Imagine how much the practice of social audit, an effective tool of transparency at multiple levels, can be used to bring more organizational efficiency in the developing sectors? Which kind of information is being provided? How open should the non-state actors in Nepal be? What about the implications of Right to Information Act (RTI) for those who are involved in the development sector? Is RTI really something that we should be scared of? Indeed, not much is known on the great role that the RTI can play to bring more and better scrutiny to the sector.
However, it will be unfair to say that nothing has been done in terms of aid transparency and accountability. Indeed, there have been several good attempts and efforts along all the spectrum of the not-for-profit sector in the last few years. National and international non-profit organizations and external development partners are mostly genuinely interested to walk the talk. Lots of discussions have been held on this topic, training materials have been developed and organizational development efforts have focused a lot on accountability.
Undoubtedly, there is a certain level of commitment and, probably, a certain momentum has emerged to discuss about the accountability of the development sector. At the same time, there is a tremendous space for improvement at all levels, starting from small community-based organizations going up to the top players.
A recent workshop on Accountability and Transparency offered the opportunity to brainstorm and discuss about the current status of development aid, its practices and possible ways for improving its effectiveness and efficiency.
But, first of all, what is accountability? The term accountability generally refers to ways and practices that keep organizations, in our cases the ones with a mandate of delivering development, responsible, transparent and open toward their beneficiaries and state authorities at village, local and national level.
The issue of accountability is also interlinked with a better definition of roles and responsibilities among national and international non-state actors in their developmental efforts. More clarity on who is doing what could be a real step forward in the definition of a new partnership between state and non-state actors.
Still, how can we change the current situation? How can we expect and demand more accountability in the development sector? One answer would be better regulatory framework, bridging the gaps between different ministries, especially between the central and local level. Positively, efforts are being made by the Ministry of Finance and Social Welfare Council in terms of data management and analysis. The “One Door” policy pursued by the Social Welfare Council is indeed an essential ingredient but we are all aware of the challenges in monitoring and evaluation and the gaps at local and district level. The most important thing is that there should be a political will to improve the efficiency of the sector and Ministry of Local Development should play an important role.
The compact could be a list of standards or minimum expected practices and principles that should guide the work of all not-for-profit entities in Nepal engaged and committed to work with the local communities.
Can we do something more? Indeed, we can and one idea is the promotion of a ‘Compact on Accountability’ that would be voluntarily adopted by all non-state actors, national and international, at grass roots, district, and national level.
The compact could be a list of standards or minimum expected practices and principles that should guide the work of all not-for-profit entities in Nepal engaged and committed to work with the local communities.
The compact should offer practical ways and modalities in order for not-for-profit entities to increase their “value for money”. It could be divided in different sections based on major topics like community ownership, coordination and cooperation with local and district authorities, minimum standards on transparency with local community, partnership working modalities, inclusion and diversity.
These are just some examples of potential domains under the purview of the compact that should not be too general but neither too much detailed. The compact, for example, could offer standards on how we work with VDC secretariat, how we involve, inform and engage the district authorities that should always play an important role in our efforts at local level. After all, all the initiatives of the non-state actors at local level are supposed to be complementary to the national priorities and programs. Now, this coordination, also with the best of intentions, is not always possible or not easy.
A good division of labor among the different agents of development should also be welcome. On transparency, the compact can help to define the correct procedures to organize public hearings or social audits, bringing clarity on similar terminologies but different methodologies. Moreover, it can help set minimum standards on the way we communicate and inform the beneficiaries on our work and supposed impact of our actions. Quality of data and information are the keys. The beneficiaries, at the end of the day, are the real stakeholders and more can be done to ensure their enhanced ownership through better and more quality information.
The implementation of the standards enshrined in the compact could be gradual and step by step according to the organization’s strengths of the signatories. A good dose of flexibility will be essential in order to have a process of participation that is as much inclusive as possible.
Some signatories could be fully ready to implement most of the principles while others might start working on the compact gradually. Organizational development and capacity building will play a very important role to make the compact a reality.
National and international NGOs can work together also in providing the expertise required to implement the compact. Many national NGOs are definitely in a position to share their best practices also with international partners that as equal partners can play an important role in facilitating the process of change.
The preparation of the compact can be organized through local, regional and national forums by all the major actors, association and federations of national and international organization. Social Welfare Council and Ministry of Local Development should help in facilitating the process.
We need to be clear: The compact is not aimed at replacing the existing rules but rather offering guidance on how to better reinforce them and possibly propose potential new ways for higher quality in the development work.
The compact can be a fantastic platform for enhanced accountability. Its definition and preparation are not going to be an easy ride but we can at least give a try. The time is ripe for this.
Related story
Clarifications on MCC Nepal Compact
