Management Service Foundation also has a social audit method for NGOs, but this requires purchase and is paired with consulting services. Other large international NGOs such as Action Aid have used social audits to enable the general public to measure its performance and to enhance its accountability and transparency. The Pakistan Centre for Philanthropy conducts assessments as part of its certification process for CSOs. The method is publicly available and includes a ratings system for each standard evaluated. One World Trust’s ‘Global Accountability Report’ is an evaluation of a selection of international CSOs along with other international organizations and the private sector. Such cross-sectoral evaluation is rare. While the assessment is led by One World Trust, target organizations are invited to share information for a more inclusive process. Many donor-led civil society assessments are internal documents used to assess capacity for partnership in project implementation; even when they are published, the methods are rarely publicly available. CIDA’s ‘Organizational Assessment Guide’ is an exception: this tool is designed to be ready for any organization to use. While it reflects the donor’s priorities, it was developed in consultation with civil society. The method emphasizes outcomes, helping users turn assessment findings into action. External civil society assessments specific to challenging political environments are addressed in Box 5.
Box 5: Assessments in challenging environments Two assessments in this guide focus specifically on CSOs in challenging political environments: UNDP Sudan’s ‘Mapping and Capacity Assessment of Civil Society Organizations in Darfur’ and the Palestine Economic Policy Research Institute (Mas)’s ‘Mapping Palestinian NonGovernmental Organizations’. Both methods examine CSOs in the unique position of providing services in the absence of a functioning state apparatus – something that requires special treatment in the assessment. They also face particular challenges in obtaining data that are addressed through methodological adaptation. The complexities of the Darfur context as listed in Sudan’s ‘Mapping and Capacity Assessment of Civil Society Organizations in Darfur’ include areas still involved in conflict, camps for the internally displaced, remote rural areas, and rebel-held territories. It includes questions such as whether CSOs are involved in peace-building and conflict resolution. Data collection was limited by a security situation that deteriorated after the terms of reference were published. ‘Mapping Palestinian Non-Governmental Organizations’ addressed the challenges of a conflict situation in occupied territories. For example, the method surveyed NGOs about changes in programmes, strategies and objectives resulting from the second Intifada. It asked about the impact of restrictions imposed by the occupation, and the unique role of NGOs in development in the occupied territories. The scope of the study was circumscribed by an inability to reach all target NGOs, especially those in the Gaza Strip. It is interesting to note that, despite some context-specific details, a large portion of these methods would be applicable in any country. Thus, although challenging environments may require some unique methodological features, the fundamental aspects of civil society to be assessed remain the same.
12
UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME