CSO self-regulation: emerging patterns and trends Robert Lloyd One World Trust

The benefits of CSO self-regulation Overview of the CSO self-regulation project Patterns of self-regulation worldwide Typology of CSO self-regulatory Approaches to ensuring compliance Weaknesses and challenges to CSO self- regulation Issues to cover

What the benefits of CSOs self- regulation? Builds public trust –Identifies to stakeholders what the sector collectively standards for and provides a basis for accountability –Helps weed out rogue CSOs Signals quality and professionalism to donors –Helps organisations stand out in an increasingly competitive and crowded field Protects the political space for CSOs to operate –Allows the sector to define what it means by accountability rather than have others defined it for them –Increases the leverage of the sector vis-a-vis government by enabling it to speak with one voice and indicate collective efforts Facilitates the sharing of good practice and learning on accountability and quality

Aim and objectives of the CSO self-regulation project Aim: Strengthen and protect the credibility and legitimacy of CSOs as actors in governance and public policy by encouraging the development and implementation of sector level self-regulation Objectives: Raise awareness of existing self-regulatory initiatives worldwide Facilitate the sharing of experiences and learning on self- regulation, internationally Identify and increase understanding of best practice Increase understanding of complementarities, overlaps and tensions between initiatives

Outputs from the CSO self- regulation project Online database of CSO self-regulatory initiatives Interactive map indicating levels of CSO self- regulation worldwide Thematic and issue specific briefing papers Future plans: –Toolkit for CSOs on how to develop self-regulatory initiatives with examples of best practice, compliance mechanisms, institutional structures etc –Methodology for assessing the implementation / impact of self- regulation on the sector and individual organisations

How the online database works /csoproject/

Levels of CSO self- regulation worldwide soproject/  CSO self-regulation is more widespread than we previously thought Past studies only looked at particular sectors or regions  343 initiatives identified worldwide 309 at the national level 34 at international and regional level  …..and we know there is more out there! A picture of CSO self-regulation worldwide

CSO self-regulation in Europe and Central Asia  Austrian Seal of Quality for Donations  Ethical Guidelines for North / South Information in Norway  Le Comite de la Charte – France  Trademark of Trust – Hungry  Guidestar Netherlands  NCO Coorinates – Russia  Social Actions Commitment to Quality in the Third Sector – Spain 144 initiatives identified within the region

CSO self-regulation in the Americas  Transparency Standards for NGOs - Chile  NGOs for Transparency Network - Colombia  Evaluation of Organisational Development System - Paraguay  Interaction PVO Standards - USA  Governance & Transparency Indicators - Mexican Center for Philanthropy  Code of Ethics of CSOs - Honduras  Letter of Principles Brazilian NGO Association 85 initiatives identified within the region, including:

CSO self-regulation in Asia and the Pacific  NPO Certification - Pakistan  PCNC NGO certification - Philippines  GuideStar Korea  10 Point Accountability Agenda – Bangladesh  Credibility Alliance Norms and Good Standards– India  ACFID Code of Conduct – Australia  NGO Good Practice Project Certification System – Cambodia 37 initiatives identified within the region, including:

CSO self-regulation in the Africa and the Middle East  Palestinian NGO Code of Conduct  NGO Quality Assurance Mechanism - Uganda  GuideStar Israel  NGO Code of Ethics Self-Assessment Program - Tanzania  Greater Good South Africa  Code of Conduct for NGOs in Nigeria  Database of Malian CSOs  Ghana CSO/NGO Standards for Excellence Project 43 initiatives identified within the region, including:

Informal structure Formalised structure Information services Self certification Codes of conduct / ethics Third party certification Peer certification Light compliance Heavy compliance Awards schemes Working groups Types of CSO self-regulation

Approaches to compliance Monitoring mechanismSanctioning mechanism ProactiveSelf assessmentDesk assessment Field assessment Both Recommendations for corrective action (confidential) Peer assessmentRecommendations for corrective action (made public) Third party assessmentFinancial penalty ReactiveComplaints proceduresMembership suspension / Removal from initiative Strength

Benefits and challenges of different monitoring mechanisms TypeBenefitsChallenges Self-assessment  Encourages ownership of the assessment process  Less costly than peer and third party assessments.  Ensuring that organisations are truthful about themselves  Integrity of assessment may be questioned by external stakeholders Peer-assessment  More independent process than self- assessment  Encourages organisations to share their experiences and learning with each other  Members may be reluctant to criticise their peers  Assessing organisations need to be willing to commit the necessary time and resources  Requires strong foundation of trust between organisations.  Assessment is only meaningful between similar organisations Third-party assessment  Greater credibility from an independent assessment  External assessment can identify issues that are difficult for those internal to an organisation to see  The process of assessment can be costly  Being granted a certificate can lull an organisation into a false sense of security Complaints procedure  Relatively low cost to set up and run  Only reveals cases of non-compliance when reported  Public/stakeholders need to be aware of complaints procedure

Benefits and challenges of different sanctioning mechanisms TypeBenefitsChallenges Confidential recommendati ons  Allows member to rectify mistakes, build on learning process  Members may ignore recommendations Recommendations made and disclosed publicly  Encourages members to act on recommendations by creating public pressure  May undermine public confidence in the sector Financial penalty  Acts as a strong deterrent to non-compliance  Will only be effective if penalty cost exceeds benefits of free- riding Membership suspension / expulsion  Acts as a deterrent to free riding  Removes poor performing members from initiative  Seen as too extreme by member organisations Expulsion publicised  Demonstrates stringency of the initiative to the public  May undermine public confidence in the sector

Nature of state – civil society relations Level of Public trust in the CSO sector Resources available to the sector Level of trust & collaboration between CSOs Diagram 1: Key factors shaping a compliance system CSO self-regulation

Have we missed an initiative in your country? Let us know!