A Door Policy of Nepal for NGOs   Leave a comment


As working on Nonprofit organization in Nepal, it is my experience on Govt’s policy.

Dr. Yogi Bikasanada, Spiritual & Motivational speaker, once said that pluralism of aid is “AIDS”. However, for country like Nepal, multitude of aid projects or “Aids” are always essential due to government’s complete inefficiency, immaturity in multifaceted capacities, especially at the economy level as it seems that it is the first essential driving force of so called “development”. Since, government is moving ahead with a one door policy, is it really the correct path?In general, Nepali people are always cannot compromise with government offices and officials with current autocratic behaviors, government officials should behave as public servants. Do really govt. officials care about their people?

NGOs had an easy accessed to districts for developmental works, and some seem to be wrong doers, however, currently government’s enforcement of one door policy for NGOs may streamline those wrongdoer NGOs but still has some fallacies that need amendments in policy in easing work flow.As per this govt. policy, districts for coalition, they ask a copy of lot of irrelevant documents regarding organizations which is redundant, their districts-VDCs are inaccessible, for small organizations their funds are not sufficient, district authorities do not have enough ideas of their areas for projects, which really frustrating NGO workers. We have seen projects that are duplicated and added redundantly, where government’s inefficiency and lack of database to examine it.

Also, District development board committee may have an indexing system for project development priorities, however, due to political power, individual link access to government fund, do not put developmental work priority areas properly and disturb overall our development goals. So it looks like it is futile to work on until a good governance system is put forward that will rather ease with complete check and balance of NGOs, District development plans together in meeting “Local Needs”.

Government should restructure in one door policy in order to ease NGOs to work.

  • First things, Government should also validate email exchanged documents in procedure, and for documents’ verification, government should network with each other efficiently in this age of information technology wherever and whenever possible. It seems that information exchange is worst between government bodies of Nepal. Communication and Data exchange is the first thing that government should be mindful for progress on development. Maybe it’s a time that Government needs a universal software application for developmental project. NGOs project approval from government process is a time consuming, and project completion time frame is delimited.
  • District government should have a clear, concise, quickly accessible, readable District Development Information Database (DDID) of developmental priorities that ease NGOs.
  • Development Decisions should not be driven on politically dividend or on any influence based, it should rather be based on “District Need Indexing System (DNIS) that uniformly plans budget funding in their region. Socio-Polito Influences has been heavily diverting decision of funding process of government, so why the government is acting about one door policy.
  • Government Officials need to take an Ownership of their district development, which is lacking due to socio-polito influences. Maybe, they should have an achievement competition between districts over 5 and 10 years interval. District Government officials do not know much about their intricacies of districts at community level. Don’t be money oriented.
  • In NGOs established district, NGOs should have a complete documents (like tax free docs, Revenue docs, Fiscal Year plans, Annual budgets, Social Welfare Council affiliation, District Renewal Doc). However, for project implementation, other district should ask only a copy docs of SWC affiliation, project plan (not proposal), Renewal District certificate, project completion Report.
  • NGOs have special deeper relation with local community people where government should not pose any obstruction in the name of district development priorities.NGOs staffs work very hard to ensure their projects are performed well with very limited budgets.
  • Government should be giving free training, networking, fund raising and government funding opportunities etc.. to NGOs official regularly.They should give back to NGOs too.
  • Not all NGOs are financially strong which makes NGO officials continue to work very hard to get fund for projects and also their annual project budgets grants from international organizations are highly unreliable and variable which government bodies has to understand.Also,Small Grant Policy for NGOs should be adopted by district to encourage them to work in their areas rather than enforcing them into their narrow band of indistinct plans strictly.
  • Govt. job is the Servant of public, not the dictator or ruler. They need a training on how to speak with public – who are ignorant of changing govt. policies and moreover their policy is govt. job servant oriented rather than based on legislation.
  • Good working organizations are falling into this trap.
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: