Greater Good South Africa

Last week, Alexander O’Riordan, an Aid and Development Effectiveness Researcher at UCT, wrote an article for the Cape Times called: "NGOs' shrinking funds myth becomes self-fulfilling prophesy". We felt that, while his research on international aid was of interest, there were assumptions and generalisations about the sector which were neither helpful nor constructive. This is our letter to the editor. What do you think?

Dear Editor

While we welcome news that international aid to South Africa is increasing, we find the blanket statements about the funding crisis and NGOs neither helpful nor constructive.

The funding issues in the sector are not simply a problem of international funders pulling out or changing their strategy in South Africa (there have been a number of agencies who have publicly announced this), it is a perfect storm of events that is seeing some highly professional, respected and effective organisations face closure. Research we conducted last year found that 80% of non profits reported retrenching staff and cutting services as a direct result of funding cuts. Trialogue’s research into CSI spending found that, since 2008, corporate donations have not increased in real terms and many of the CSI practitioners we interact with daily tell us that their budgets have been reduced. Add to this the documented challenges of accessing National Lottery and state funding, even for organisations providing statutory services, like Rape Crisis.

It is not helpful to lump organisations in a sector as large and diverse as ours – 100,000 according to the Department for Social Development, from big, well-capacitated organisations with professional fundraising departments right through to small, informal community groups. Community organisations – savings clubs, home care services, after-school tutoring groups – perform a vital function in our society but do not have the infrastructure to access and manage the kind of funding that the international agencies provide.

It is not constructive to offer as a solution that NGOs must ‘professionalise’. The statement “NGOs seem to take pride in a policy of paying below-market salaries” is particularly unfortunate: I have worked in the sector for almost 20 years and I have never met an NGO leader who didn’t want to pay their staff more. The truth is that donors (particularly corporate and individual donors) do not want to fund salaries and overhead costs.

Yes, we must strive to be more business-like and rise to meet the challenges by keeping our costs down and investing in systems and human resources that make us more efficient, effective and transparent. We must play our part in the funding equation by being the very best stewards of the money we receive from the public. But the public, government, media and the private sector must also support the valuable contribution non profits make in delivering services and incubating innovative solutions to South Africa’s problems. To do this, NGOs need a good spread of income and unrestricted funding so that they can build the reserves and capabilities to see them through the tough times.

POST SCRIPT: In response to our letter above, the author of the original op-ed, Alexander O'Riordan, sent us the data he compiled on the subject. It makes for interesting reading: ODA to South Africa. To be part of this debate or let us know what your experience of development aid is, email: