Community Accountability in NGO: Are We Transparent?

According to the latest Edelman Trust Barometer 2023, trust in key public institutions, including NGOs, remains low globally, with no change compared to the previous year, scoring 56 out of 100 points worldwide. Specifically, trust in NGOs has decreased globally by one point. In Poland, the only institution enjoying widespread trust is the fire department. However, not all of us are firefighters.

Challenges of Transparency

In a time when trust in public and private institutions is regularly questioned, we, non-governmental organizations, face the challenge of not only fulfilling our missions but also ensuring transparency and accountability to the communities we serve. While we fulfill our formal reporting obligations fairly smoothly, the "non-mandatory" aspects of transparency often pose difficulties. Key here is transparent decision-making and building accountability based on community feedback.

One of the biggest risks we face is the belief in our infallibility. Reluctance to report and viewing reporting as a necessity to "explain ourselves" undermine social trust. Organizations convinced they always know best may ignore valuable community opinions and suggestions meant to serve them, leading to alienation and loss of support crucial to achieving our goals.

Though most of us strive for transparency, reality can be challenging. Mechanisms for transparency implementation are often complex and costly. Budget constraints and grant limitations frequently restrict resources for data management, reporting, and communication with diverse stakeholders. Today, I invite you to consider two areas that can help us build accountability, depending on our resource levels.

Decision Gates and RACI

"Decision gates" are critical points or stages through which decisions regarding organizational actions and strategies pass. To incorporate the voices of various actors—boards, staff, and beneficiaries—it's crucial to define who plays a consultative, decision-making, or informational role (the RACI responsibility matrix is a useful tool). Clear communication helps avoid conflicts and misunderstandings.

When asking for an opinion, we must indicate what we will do with it. Will it be guidance for us or the basis for decision-making? Could we possibly say "no"? If so, how will we justify our decision? While the board is responsible for strategic decisions and overseeing organizational actions, its role must also involve listening to and considering the opinions of staff and beneficiaries. Staff, through daily work and direct contact with beneficiaries, possess a unique perspective on community needs and action effectiveness. Meanwhile, beneficiaries should have the opportunity to voice their opinions and suggestions regarding our actions, allowing us to better meet their needs.

Well-defined decision gates not only set decision-making processes but also enhance community trust. Transparency in this area not only minimizes the risk of conflicts and misunderstandings but also enables more effective responses to changing needs of local communities and other stakeholders.

CARM and Feedback

Collecting feedback from the community happens—whether we intend it or not. People speak to us. They tell us what they think. However, we do not always utilize this treasure trove of knowledge. This is a crucial element of our responsibility as a non-governmental organization.

By gathering opinions, suggestions, and assessments from partners, beneficiaries, and other stakeholders, we can evaluate the effectiveness of our actions, identify areas for improvement, and adjust strategies to real community needs. Responding to these voices strengthens relationships and turns our organization into a learning entity that builds its development on lessons learned from successes and challenges.

This process, also known as Community Accountability Reporting Mechanisms (CARM), refers to reporting mechanisms regarding our accountability to the community. Defined by the organization, CARM enables communities to report issues and suggestions, ensuring transparency in our actions. In practice, CARM can be implemented at various levels. Starting from simple forms such as suggestion boxes or post-session surveys to advanced online systems allowing for feedback collection from diverse sources.

Two key aspects are critical in this process. Firstly, systematic collection of organizational feedback in one place—be it an online database, a simple spreadsheet, or a lined notebook where we record community voices. Secondly, real responsiveness to issues raised and signaling to our community what we have done with their voices. Have we conducted an analysis (e.g., addressing concerns and evaluating support points)? Are we implementing change (e.g., adjusting Club hours and providing cold water)? Are we strengthening ourselves (e.g., expanding effective open spaces)? Or are we taking intervention (e.g., addressing organizational issues or reporting to relevant authorities)?

Through regular application of CARM—encouraging feedback, analysis, and response—we build stronger relationships based on trust and engagement, essential for our efforts serving communities.

Conclusion

Transparency and accountability to the community form the foundation on which we should base our operations. Avoiding the trap of believing in our infallibility, clear decision-making mechanisms, and effective feedback and accountability mechanisms can significantly contribute to building trust and effectiveness in our actions. While implementing these mechanisms may pose challenges, investing in transparency brings long-term benefits for both our organizations and the communities we serve. It's worth trying and seeking solutions.

Acknowledgements

Thank you to the Mercy Corps Poland team for inviting me to the discussion on community accountability in NGOs and for involving me in testing solutions within the local community. Your contribution has greatly enhanced my skills in this area. This opportunity occurred within the framework of a nationwide partnership with organizations implementing humanitarian programs in collaboration with Mercy Corps Polska. Additionally, it was part of my work at Gdańska Fundacja Innowacji Spo?ecznej .