Intermediary NGOs and Civil Society Organizations. Chap. In NGOs, States and Donors, Too
Close for Comfort?. London: Macmillan Press.
Berg, Robert. (ca. 1987). Non-governmental organizations new force in third world development and
politics. CASID distinguished speaker series no. 2. East Lansing: Center for Advanced Study of
International Development, Michigan State University.
Bjar, Hctor and Peter Oakley. 1996. From accountability to share responsibility NGO evaluation in
Latin America. Chap. In Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability on the
Post War World. Edited by Michael Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.
Biekart, Kees. 1986. European NGOs and Democratization in Central America: assessing performance in
light of changing priorities. Chap. in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and
Accountability in the Post Cold War World. Edited by Michael Edwards and David Hulme.
London: Kumarian Press.
Biggs, Stephen D. and Arthur D. Neame . 1996. Negotiating room to maneuver: Reflections concerning
NGO autonomy and accountability within the New Policy Agenda. Chap. in Beyond the Magic
Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War World. Edited by Michael
Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.
Blair, Harry. 1997. Donors, democratization and civil society: relating theory to practice. Chap. in NGOs,
States and Donors, Too Close for Comfort? Edited by David Hulme and Michael Edwards.
London. Macmillan Press.


Bratton, Michael. 1989 (?). Poverty, organization and public policy: towards a voice for Africas Rural
Poor. Unpublished Paper.
Brinjerhoff, Derick L. 1979(?) Review of approaches to productivity, performance, and organizational

effectiveness in the public sector: applicability to non-profit organizations. New Haven: Program
on Non-Profit Organizations, Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale University.
Brown, L. & Ashman D. 1996. Participation, social capital, and intersectoral problem solving African and
Asian cases. World Development 24 (6): 1467-1479.
Brown, L. David. 1988. Organizational barriers to NGO strategic action. Lok Niti, 5 (4): 38-49.
Burns, J.M. 1978. Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
Butler, Daniel, 1996. Support with strings attached. Accountancy 3 (September) 27-32.
Carroll, Thomas F. 1992. Intermediary NGOs: the supporting link in grassroots development. London:
Kumarian Press.
Chambers, Robert. 1996. The primacy of the personal. Chap. in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO
Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War World. Edited by Michael Edwards and
David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.
Chambers, Robert. 1983. Rural development: putting the last first. Harlow: Longman.
Chen, Martha Alter. 1995. Engendering world conferences: the international womens movement and
the United Nations. Third World Quarterly 16(3): 74-84.
Clark, John. 1997. The state, popular participation and the voluntary sector. Chap. in NGOs, States and
Donors, Too Close for Comfort? Edited by David Hulme and Michael Edwards. London:
Macmillan Press.
Commins, Stephen. 1997. World vision international and donor to close for comfort? Chap. in NGOs,
States and Donors, Too Close for Comfort? Edited by David Hulme and Michael Edwards.
London: Macmillan Press.
Conca, Ken. 1995. Greening the United Nations: environmental organizations and the UN system. Third
World Quarterly 16(3): 41-457.
Constantino, David. 1997. NGOs and development in a changing world. Edited by M. Edwards and D.
Hulme. London: Macmillan Press.
Covey, Jane G. 1998. Accountability and effectiveness in NGO policy alliances. Chap. in Beyond the
Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War World. Edited by
Michael Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.
Desai, Vandana and Mick Howes. 1996. Accountability and participation: a case study from Bombay:
Chap. in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War
World. Edited by Michael Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.
Development Co-operation Review of Finland, Summary and Conclusions, DAC aid review of Finland.
Retrieved January 22, 1999 from the World Wide Web: Http://www.oecd.org/dac/htm/ar-
fin.htm#overview


Development Co=operation Review of Germany, Summary and Conclusions, DAC aid review of Germany.
Retrieved January 22,1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.oecd.org/dac/htm/ar-
de.htm
Ditcher, Thomas W. 1997. Appeasing the gods of sustainability: the Future of international NGOs in
microfinance. Chap. in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the
Post Cold War World. Edited by Michael Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.
Drakakis David. 1986. Third World in the first: development and indigenous peoples. The Geographical
Journal 11 (July): 55-70.
Drucker, Peter. 1967. What business can learn from nonprofits. Harvard Business Review 3 (July-
August): 88-93.
Drucker, Peter. 1990. Managing the nonprofit organization: Principles and practices. New York: Harper
Collins.
Eby, Charles. 1982. Performance norms in no-market organizations: an exploratory survey. PONPO, no.
56. New Haven: Program Non-Profit Organizations, Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale
University.
Eikeland, P. 1994. US environmental NGOs: new strategies for environmental problems? The Journal of
Social, Political and Economic Studies 19. (3) 259-285.
Eppler, Erhard. 1972. Not much time for the third world. London: Oswald Wolff.
Farrington, John, and Anthony Bebbington. 1994 From research to innovation: getting the most from
interaction with NGOs in farming systems research and extension. Gatekeeper Series, no. 43.
London: International Institute for Environmental Development.
Fischer, Julie. 1993. The road From Rio: sustainable development and the nongovernmental movement
in the third world. London: Praeger Publishers.
Fisher, Julie. 1998. Non governments and the political development of the third world. London:
Kumarian Press.
Flushing. 1996. First world. Comparative Economic Studies 6 ( Summer-Fall): 22-34.
Fox, Jonathan, and John Butler. 1992 (7). Research project review: membership organization dynamics:
lessons from the Inter American Foundation experience IAF Memorandum.
Foundation Center. 1997. International grantmaking: A report on U.S. foundation trends. New York:
The Foundation Center.
Fox, Thomas H. 1987. NGOs from the United States in world development. Chap. in Development
Alternatives: The Challenge for NGOs. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Fowler, Alan. 1990(?). Political dimensions of NGO expansion in eastern and southern Africa and the
role of international aid. Paper. New York: Ford Foundation.
Fowler, Alan F. 1996. Assessing NGO performance: difficulties, dilemmas, and a way ahead. Chap. in
Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War World.
Edited by Michael Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.


Harriss, John. 1996. Government-NGO relations in Asia: prospects and challenges for people-centered
development/non-governmental organizations and rural poverty alleviation. The Journal of
Development Studies 5 (December): 25-46.
Hasan, A. 1993. Scaling-up the OPPs low cost sanitation programme. Karachi: Orangi.
Hansmann, Henry. 1980. Economic theories of nonprofit organization. Chap. in The nonprofit sector: A
research handbook. Edited by Walter W. Powell. Boston: Yale University.
Hashemi, Syed M. 1996. NGO accountability in Bangladesh: beneficiaries, donors and the state. Chap.
in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War World.
Hellinger, David. Susan Hellinger, and Frank ORegan. 1988. Aid for just development. Bourder: Lynne
Rienner.
Henkel, Stirrat. Heiko. 1997. The development gift: the problem of reciprocity in the NGO world.
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 4 (November): 55-74.
Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. 1977. The management of organizational behavior. 3rd ed. Englewood
Cliffs NJ Prentice-Hall.
Hodson, Roland. 1997. Elephant loose in the jungle: the World Bank and NGO in Sri Lanka. Chap. in
NGOs, States and Donors, Too Close for Comfort? Edited by David Hulme and Michael Edwards.
London: Macmillan Press.
Holloway, Richard. 1998. NGOs-losing the moral high ground?. UN Chronicle 6 (July): 15-18.
House, R.J. 1977. A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. Chap. in Leadership: the cutting edge.
Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Hulme, David and Michael Edwards. 1997. NGOs, States and Donors Too Close for Comfort? London:
Macmillan Press.
Hulme, David and Michael Edwards. 1996. Introduction: NGO performance and accountability in the
post cold war world. Chap in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in
the Post Cold War World. Edited by Michael Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian
Press.
Gariyo, Zie. 1996. NGOs and development in East Africa: a view from below. Chap in Beyond the Magic
Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War World. Edited by Michael
Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.
Karten, Moss Rosabeth and David V. Summers. 1987. Doing well while doing good: dilemmas of
performance in nonprofit organizations and the need for a multiple-consistuency approach.
Chap. in The Nonprofit Sector. Edited by Walter W. Powell. New Haven: Yale University.
Karim, Mahbubul. 1996. NGOs in Bangladesh: issues of legitimacy and accountability. Chap. in Beyond
the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War World. Edited by


Kerr, S. and Jermier, J.M. 1978. Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and measurement. Chap in
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 22.
Korten, David C. 1990. Getting to the 21st Century. West Hartford: Kumarian Press.
Korten, David C. 1983. Social development: putting the people first. Chap. in Bureaucracy and the Poor.
Edited by David C. Korten and Feiple Alfonso. Wets Hartford: Kumarian Press.
Lehmann, David. 1990. Democracy and Development in Latin America: Economics, Politics and Religion
in the Postwar Period. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Lewis, John P. 1988. Strengthening the poor: what have we learned. U.S. Third World Policy
Perspectives: 10 (8): 15-22.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 1998. Stakeholders Government-
NGO Partnerships for International Development. Edited by Ian Smillie and Henry Helmich.
Paris: OECD.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 1995. Private sector development:
A Guide to donors support. Paris: Development Assistance Committee, OECD.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 1998. Civil society and international
development. Edited by Amanada Bernard, Henry Helmich and Percy B. Lehninh. Paris. North-
South Centre of the Council of Europe, Development Centre, OECD.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 1996. Migrants Partners in
development co-operation. Edited by Marie Libercier and Hartmut Schneider. Paris:
Development Centre, OECD.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 1998. Efforts and Policies of the
members of the development assistance committee: Development Co-operation. Report by
James. Michel. Paris: OECD.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 1997. Sustainable development:
OECD policy approaches for the 21st Century. Paris: OECD.
Mabbott, John. 1992. Improving government funding: report and recommendations. London: National
Council for Voluntary Organizations.
Middleton, Melissa. 1987. Nonprofit board of directors beyond governance function, Chap. in The
Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook. Edited by Walter W. Powell. New Haven: Yale
University.
Moore, M. 1993. Good government? Introduction. IDS Bulletin 24 (1): 1-6.
Padrn, Mario. 1987. Non-governmental organizations in Latin America. World Development 15.
Supplement (Autumn): 31.
Pratten, D. and S. Ali. Baldo. 1995. Return to the roots: processes of legitimacy in Sudanese migrant
associations. Chap. in NGO performance and accountability: beyond the magic bullet. London:
Cambridge University Press.


Price, M. 1994. Ecopolitics and environmental nongovernmental organizations in Latin America. The
Geographical Review 84 (Fall): 42-58.
Ramesh, Janaki. 1985. Strategies for monitoring and accountability: the working womens forum
model. Chap. in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold
War World. Edited by Michael Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.
Riddell, R., and M. Robinson. 1992. The impact of NGO poverty-alleviation projects: Results of the case-
study evaluations. ODI Working Paper, no. 68. London: Overseas Development Institute.
Robinson, Mark. 1997. Privatizing the voluntary sector: NGOs as public service contractors. Chap. in
NGOs, States and Donors Too Close for Comfort? London: Macmillan Press.
Rudney, Gabriel. 1981. A quantitative profile of the nonprofit sector. PONPO, no.40 (November) New
Haven: Program on Non-Profit Organizations, Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale
University.
Rules of procedures for the participation of non-governmental organizations. 1993. New York: United
Nations Conference on Human Settlements Habitat II.
Salamon, L. 1993. The global associational revolution: The rise of the third sector on the world scene.
Occasional Paper no. 15. Baltimore: Institute for Policy Studies, John Hopkins University.
Schnieder, Bertrand. 1985. La Revolution des Pieds Nuns-Rapport au Club de Rome. Paris: Fayard.
Senge, P. 1990. The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York:
Doubleday.
Shah, Parmesh and Meera, Kaul Shah, 1996. Participatory methods for increasing NGO accountability: a
case Study from India. Chap. in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability
in the Post Cold War World. Edited by Michael Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian
Press.
Silberberg, Mina. 1997. The evolution of assistance to Grassroots organization: The impact of linkage.
Public Productivity & Management Review 6 (June): 15-18.
Smillie, Ian and Henry Helmich. 1998. Stakeholders- Government-NGO Partnerships for International
Development. Paris: Organization of Economic Co-operation Development (OECD). Draft
Unpublished.
Smillie, Ian. 1996. Painting Canadian Roses Red. Chap. in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance
and Accountability in the Post Cold War World. Edited by Michael Edwards and David Hulme.
London: Kumarian Press.
Spiro, Peter J. 1995. New global communities Nongovernmental Organizations in international

decision-making institutions. The Washington Quarterly 18 (1): 45-56.
Tandon, Rajesh. 1996. Board games: governance and accountability in NGOs. Chap. in Beyond the
Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War World. Edited by


United Nations Development Programme. 1983. Human Development Report. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Uphoff, Norman. 1996. Why NGOs are not a third sector: a sectoral analysis with some thoughts on
accountability, sustainability, and evaluation. Chap. in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO
Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War World. Edited by Michael Edwards and
David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.
Wapner, Paul. 1995. Politics beyond the state-environmental activism and world civic politics. World
Policitics 3 (April): 3-17.
Wils, Frits. 1996. Scaling up, mainstreaming, and accountability: the challenge for NGOs. Chap. in
Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold War World.
Williams, Maurice and Patti L. Petersch. 1993. Sustaining the earth: role of multilateral development
institutions. Washington, D.C. : Overseas Development Council.
Wood, Geof. 1997. States and citizen: the problem of the franchise state. Chap. in NGOs, States and
Donors Too Close for Comfort? Edited by Hulme, David and Michael Edwards. 1997. London:
Macmillan Press.
Wood, Robert E. 1986. From Marshall Plan to debt crisis: Foreign Aid and Development. Choices in the
World Economy 4 (2): 15-18.
World Bank. 1994. Poverty reduction in South Asia: promoting participation by the poor: Summary of
an Informal Workshop Co-sponsored by the World Bank and the South Asian Association for
Regional Cooperation (SAARC). Washington, D.C. The International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development, The World Bank.
World Bank. 1986. Aid for development: the key issues. Washington D.C.: World Bank.
Young Dennis. 1987. Executive leadership in nonprofit organizations. Chap. in The Nonprofit Sector: A
Research Handbook. Edited by Walter W. Powell. New Haven: Yale University.
Yuld, Gray. 1998. Leadership in Organizations. Fourth Edition, State University of New York at Albany.
Prentice Hall., NJ.
Van der, Heijiden, H. 1987. The reconcilitation of NGO autonomy and operational effectiveness with
Accountability to Donors. World Development 15. Supplement: 103-12.
Van Dijk, M-P. 1993. The effectiveness of NGOs: Insight from Danish, British and Dutch import studies.
Schriften des Deutschen Ubersee- Institute Hamburg. 28 (4): 27-42.
Van Rooy, Alison. 1997. The frontiers of influence: NGO lobbying at the 1974 World Food Conference.
World Development 25 (1) 93-114.
Vereker, John. 1998. International Development: Policy in practice. Harvard Institute for International
Development 23 (February): 1-5.


Zadel, Simon and Gatward Murdoch. 1996. Transforming the international NGOs: social auditing or
bust? Chap. in Beyond the Magic Bullet: NGO Performance and Accountability in the Post Cold
War World. Edited by Michael Edwards and David Hulme. London: Kumarian Press.

Manual For Standards

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Manual For Standards

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Copyright

and Registered 1999, Raquel Marti 1

Manual For Applying The Standards To

Categories of Selection Criteria 12

Levels of Organizational Sustainability 13

Instrument: International Standards for NGOs. 30

Points on Selection Criteria 45

Levels of Organizational Sustainability.. 46

Developmental Sustainability Action Plan (DSAP)... 46

Economic Cooperation Development (OECD).

poverty reducing development. There is universal recognition that poverty alleviation,

eradication of hunger, protecting the environment, grassroots development, and safeguarding

the poor from the debt crisis are governmental priorities.

In SHAPING THE 21ST CENTURY, DAC (Development Assistance Committee) member

countries of the OECD reconfirmed the Contribution of Development Cooperation, a number of

specific targets agreed on UN Conferences (OECD, 1997), these included:

a reduction by one-half in the proportion of people living in extreme poverty by 2015;

universal primary education in all countries by 2015;

demonstrated progress toward gender equality and the empowerment of women by

eliminating gender disparity in primary and secondary education by 2005;

reduction by three-fourths in maternal mortality, all by 2015;

the current implementation of national strategies for sustainable development in all

alike-which is conducive to development and the elimination of poverty.

agreed by 23 international organizations and 192 countries to be achieved by 2015:

Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger.

Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education.

Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women.

Goal 4: Reduce child mortality.

Goal 5: Improve maternal health.

Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases.

Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability.

Goals 8: Develop a global partnership for development.

NGOs- Non Profits serve as a self-assessment instrument to determine the developmental

capacity that the organization has towards sustainability.

level of people-to-people organizations, it would be of benefit for international donors to

development assistance (ODA) is a necessary and complementary source of finance for

donors, philanthropic organizations, special purpose funding initiatives, innovative financing

new challenges to understanding the patterns and systems of aid flows.

underlying causes (Clark, 1993).

Development is a process by which the members of a society increase their personal

lives. (David C. Korten, 1990).

alike-which is conducive to development and the elimination of poverty.

agreed by 23 international organizations and 192 countries to be achieved by 2015.

Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger.

Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education.

Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women.

Goal 4: Reduce child mortality.

Goal 5: Improve maternal health.

Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases.

Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability.

Goals 8: Develop a global partnership for development.

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs): Refers to those non-profit, voluntary, organizations

APPLICABILITY OF THE NGO SELECTION AND EVALUATION CRITERIA MODEL

The Likert scale used is as follows:

Alternative 5: Definitively Agree

Alternative 3: Not Agree nor Disagree

Alternative 1: Definitively Disagree

Categories of Selection Criteria

The ten selection criteria are divided in the following manner:

Selection Criteria Number of items Total sub-points

4. Community Representation #11 55

5. Leadership #20 100

8. Past Performance #14 60