NGO Management and Social Entrepreneurship

View with images and charts

NGO Management and Social Entrepreneurship

Introduction:

Over the last decade there has been a dramatic growth in the number of NGOs involved in development aid, in both developed and developing countries. The total amount of public funds being spent through NGOs has grown dramatically and the proportion of development aid going through NGOs, relative to bilateral or multilateral agencies, has also increased.

Associated with this growth has been a growing concern about identifying the achievements of NGOs. This has been evident in the burgeoning literature on the monitoring and evaluation of NGO activities. There has been a steady stream of experimentation with specific methods, especially those focusing on participatory approaches to M&E and impact assessment. On a smaller scale, a number of NGOs have produced their own guides on monitoring and evaluation. Recent books on NGO management are giving specific attention to assessing performance and the management of information. As well as doing their own evaluations, some NGOs are now doing meta-evaluations (of methods) and syntheses of their evaluations to date Similar but larger scale studies have been commissioned by bilateral funding agencies. Both sets of studies have attempted to develop a wider perspective on NGO effectiveness, looking beyond individual projects, across sectors and country programmers. They have been more critical and analytic, when compared to the more prescriptive and normative approach of the method literature. Overall, NGOs have become much more aware of the need for evaluation, compared to the 1980s when there was some outright hostility.

There are relatively few examples of a more independent literature, which steps back and looks at the institutional context in which monitoring and evaluation activities are taking place . So far the main focus has been on bilateral and multilateral donor influences, within a wider perspective than monitoring and evaluation alone. Less evident are more economic perspectives, looking at NGOs as agents in a marketplace, although most large NGOs have marketing departments and these pre-date and exceed in size other units dealing with government funding. Further field, but growing in number, is the very public criticism of NGOs as a whole, which contain implicit and explicit judgments about NGO performance. At the other extreme of involvement are the more biographical accounts of NGO work, which include insiders perspective on monitoring and evaluation practices .One small but emerging genre is the organizational ethnography. These have been widely used in research into the application of information technology, and more generally in the sociology of science.

A brief definition of NGO:

At present, there isn’t a formally agreed definition of an NGO. However, it can be described as an independent voluntary association of people acting together on a continuous basis and for a common purpose, other than achieving government office, making money or being involved in illegal activities. As such, NGOs have four features that are fairly distinctive from either the public or the private sector (and this is why NGOs are sometimes called “The third-sector”). NGOs are:

• Independent from any direct control of a public authority
• Non-profit making (any profit must be reinvested into the organization’s mission)
• Not constituted as a political party and
• Non-violent, non-criminal

A non-governmental organization (NGO) is any non-profit, voluntary citizens’ group which is organized on a local, national or international level. Task-oriented and driven by people with a common interest, NGOs perform a variety of service and humanitarian functions, bring citizen concerns to Governments, advocate and monitor policies and encourage political participation through provision of information. Some are organized around specific issues, such as human rights, environment or health. They provide analysis and expertise, serve as early warning mechanisms and help monitor and implement international agreements. Private sector, voluntary (and usually non-profit and non-sectarian) organization that contributes to, or participates in, cooperation projects, education, training or other humanitarian, progressive, or watchdog activities. Some of them are accredited by the UN, and some collect donations for distribution among disadvantaged or distressed people. Major worldwide NGOs include International Air Transport Association (IATA), International Chamber Of Commerce (ICC), International Committee Of The Red Cross, International Organization For Standardization (ISO), Transparency International, World Wide Web (W3) Consortium, and World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

Basic concept of NGOs in Bangladesh & Critical analysis of NGOs:

In order to direct the operation and the funding arrangements of the NGOs working in Bangladesh, GoB applies a range of statutory and administrative regulations towards the NGOs. A detailed structure exited for NGOs.One of the main concern of the govt to monitor the flow of foreign fund.

In Bangladesh the legal framework for the NGOs has two parts-

• Lows under which NGOs are given a legal identity.
• Laws regulating the relationship of NGOs with GoB.

The under noted laws are provide a framework for NGOs to exit under a legal identity.

• The Societies Registration act,1861
• The trust act,1882
• Cooperative societies act,1925
• The companies act,1913

The following laws and ordinances have been introduce to compel the NGOs to register with the GoB agencies-

• The voluntary social welfare agencies ordinance,1961
• The foreign donation ordinance,1982
• The foreign contribution ordinance,1982

With a view to attaining optimal impacts the NGOs require collective coordination. GoB establish some regulatory agencies –

· The NGO affairs bureau (NGOAB)

· Women and children affairs bureau

· Ministry of social welfare.

Conclusion:

NGOs work in an unusual environment shaped by the communist past and the difficult political, social, and economic transitions of recent years. But the needs and circumstances of individual organizations differ sharply, depending on local attitudes, experiences, and goals. Though common ground is not always easy to find, we consider it important to strengthen the NGO sector in this part of the world by providing a consistent, locally responsive framework for nonprofit governance. We see such a framework as both a practical need and a strategic necessity, helping our NGOs operate more efficiently while contributing to the larger goal of improved transparency and accountability in the NGO sector as a whole.

We evaluate the whole programs and activities of the NGO Bangladesh Extension Education Services (BEES).We set about drafting a set of guidelines that could promote a shared regional understanding of good governance while showing how to turn abstract theory into workable practice. This paper is the result of our efforts. Throughout the handbook we seek to address the specific environment of CEE and offer solutions to the special challenges our NGOs face. We believe that the handbook can serve as a guide to good governance throughout CEE, no matter what the stage of maturity of an organization or its country’s NGO sector. But we believe that every NGO has the responsibility to think early and deeply about its governance practices. Engaged and responsible governing bodies set the standard for leadership and in their own behavior express the fundamental values our NGOs stand for.

Part-2:

Introduction:

Bangladesh Extension Education Services (BEES) has been experiencing from the date of its emergence – knitting changes for progress and prosperity towards human resource development is the very practical and overarching way for easing vulnerability to chronic hunger and deep-seated impoverishment. The tragic reality is that poverty is a life-threatening fact for most of the people in our country. They dwelling in very distressed condition both in rural and urban areas have not minimal access to opportunity for developing life skill to cope with their poverty. Unlocking this poverty trap is the key for pro-poor economic growth. Bearing at the very heart of the development goals, BEES is arraying staple prosperities widely to expand the scope of development all along.

With special emphasis on community driven activities for sustainable development in a number of innovative ways, BEES set off in 1975 as an integrated development initiative entitled Rural Development Program (RDP) in Bogra District. It has been implementing Poverty Alleviation Program (PAP) since 1997 well-equipped with 3 key pillars of its development approach, such as – enhancing the scope of social mobilization, community empowerment and effecting long-term change. With the passage of time, different development initiatives have been taken by BEES one after another for serving the illiterate, destitute, deprived and indigent people over the years.

BEES’ experiences over the years have shown that poor people and their institutions are assets and potential partners in the search for sustainable solution to development challenges. With enough access to information & knowledge, appropriate capacity and financial support, poor people can effectively organize in order to identify community priorities and address existing problems. Thus, they are geared up to make stride in livelihood development. Therefore, BEES’ effort is to promote income or employment generation through life skill development for the target beneficiaries. In view of this, counting on collective action it is conducting different programs and projects like micro enterprise lending assistance, micro finance, poultry & livestock, agriculture & social forestry, education and so on. Bringing the disadvantaged people of rural and urban areas under the same umbrella, BEES works to form homogeneous groups to facilitate a sustainable change within the society through social and economic emancipation. For changing the behavior, attitude and practice as well as improving knowledge and awareness among the target groups, BEES is initiating inclusive promotional activities comprising training, behavior change communication, interpersonal communication, and advocacy, networking and comprehensive social mobilization constantly in the basis of need.

The broadest and most encompassing view of BEES’ Poverty Alleviation Program (PAP) includes the social safety net that shapes widespread support towards participatory development. It is building the bridge across many development activities like health care services, human resource development, and income generating activities, livelihood development and so forth. Awareness programs on human rights, legal support, good governance, gender equality, women empowerment etc. have been linked up to the program implementation to make the efforts significant, potential and well-groomed.

Objectives of the study:

· To asses the legal framework of BEES based on our theoretical knowledge.

· To asses the activities of BEES – how those are relevant to there vision and mission.

· To asses the situation of BEES-GoB collaboration.

· To asses the activities if BEES that how there work are helping GoB in a way of development.

Methods of data collection:

Interview: We interviewed Mrs. Jeyaun Nahar Begum, the executive board member of BEES. And we talk with Professor Nazmul Ahasan Kalimullah, who also the board member and our dept. teacher. They gave us spontaneous and vulnerable information about BEES.

Observation: We observe the office management of the BEES and the work & duties distribution system of BEES. The organizational structure and design are very well organized.

Questionnaires: We use Questionnaires about some open questions by which our data are collected.

Implementation Checklist:

Is your organization committed to there vision? Use the following checklist to rate your NGOs performance, writing any comments you may have in the space after each statement. We later compare your answers and together identify areas of strength and weakness. An action plan for improving the NGOs performance can follow.

Yes Partly No

1. Our organization has a formally established governing structure.

2. Our NGO makes decisions collectively.

3. Our NGO has a designated leader or chair.

4. Our chief executive has a written job description outlining Performance

Expectations and goals.

5. Our NGO evaluates the chief executive annually.

6. Our organization has a mission statement.

7. Our NGO focuses on strategic leadership and “big picture” thinking

8. Our NGO does not micro-manage or engage unnecessarily operations.

9. . Our NGO makes sure that adequate planning takes place throughout the

Organization.

10. . Our NGO makes sure those regular evaluations of programs and

operations Are performed.

11. Our NGO understands the organization’s finances and monitors the

Financial condition regularly.

12. Our NGO ensures that internal financial controls are in place and

working.

13. Our NGO ensures that the organization’s accounts are regularly audited.

14. Our NGO takes part in resource development.

Our NGO members are not paid for their service and derive no other

Direct – indirect gain

15. Our NGO sets a high professional and ethical standard.

Content analysis: We read some publication books and annual report of BEES. We collect them from the library of BEES.

Case study: We read some case of development and observe some case like- women empowerment, adult literacy, employment. And we interview some beneficiary about there situation to know the case.

Brief description of BEES:

Registration: Register of Joint Stock Companies and Firms under Societies Registration Act,1860 since September 20,1986; NGO Affairs Bureau under Foreign Donation Regulation Ordinance 1978 on June 28,1993; in special consultancy status with UNECOSOC since July 31,1998.

Members:

Executive Board Members	General Board Members
Chairmen Mr. Golam Sarwar Income Tax Advisor	Mrs. Taherunnessa Abdullah Social worker
Vice Chairmen Mrs. Nilufar Begum Ex. Director General	Mr. Shah Jikrul Ahmed Advocate
Treasurer Mr. Manoj Dewan Ex. Director	Md. Yeasin Ali Managing Director, Duch Bangla Bank Ltd.
Executive Secretary Dr. Mokbul Ahmed Khan	Mr. Abdul Mannan Social worker
Member Professor Jahanara Huq	Mr. C.R. Mazumder (FCA)
Member Mrs. Jeyaun Nahar Begum
Member Professor Dr. Nazmul Ahsan kalimullah

BEES Mission:

To bring about changes in the lives of the poor, illiterate, neglected, unskilled and destitute people, especially women of the society, through their empowerment, self-reliance and improvement of life style by its endeavors for sustainable development.

BEES Vision:

BEES has the vision of a just society in which men and women can work together to form institution to attain a higher degree of self-reliance in managing their own affairs and achieve a higher and sustainable standard of living.

Program approach:

Building and Strengthening Community Institutions, Centering upon Community Empowerment, Establishing Human Rights for Social Equity, Pro-poor and Gender Sensitive Interventions, Demand Responsive and Decentralized Service Delivery Mechanisms, Promotion of Good Governance and Human Resource Development and Supplementing Sustainable Development are the major approaches of BEES to run all programs smoothly.

Target population:

Enhancing the scope of community development as a whole, BEES’ pro-poor programs are designed properly to cater to the beneficiaries covering the wide range of population in light of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Men, women, children, adolescents and disabled people within the program areas are the target beneficiaries of BEES with especial emphasis to destitute women and hard core poor. Presently, BEES is providing services for improvement of livelihoods to a population of more than 45 lac people.

Following are the target groups of the existing programs and projects –

Category of Target Beneficiaries	Criteria for Selection
Ultra poor (Financial Services for the Poorest)	General landless or having 0.03 acres of land. Daily income not more that 60 taka. Depends on temporary work. Wealth less even no place for sleeping in night Divorcee or separated women as head of the family Disable and old aged Parent of child labors Ex. prostitute Servant or beggar Seasonal day labor Population without skill Predecessor of deceased loanee
Poor (Micro-credit)	Landless 18-45 years poor old people especially women having singing ability. People who own maximum £ 0.5 acre of land. People who earn their living by selling manual labor and the hardcore poor who live below poverty line. Destitute and divorced household head. Having willingness to undertake income-generating activities.
Small entrepreneurs (Micro-enterprise)	18-45 years old man/woman having own small trade. Having no access to take loan from any commercial bank or financial institution. Savings minded hard laborer entrepreneur. Having small trade license. Financial services for the poorest.
Landless Marginal Farmer Small Farmer (Agriculture)	Landless and functionally landless households who own less than 0.50 acres of land on share cropping or lease in basis including homestead. The household which is owning or cultivating above 0.51 acres up-to 1.50 acres of land on share cropping or lease on basis including homestead. It is identified as that household which is owning or cultivating above 1.50 acres up-to 2.50 acres of land on share cropping or lease on basis including homestead.
Women	Fertile couple (15-49 yrs) of age
Adolescent	Age 10-19 years.
Children	Age 0-1 year, 1-5 years, 8-14 years

Geographical area:

BEES is working in 3,400 villages of 84 upazilas under 31 districts of Bangladesh. BEES likes to expand intervention area gradually covering new areas of the country to address the needs of people who are continuously fighting against poverty.

Development partner:

• Oxfam-Novid (Netherlands)
• The Royal Norwegian Embassy, Dhaka
• The Swedish Embassy, Dhaka (Consortium partner, which plans to renew funding in 2009)
• NETZ-Germany
• Save the Children Sweden-Denmark
• Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)
• Concern Worldwide

National networks:

• Bangladesh Shishu Adhikar Forum (BSAF)
• Beijing Plus Five or Women’s Rights
• Coalition for the urban Poor (CUP)
• Citizen’s Initiative CEDAW
• Citizen’s Initiatives to Address Domestic Violence
• Srmik Nirapotta Forum (SNF) Samajik Protirodh Committee
• Human Rights Forum on Universal Periodic Review (URR), Bangladesh
• Samajik Protirodh Committee(SPC)

International networks:

• Asian NGO Networks National Human rights Institute (ANNI)
• Asia Pacific Forum for Women, Law and Development (APWLD)
• End Child Prostitution,Child Pornography and the Trafficking for Sexual purposes (ECPAT)
• Forum Asia (FA)
• International Women’s Rights Action Watch (IWRAW)
• Migrants’ Forum in Asia (MFA)
• South Asians for Human Rights (SAHR)
• We can End Violence against Women
• Women Living Under Muslim Laws (WLUML)

BEES at a glance:

Programs of BEES:

i. Rural Development Program:

BEES set about Rural Development Programme in the name of Bogra Rural Development Programme in 1975 under Bogra district putting the highest possible emphasis on participatory process for empowering disadvantaged people to identify, analyze and devise creative solutions to there own problems as well as making them battle against bondage of poverty. Under this programme, BEES has been facilitating to create a favorable situation for the poor to generate self employment and reduce there poverty through initiating income generation activities.

Under this program BEES have performed these activities:

· Institutional Building

· Micro-finance Program

· Micro-Enterprise Development

· Agriculture Program

· Agriculture and Social Forestry

· Agricultural Diversification and Intensification Project (ADIP)

· Smallholder Agricultural Improvement Project (SAIP)

· Poultry and Livestock Program

· Education Program

· Programmed Initiative for Monga Eradication (PRIME)

ii. Maternal and Child Health-Family Planning (MCH-FP) & Nutrition Program:

BEES puts an enhanced importance on the health aspects of the community people, specially of the poor. BEES has been implementing multidimensional health programme since its inception in 1979. During the reporting session 2006-2007, BEES implementing these following program.

Under this program BEES have performed these activities:

· Community Based Health Program (CBHP)

· Expanded Health and Education Program (EHEP) Project

· Maternal, Neonatal and Child Survival Interventions (MNCS)

iii. Special Program:

BEES often endeavors to execute special development activities well-equipped with integrated approach and down to earth method.

Under this program BEES have performed these activities:

• Urban Poor Development Program (UPDP)
• Advocacy Program
• Gender Awareness and Women’s Right
• Social Mobilization Programs with Vulnerable Groups
• Legal Aid Services
• Financial Services of the Poorest
• Social Assistance for Tribal Population
• Promotional Activities
• Water and Sanitation

iv. Support Program:

To make access effectively to success for existing, BEES is conducting different supporting and promotional activities.

Under this program BEES have performed these activities:

• Training
• Information and Development Communication
• Research, Monitoring and Evaluation
• Advocacy initiatives for law and policy reform

Case studies:

The consequence of current case-studies is this publication entitled Kulsumson most success stories. In the case-studies various aspects of success stories have been pointed out such as difference between previous income and present income, perspectives and rate of current expenditure, assessment of average savings, comparison between previous life-status and current life-status, dimensions of income-generating activities, promotion of perceptions to be self-reliant, potential graduation due to social and economical empowerment, total achievement in the light of desired goal and far-seeing initiatives, amelioration of consciousness related to education, reproductive health, gender-equity, environment, nutrition, healthcare, spick and span, women-rights and so on.

Kulsums is mostly a collection of success stories of the disadvantaged, humiliated and deprived women who are the mainstream beneficiaries of BEES Samities (village organization). On behalf of the most dispossessed people by severe poverty, Kulsum is a name who represents the common woman with involvement to constitute a great portion of our society in the perspective of Bangladesh. They are disadvantaged, because they have no opportunity to be conscious of removing poverty along with the lack of income generating activities. They are humiliated by their more dominating husbands and influential persons of their society. Moreover the Kulsums are deprived of all kinds of human rights due to their vexed fate emanated from their illiteracy, ignorance, beliefs in superstitions and religious dogmas, laziness, dependency on so-called fortune and so on. All of them have had to experience the common problems such as being humiliated and oppressed. Precisely, there has been undiversified dimension in their life style. The background of their previous life relating to struggle with drastic reality, more or less, is all the same. Evaluating these characteristics of their life-style they are all incorporated in a common group. So the various aspects of their cursed previous life-background have not been cited in details in every success-story.

The very vulnerable group of people who are prominently known as Kulsums and Karims in our surroundings are being benefited in many ways with the implementation of various programmes. Various development initiatives adopted to the changed situation over the last 30-year have been undertaken by BEES to bring about changes in their lives who are termed as Kulsums and Karims. But BEES realizes that poverty alleviation or reduction is a very complex task. Equally with long experiences, BEES, with its limited resources, has been contributing tirelessly to bring about a change in the lot of the poor and destitute people particularly the women, who are at the risk of extinction losing all of their resources. With the cooperation and help rendered by BEES with its credit plus services through Seba Package, a markable number of disadvantaged people have been able to change their lot. This publication is a documentary having a compilation of a series of success-cases while it reflects the facts how the Kulsums and Karims in the society have been able to change their lot being guided and directed by the development initiatives of BEES. Kulsums and Karims is addition to our first publication Kulsums in the year 2004 while the cases regarding the success of many destitute women in changing their lot were documented. But BEES realizes that there are the male people also maintain the same margin of economic crisis, and they should also be highlighted as they are being covered in various programmes having a markable success to be highlighted to others.

Bangladesh Extension Education Services (BEES)
PKSF AND NON PKSF FUNDED MICRO CREDIT PROGRAM
INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2010
PARTICULARS	NOTES	FY – 2009-2010
		PKSF	Non-PKSF	Total
INCOME :
MCP Loan Service Charges received:		112,670,272	3,405,029	116,075,301
Grant from PKSF		7,044,499		7,044,499
Bank Interest		23,515		23,515
Sales of Form & pass book		1,011,125	47,910	1,059,035
Admission Fee		531,470	22,660	554,130
LLPI interest			–	–
DMFI interest			–	–
DRFI interest			–	–
Motor cycle interest		132,990	790	133,780
Training income		654,759		654,759
Others income		1,516,392	21,310	1,537,702
Total :		123,585,022	3,497,699	127,082,721
Sub Total		160,209,861	5,851,524	166,061,385
				166,061,385
Total:		123,585,022	3,497,699	127,082,721
Salary & Bonus		68,623,253	2,938,834	71,562,087
LLPE		26,005,386	145,000	26,150,386
Service Charge Paid to PKSF		14,148,198		14,148,198
Interest on Savings		7,209,433	238,114	7,447,547
Office Rent		5,380,961	229,500	5,610,461
Traveling , Allowance & Conveyance		5,330,989	187,052	5,518,041
Service Charge Paid to Banks		5,098,895	320,505	5,419,400
Printing & Stationery		4,769,240	74,674	4,843,914
Gratuity Contribution		4,482,723	189,749	4,672,472
Miscellaneous Expenditure	27.00	4,372,785	97,993	4,470,778
Training		3,397,671	17,960	3,415,631
PF. Contribution		2,918,365	131,601	3,049,966
Fuel		1,268,049	55,594	1,323,643
DMFE		1,014,904	20,006	1,034,910
Bank Charge & Commission		909,880	57,828	967,708
Repair & Maintenance- Vehicle		925,966	12,574	938,540
Service Charge Paid to Non-PKSF			861,428	861,428
Depreciation		786,350	17,913	804,263
Electricity Bill		730,050	33,314	763,364
Telephone Bill		711,143	14,700	725,843
Income Tax		644,143		644,143
Entertainment		594,814	21,578	616,392
Insurance Premium		428,708		428,708
Meeting & Seminars		226,761	3,141	229,902
Interest on PF		109,438	78,786	188,224
Interest on Gratuity		56,756	103,680	160,436
DRFE		65,000		65,000
Excess/(Deficit) of Income Over Expenditure		(36,624,839)	(2,353,825)	(38,978,664)

Challenges they face:

• BEES
• have gained acceptance in the community but they may lack leadership ability and experience.
• The GoB legal aid fund in some cases is very difficult to access.
• Crisis of members due to sudden prices hike affected there work.
• Because of low budge allocation the training unit can not utilize fully.
• BEES some cases unable to monitor the implementation or application of training by organizations.
• They face some legal problem to broad there area.

Critical analysis of BEES:

I. Ambitious expectations:

almost all “the Terms of Reference [for evaluations] set the scene for anticipating exceedingly high expectations of what can be achieved, particularly what can be said about development impact. In quite sharp contrast, the tone of the conclusions is usually cautious and tentative, arguing that it is difficult to come to firm and decisive conclusions…” Both the DAC and Danish NGO studies used nine different performance criteria to compare NGO projects. The proposed SPHERE (2000) Training Module on Monitoring and Accountability lists 10 different criteria. Most of these are in addition to what are often a quite ambitious set of objectives defined within a project’s Logical Framework. However, unlike the contents of these Logical Frameworks there must be some doubt as to whether BEES knowingly sign up to all of these additional and ambitious expectations at the time when they seek approval and funding for the project.

II. Complexity caused by scale:

Expectations of project performance are raised even further by the hierarchical structure of large NGOs, and their position in a larger hierarchy of associated partner organizations (including both implementing partners and back-donors). Large international NGOs can have country, regional and international strategies. At each level their strategy documents will list a number of objectives. Donors, such as DFID, will in turn have their own international objectives and targets. This plethora of objectives is only manageable if objectives are clearly nested, such that local objectives are detailed versions of more macro-level objectives. In these circumstances judgments about the smallest units can be used as raw material for judgments of larger units that they belong to. In practice, doing so is complicated by the hierarchical nature of aid supply chains. BEES often belong, through their donors, to more than one hierarchy of organizations, each with differing expectations and reporting practices.

III. Diversity of Activities:

BEES tend to be generalists, being involved a wide range of development activities, across a number of sectors .This must make the task of comparing and aggregating performance information more difficult. The problems of diversity are accentuated by progressive growth in organizational scale. One response to diversity of practice within many NGOs has been to initiate more thematic studies, which focus on one type of activity (e.g. micro-finance, health, water, etc.), but across a number of countries. Another response has been to develop assessment methodologies tailored to specific types of interventions .Both responses manage diversity through specialization. A less common response has been to reduce the scale of the task, but to maintain a more holistic focus, by undertaking within-country cross-activity studies. Each option carries with it an implied judgment about the type of knowledge that matters (scrotal versus country based), and whose judgment matters. In contrast to single-sector studies, country-based studies offer more potential to build in public participation and accountability, at each level of aggregation.

IV. Vague objectives:

It is widely recognized that the achievements of many development objectives of BEES, such as empowerment, institutional strengthening and the development of civil society, are difficult to define in advance. Evidence of their achievement is not easy to agree on, and there is no one single path to their realization. The value of what is achieved often depend local context and history. Establishing pre-defined near-universal indicators for such changes is inherently difficult. This is a problem if measurability is over emphasized, as it seems to be in the case of many evaluations. However, many important development events are not measurable, but they are verifiable. News stories, found in reputable newspapers, are a good means of reporting exceptional and significant events, so much so that people are prepared to pay for them. On the other hand, they are less suitable as the basis for generalizations. The significance of this problem depends on the scale at which totalizing statements are required, and this in turn, on the overall structure of the aid sector.

V. The tools being used:

The “limitations of the instruments that BEES use to monitor, evaluate and review” are one reason why BEES have not been able to substantiate their achievements. Certainly there has been a lot of argument over the value of the Logical Framework as a planning and monitoring tool .Logical Frameworks have been useful in encouraging the identification of indicators at the planning stage, but much less so in ensuring their actual use during project monitoring or evaluation. In practice, the widespread focus on identification of indicators reflects a bias towards planning rather than monitoring and evaluating that is built in to BEES, and other agencies. In the worst case the advocates of Logical Frameworks have promoted a very narrow view of indicators i.e. only that which is measurable can be.

Outside of the Logical Framework BEES have been actively searching for appropriate methods, especially in ways of enabling people’ participation in the monitoring and evaluation of projects .The challenge here has been how to aggregate the complex and large volume of information and analysis generated by these methods .

VI. Methodological developments:

Methodological developments have been less noticeable with analysis of performance above field and project level. At the country programmed level and higher, Logical Frameworks have been pre-empted by strategic planning frameworks, suggesting that Logical Frameworks are not scalable solutions to planning and monitoring. With some applications of strategic planning NGO s have found they need to assess their country programs according to multiple strategic objectives, rather than one goal level statement (Oxfam, Action Aid). While this plurality allows some variation in strategic emphasis between different countries it does complicate the task of inter-country comparisons and coming to high level generalizations about achievements.

VII. The absence of baseline information and adequate monitoring systems:

The absence of adequate baseline information, is an almost a very problem in BEES. Another less noted phenomenon are the incidence of base-line survey data being lost or forgotten, and unavailable to evaluation teams. Although most organizations have monitoring systems of some sort, many writers have noted the pervasive problem of organizations monitoring expenditure, activities and outputs, but not effects and impacts. All of these phenomena are really symptoms rather than explanations of why NGOs do not seem to know what impact their work is having. If some types of information are not being produced then we need to ask why there is no demand for that information.

VIII. Organizational structure and relationships:

It may be a more significant factor than the absence of appropriate M&E concepts or methods. BEES proximate rationality rules. Activities are measured against activity plans, expenditure against budget. These are immediate tasks where delays are visible and have consequences for those responsible. Staffs have to cope with the short term before they can worry about the long term. On the other hand there are external demands for information about performance, arising primarily from donors and governments. Financial reporting is required most often, and then implementation relative to plans, then much less frequently, achievement in terms of changes in people’s lives (purpose and goal level type statements). Not being dependent on their clients for their financial survival, BEES’ incentives to attend to clients’ judgments about effects and impact are dependent on organizational culture and values.

IX. Funding problem:

Variations do exist between NGOs in terms of their dependence on bilateral and multilateral donors versus individual members of the public. The nature of this dependence is likely to affect the information demands being made on those NGOs, and their motivation and capacity to assess their achievements. Individual members of the public donate to charities on the basis of trust, and that relationship is managed by marketing departments, not M&E units. There is some anecdotal evidence to suggest that BEES with the most financial independence from official donors have invested the least in monitoring and evaluation.

Amongst BEES with significant funding from bilateral agencies the picture is more mixed. Wallace have argued that donors such as DFID are responsible for the widespread use of the Logical Framework, by British NGOs. On the other hand, almost all the Danish NGOs in the INTRAC study have received the majority of their funding from Danida, but without any significant impact on their capacity to monitor and evaluate their work (Oakley, 1999).

X. Transparency & accountability:

NGOs are founded on the principle that citizens have a right to associate freely. Most countries in CEE acknowledge this right in their constitutions and through legislation. They may also affirm it by extending direct or indirect financial support to NGOs, which can include full or partial exemption from taxes. In return for this support, NGOs pledge to pursue activities that meet a public or community need rather than the private profit-making interests of owners or stockholders. As long as they benefit directly or indirectly from public-sector support, NGOs are expected to demonstrate a high degree of accountability to their surrounding community. This community includes members, beneficiaries, donors, the government, and other stakeholders or constituencies. Even membership organizations have the responsibility to be accountable to the larger community to the extent that they are directly or indirectly dependent on its support.

NGOs should behave accountably even in countries where the general public doesn’t expect it or the legal or political environment isn’t supportive of the NGO sector. Throughout CEE, a so-called “accountability gap” exists in that NGOs often feel little pressure from stakeholders to behave accountably—donors don’t ask how money is spent, or beneficiaries don’t ask who funds an organization and why. However, the best NGOs view this accountability gap as all the more reason to prove they deserve their special privileges. By behaving responsibly and responsively, an NGO demonstrates its commitment to serving the public interest.

XI. Capacity to protect human right:

Adhering to the prime emphasis on women empowerment BEES has been concocting the remedies for combating the social narrowness and salving the wounds of our socio-economic condition hypothetically as a whole. The grim reality is that the prevailing male hegemony in our country makes women prolong their dependence on men. So with the zeal to expedite the development from grassroots level, bringing stability in their income flow BEES initiated micro-credit plus program for empowering women through. By way of lavishing micro-financial assistance BEES tries to make women empowered that they may surmount the contemporary limitations on the society. Activating its micro-finance services by means of group formation, regular courtyard-session, respective training and orientation, motivation-class, BEES stimulates their ardor for economic and social emancipation. Only economical assistance can not give the Kulsums more mastery on their lives. Thinking over this moot point BEES is orchestrating the demand-driven programs pragmatically under the title of Credit Plus. The Credit plus Program of BEES not only ensures the credit facilities but also provides training for skill-development, serving-package to make them aware of healthcare and nutrition, materials and other inputs needed for productive employment generation, educational facilities to get rid of illiteracy and ignorance by way of Human Resource Development (HRD) and Occupational Skills Development (OSD).

XII. Capacity to help the poor in practical sense:

In the course of ensuring micro-finance assistance BEES first steeps to conduct personal contacts in the respective community among the target group and brings off group discussions according to the findings of informal previous survey-report. The group discussions in the process of group formation and the weekly sessions of the groups have been being conducted by arranging ‘Uthan Baithak’( Courtyard Meeting). The Courtyard Meetings are like ‘mini parliament’ where the participants participate spontaneously and give their opinion and at the same time become enriched with relevant knowledge, know-how, proper directions and so on. The trickle-down benefits of development are being engrossed with relation to BEES Samities at the root level enhancing self-reliance efforts of more than 1 lac people. Up to December 2003, BEES has disbursed more than TK.100 crore (cumulative) to more than 50 thousand beneficiaries (household women) in the field level of assorted performing-areas through micro-credit program. The auspicious recovery rate of its loan is 99%. The savings balance of the syndicate members i.e. members of BEES Samities as on December 2003 has been Tk. 10 crore. Implementing the economical assistance oriented plan of action it has inaugurated more than 1600 self- employment oriented new jobs per year in its working areas over last 7 years side by side leading other income generating programs guided by research, impact assessment and case-studies.

BEES-GoB collaboration:

A healthy relationship is only conceivable when both parties share common objectives. If the government’s commitment to poverty reduction is weak, NGOs will find dialogue and collaboration frustrating or even counter-productive. Likewise, repressive governments will be cautious of NGOs which represent the poor or victimized. In such situations, NGOs will probably prefer to chart their own course, giving all instruments of the state as wide a berth as possible. In this sense of view BEES-GoB collaboration is very strong. There are some programs BEES taken to improve the collaboration level and help to develop the economic condition of the poor. Some of this are-

• Encouraging official aid agencies and government ministries to adopt successful approaches developed within the voluntary sector.
• Educating and sensitizing the public as to their rights and entitlements under state programs.
• Attuning official programs to public needs by acting as a conduit for public opinion and local experience.
• Operational collaboration with official bodies.
• Influencing local development policies of national and international institutions
• Helping government and donors fashion a more effective development strategy through strengthening institutions, staff training and improving management capacity.
• Official aid agencies and many governments seek to give greater attention to assisting women, the food insecure, indigenous peoples, AIDS sufferers/orphans and other vulnerable groups, which BEES better able to reach .
• Long experience of work with communities living in environmentally sensitive areas (including forests, desert margins, urban slums, etc.) provides BEES with certain comparative advantages in dealing with environmental issues.
• There is a more clearly recognized need for pluralism and prominent citizens’ voices in national development planning. BEES can contribute to this in many ways including, at the local level, by the promotion of grassroots mobilization for social change or participatory development

Way forward:

In a fundamental way, advance the capacity of individual organizations and the NGO sector as a whole to meet the needs of transforming societies. As NGOs in CEE search for new and sustainable sources of local support, boards will play a vital role in reassuring supporters that the nonprofit sector is working towards larger community goals. Organizations that seek to build prosperous and fair democratic societies need to show that good governance begins at home with engaged and responsible boards.

There are some organization that makes some recommendation and rule for the NGOs to follow. As such the INAFI Bangladesh has organized this exposure visit with some objectives. Among these objectives some important objectives are to refurbish INAFI Bangladesh’s policy res