2012 has been a tough year for civil society. Those funding cuts that we’d been warned of since the crash in 2008, were keenly felt. The President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) wrapped up its second five year programme, the Europeans curtailed their investments, the United Kingdom Department of International Development (DIFID) restructured. The retraction in international funding was exacerbated by instability in local funding as the National Lottery in trying to get its house in order, struggled to deliver on its grant mandate. Government too continued to frustrate rather than support, being slow to pay and with large underspends on its welfare budgets. Business plodded along, on hold as it waited for the new BBBEE Draft Codes to be published.
The result is that the country may not be in recession, but it feels as if the non-profit sector is. The reality of this picture was brought to life by a recent survey by consultancy Greater Good, which interviewed over 600-plus organisations. Eighty percent of those surveyed have lost significant funding this past year, 20 percent have enough money to last another month, 17 percent have no operating cash at all. Published late last year, the report confirms my instincts - that the tough times are real, and life for civil society isn’t going to improve in the near future.
But I’ve had a forced rethink, after attending the ‘Looking Back, Looking Forward’ forum at GIBS, which hosted visionaries whose crystal balls are a whole lot more informed than mine, strategist, Clem Sunter, constitutional expert, Roelf Meyer, City Press editor, Ferial Haffajee, civil society’s Neville Gabrielle, economist, Adrian Saville and Rand Merchant Bank Chair, Sizwe Nxasana.
Hosted at the business school - the home of sharp suits, expensive cars and lengthy debates on profit and loss, the forum took an a-typical turn when the panel from their various areas of expertise agreed that the area of positive growth for 2013 wasn’t financial services, or mining, or media.
But civil society.
This is exciting, as it means that the work being done in social development is finally integrating into mainstream thinking. The commentary was fascinating: that civil society’s cross cultural mobilisation of citizenry is connecting people more than anything (think of anti-toll group, OUTA). That the nonprofit sector is where real change lies - for employment, skills development, entrepreneurship and of course, social development. That government and business have to engage if they want to move forward and civil society is the key to that action.
To hear development debates making their way onto business school panels marks a significant change in thinking. It is an opportunity we cannot miss.
Although I believe that 2013 will be tougher than 2012, I am heartened by the way the work of nonprofits and activists is being viewed. Jim Collins writes about the importance of gaining momentum to achieve change. I like to think that the years of consistent and persistent pushing are starting to gain traction. We don’t have momentum yet, but we’re starting to see the extra spin. And that’s heartening.
So rather than predictions for 2013, I have written instead a few survival tips to ensure that your organisation comes out fitter, stronger and more focused by 2014.
These six steps to surviving 2013 create a well-connected approach that will strengthen your relevance and contribution to social development, creating a solid foundation for the more stable years that sit tantalisingly close on the 2014 horizon.
1. Look beyond the of jobs jobs jobs mantra
Jobs. Jobs. Jobs. It was the mantra of 2012 which resulted in a flurry of activity because it came with access to sizeable sums of money, and is a neatly measurable indicator.
I hope that we have learnt from the HIV-years, when everyone ended up with an HIV project regardless of whether it was relevant to their work or not. And in chasing the easy funding, non-profits neglected the local options which is part of why we’re facing financial difficulties today.
My advice for 2013 is then let’s not focus on jobs, but rather on the more sustainable approach of building business. It’s the entrepreneurs who will create work for those in their communities. We have to move away from the thinking that institutions will create more work. They won’t – the financial pressure that we are already under means that many of us are cutting not creating employment. So it is common sense to think away from the traditional institutional framework. We need to broaden the base of people in employment. We need to focus on improving the systems they work in. And we need to make instill a strong sense of social focus in our entrepreneurship, so that they are a contact point of positive development.
For more on this, refer to www.ngopulse.org/article/milking-profits-tale-cows-kenya.
2. Accountability – getting our house in order
With 80 percent of nonprofits not submitting their annual financial statements and narrative reports to the Department of Social Development, we have no foundation for criticising the other sectors of democracy, business and government.
2013 must be a year where nonprofits commit to Codes of Good Practice and then follow them.
Only with an accountable, robust civil society can we attain the moral high ground and hold others to account.
Business and government are making concerted efforts to improve their accountability as evidenced in King III, and the work of the Public Protector, Auditor-General and legislative framework of the Public Finance Management Act.
We cannot afford to cruise along with a misplaced arrogance that because we do good, we are good.
If anyone is to survive 2013, accountability and transparency has to be central to their ethos.
For more on this, refer to www.ngopulse.org/article/herculean-task-good-governance.
3.Monitoring and Evaluation
If you don’t have monitoring and evaluation in place, 2013 is your year to get it going.
If you fail to get basic measurement in place, chances are your organisation will be obsolete by 2015.
Not only is measurement an important part of being more accountable, but it enables nonprofit leaders can challenge their assumptions of what works and what doesn’t.
I believe that as we all focus on monitoring and evaluation, partnerships will become easier to manage leading to a natural consolidation in the sector. When you realise your areas of expertise you begin to share knowledge and so begins a positive cycle that leads to improved more professional services.
For more on this, refer to www.ngopulse.org/article/completing-circle-some-thoughts-why-measurement....
4. From Programmes to Activism
There is a growing voice that is calling for a move away from programme funding to donor support of activism and rights-based movements. The argument is that civil society’s role is not to provide services that government should be delivering (e.g. like HIV care), but rather to hold government to account to provide these services.
It’s a good argument, and even better because it is rattling our rather traditional approach to development. I think that 2013 will see more money being available in building accountability and growing the rights-driven voice of civil society. The success of SECTION27, the Right2Know Campaign, even the Opposition To Urban Tolling Alliance (OUTA) in Gauteng, adds credence to this movement. This is moving the flywheel significantly and I like it. Watch out for more activism in 2013 and even more for 2014.
5. Rise of the CBO
We can’t keep ignoring community-based organisations (CBO). Just because they don’t have the institutional structures that our funding models demand, doesn’t mean that they are irrelevant. We cannot continue channeling funding for communities via national organisations just because they comply structurally to the needs of the donor.
I would like to see a concerted effort by the larger nonprofits to bring in CBOs, and to help them build up their institutional structures, securing accreditation, developing financial statements and creating annual narratives.
I think that national organisations will find that the role they can play as mentor and guide is part of their survival strategy as it is through the CBOs that they will maintain their relevance.
6. Making Profits out of Nonprofits
A key survival strategy for 2013 is to grow the profit base of your nonprofit. Usually a sacrilegious word in social organisations it is important that we start to professionalise the work that we do by increasing the surplus of funding. And this doesn’t mean going out to raise more grant funding, but rather taking a longer term view on what type of funding you need to survive. Research by the Stanford Innovation Review shows that America’s top nonprofits have funding stability as their common denominator. This is difficult in South Africa where government and donor funding is erratic. But what must happen is a focus on building a surplus into the organisation, by doing what you do well. Whether that funding stream is grant, or entrepreneurial it must be a surplus and it must provide the type of funds that you need to grow.
A case study of the Children’s Hospital Trust’s fundraising success
The Children’s Hospital Trust (the Trust) is widely considered to be one of the most successful fundraising organisations in South Africa, having raised over R420 million for the Red Cross War Memorial Children’s Hospital and Paediatric Healthcare in the Western Cape since its inception in 1994.
A Matter of Trust is a compelling case study based on the experience gained and the lessons learned by the Trust translated into best practice within the arena of fundraising. The book is a beneficial read for any professional working in the philanthropic sector in South Africa and elsewhere in Africa.
A Matter of Trust details the challenges that the Trust has faced, as well as opportunities that the Trust has created through strategic and innovative methods. In describing the Trust’s ethos, strategies and protocols, the case study is a useful ‘how to’ guide for nonprofit organisations to operate effectively and grow in the current socio-political environment while building a successful brand.
The book outlines critical elements that every nonprofit organisation should embrace in order to gain competitive advantage. These include engaging, consulting and relationship building with key stakeholders and funders, as well as building and maintaining a reputation for excellence and integrity in order to engender a significant amount of positive public sentiment and support.
The unique and practical publication showcases two of the Trust’s most successful fundraising campaigns and highlights the factors that have contributed to this success in such a way that similar organisations can transfer these principles to projects and campaigns they are embarking upon. In telling the story of the Children’s Hospital Trust’s formation and of its consequent success, A Matter of Trust endeavours to contribute to the growing spirit of philanthropy in the country and to demonstrate the gains made in paediatric healthcare in the region.
Who should read this book?
Anyone who is interested in effective fundraising and is motivated to strengthen the non-profit sector, particularly:
- Nonprofit leaders seeking insight into principles that can ensure greater success for their organisations;
- Donors and philanthropists who require a framework from which charitable organisations can be assessed to determine viability and sustainability;
- Business leaders who wish to ensure that their companies are good corporate citizens through working with effective nonprofits; and
- Students and academics who are eager to learn more about the non-profit sector and the inner workings of a non-profit organisation.
The Children’s Hospital Trust
Fundraiser for the Red Cross War Memorial Children’s Hospital & Paediatric Healthcare in the Western Cape
Tel: 021 686 7860
Fax: 021 686 7861
For more about the Children’s Hospital Trust, refer to www.childrenshospitaltrust.org.za.
Sustainable rural development in the Eastern Cape would need a package of interventions if real local economic opportunities for rural communities were to be created.
This was the combined message from three speakers at a seminar hosted by the European Union and Office of the Premier-funded Sustainable Rural Development in the Eastern Cape (SURUDEC) and its local implementing agent, RuLiv in East London in April 2012.
Entitled ‘Rural Livelihoods and Development Planning: Experiences from the Eastern Cape’, the seminar heard presentations from the Eastern Cape Social and Economic Consultative Council (ECSECC), the Agricultural extension department of the University of Fort Hare and from SURUDEC.
Most of the opportunities probably lay in the agro-processing sector according to ECSECC's CEO, Andrew Murray.
He added that as agriculture contributed a mere 2.6 percent to the provincial gross domestic product (GDP), beneficiation and value chains needed to be explored and would probably be the sector where most jobs could be created.
One possible strategy was aggregating micro-projects with a focus on value chain multipliers, but Murray cautioned that producers had to produce the right product at the right time within a market system.
“It’s important to link micro-projects with manufacturing at scale, this needs to be a costed instrument and we have been too slow in getting it right – this needs to be speeded up”.
“Values have to be shared; it is no good squeezing small producers on one end of the scale while manufacturers take home huge revenues.”
Training and learning incubators were also important as making land more productive was a lengthy process and consisted of more than mere access to land. Capital, knowledge and skills together with labour were also needed.
On training, Murray’s view was echoed by Professor Francois Lategan of the Agricultural Extension department at the University of Fort Hare who added that past training of agricultural extension officers had failed and that today’s students needed training in a multiplicity of skills in order to equip them for the job.
This included entrepreneurial skills, innovation and understanding markets. he most crucial skill was the ability to identify opportunities and act on them.
“We lack a message or a workable model for small scale farmers but the message needs to include instilling an entrepreneurial slant.
“Farmers, big and small, need to be shown how to recognise opportunities to make money,” he concluded.
SURUDEC programme coordinator, Dr Stephen Atkins, outlined SURUDEC’s asset-based approach to development which included recognition that communities employed multiple livelihood strategies and that local conditions determined responses and interventions.
An example was one SURUDEC-funded project in the Indwe area, a large farm obtained through a restitution award in 2001. While the farm co-operative had R70 000 in its bank account and was now valued at R10 million, the enterprise could potentially earn a net profit of R600 000 a year while employing 20 people full time.
However, currently additional enterprise and employment generating options were not being considered and Atkins pointed to potential rental accrued from a cell phone mast which was not being collected by the enterprise.
“The business is in a fragile state and long term plans need to be made by all stakeholders for sustainability of the enterprise,” he added.
The second case study was of an ecotourism development initiative at Cata, near Keiskammahoek in which existing and new birding hiking trails were refurbished and developed, a community institution was set up and given business skills training and marketing material had been produced. In addition, the project dovetailed well with previous community development initiatives.
Atkins concluded with some of the lessons coming out of the SURUDEC programme in the Eastern Cape which included:
- It was vital that robust and accurate data support rural development actions;
- It was important to know the area and know the people concerned;
- Possibilities and the challenges needed to be identified;
- Being realistic of the scale and scope of the intervention was needed from the beginning;
- It was important to identify the resources required to undertake an action and to budget correctly;
- Time frames or horizons needed constant monitoring and management;
- Building capacity over time and planning for support and mentoring was an integral part of any intervention and must be planned and budgeted for;
- The prioritisation of options needed to be managed constantly;
- It was important to network with relevant practitioners.
SURUDEC aims to reduce poverty in the province by providing grant funding to support the design and implementation of integrated community-driven development plans (ICDPs). These are plans of action that indicate ways in which the economic situation of a community will be improved and how its asset base will grow over time. These plans would inform district and local government IDPs, and importantly, over time and as resources become available, elements of each community plan would be implemented, either directly from community resources, or in combination with funds from partners, donors or Government.
- Barbara Manning is the Visibility and Communications Coordinator (SURUDEC) within Ruliv.
- The term non-governmental organisation (NGO) has the connotation and literal meaning of a group of people performing social projects parallel to government services. One of the earliest mentions of the term was just after the formation of the United Nations, immediately after the World War II. It worked well in that context as most countries and communities were suffering during the aftermath of that war; there was little trust and resources for state services and outside funding agencies worked with civil society to implement social projects to restore the well-being of communities. In South Africa, the term became fashionable in the 1990s, during the dawn of democracy, as international donors lined-up to assist in restoring the injustices of the previous regime.
Is the term still relevant in the current set-up? As the donor funding model dries up, most NGOs are failing to adapt and to re-look at their role in advancing social service projects. Currently, most international funding is channelled through government; so why would government support NGOs which by connotation work parallel to government social programmes? By the way, is there a future in South Africa for such social services, with imminent donor funding challenges? Seeing that most companies prefer to align their social investment initiatives to government priorities, and the Department of Social Development prefers to support community-based organisations (CBOs), maybe now is the time for NGOs to shift toward becoming Social Enterprises (SEs). Governments and society in general probably acknowledge the limitations of the NGO concept, but in the absence of a viable alternative, accepted it as a ‘necessary evil’.
The transition from NGO to SEs is very challenging but rewarding in the long-term and could translate into sustaining social projects. Strategy and operation has to change, and a leadership mindset shift is critical in restructuring the organisation to become a social enterprise. That evokes the spirit of entrepreneurship, which requires innovation and determination in the leadership. The approach in strategy and operation is similar to running a normal business and the only difference is motivation, which in this case would be social value instead of economic value. General business principles are applied but goals should be mission driven and appeal to the goodwill of society.
Sustainability of social projects is critical, hence services have to be carefully looked at and delivered in a way that adds value to society while generating income for the organisation. Social entrepreneurs should adopt the basic rule that if the service or product is not sellable then it is probably not valuable. CBOs should not be confused with SEs, the former generally serve a specific geographical location and their services are an extension of government social services, such as feeding schemes. Meanwhile, SEs should be scalable at other locations and their interventions should be measurable in terms of impact in people’s lives.
Most successful SE’s interventions utilise a ‘problem-based approach’, where plans are put in place to address current challenges in order to project a better future. An example would be an organisation that provides career guidance with a special emphasis on mathematics, engineering and technology to rural learners, who would otherwise not have access to such critical information. That project could be easily scaled-up and measured to determine impact and the service is critical as middle class families could pay for such information. The only trick would be to determine how innovative the project is in order to generate income for its sustainability.
Innovation by its definition involves doing things differently. Continuing with the career guidance example, the organisation could utilise young professionals practising in those fields of study to ‘tell their stories’ to learners - that way learners are not only getting first-hand information but are also motivated by meeting ‘living role models’ who did their high schooling in the same or similar environments. Another practice associated with entrepreneurship is the ability to spot partnerships in order to complement an existing service, instead of being a ‘Jack of all trades’.
Successful innovators form strategic partnerships to maximise their offerings. In this case, the career guidance organisation can source video revision lessons and study guides in those critical subjects and offer them to ‘their’ schools and learners at a reasonable fee. They may also want to facilitate weekend classes, where learners register and access additional support offered by the young professionals in problematic subject topics. That way the organisation will create a market to deliver its career guidance service while generating an income.
The above description is a simplified process of one NGO adjusting towards a social enterprise; the actual shift requires time, will and determination from its leadership and all those who are involved. The implementation of social projects requires a clear understanding of the communities involved and buy in from multiple stakeholders. It is important for social projects to acknowledge that community members are capable of making their lives better, given the necessary support and tools. Project managers should spend some time in the communities to understand local issues, spot champions and provide support for communities to ‘own’ the projects.
- Goodman Chauke is a marketing manager of Mindset Network and a social entrepreneurship student at the Gordon Institute of Business Science (University of Pretoria).
- More and more we are starting to read in the news of nonprofit organisations going into liquidation and closing down. CMDS is often called on to assist organisations that are already in financial crisis for reasons such as:
- Inability to get a tax clearance certificate needed to secure funding;
- A dispute of one kind or another;
- Suspicion of fraud or theft;
- An unexpected but significant financial obligation to report or pay; and
- Threat of closure due to lack of funds.
So what are some of the first signs of financial trouble for an NPO?
You might think that cash flow difficulties, particularly an inability to pay costs such as salaries, rent, and other running costs, would the first sign of trouble. However, it is our experience that cash flow difficulties today are the result of trouble that started much earlier and should have been picked up and addressed.
Trouble may be brewing at your organisation that you may not be aware if:
- Financial recordkeeping is not up to date - it is not uncommon for us to find that either no transaction capturing is being done at all or that capturing is months behind. The records of your organisation should be captured into an accounting package (such as Pastel or Quickbooks) and reconciled to bank statements to the end of the previous month by the middle of the next month. You do not even need to wait for the auditors to finalise the previous year’s records and reports to start capturing and checking the next financial years’ records;
- Financial reports are not presented to, or not considered regularly by, the management (monthly) or the board (quarterly);
- Financial reports are inaccurate or incomplete or do not agree to the underlying accounting records. Often, such reports are presented on Microsoft Excel spreadsheets with no reconciliation to actual balances in the bank accounts, in such cases, the information cannot be relied upon for good decision-making.
- The situation revealed by the financial reports is not fully understood or is simply ignored, appropriate questions are not asked and actions are not taken even when complete and accurate financial reports are presented and considered;
- Monthly cash flow forecasts are not prepared and scrutinised, starting with the balance in the bank today and realistically forecasting the expected cash inflows and outflows month by month showing the resulting closing balance of funds per month for the year ahead; and
- There is a lack of independent regular checking of the work of the finance person, who is often trusted to carry out all the necessary financial and legal obligations of the organisation unsupervised, including meeting the South African Revenue Services (SARS) requirements. This leaves the organisation vulnerable to the effects of normal human frailties, such as forgetfulness, omissions, errors or even fraud. Financial records and systems need to be regularly independently checked – not just by the auditor once a year so that the finance person can be held accountable.
- Ongoing deficits - expenditure is consistently higher than income (or put another way the regular income is not enough to pay for regular expenditure) in general or for particular projects;
- Liquidity problems – cash in the bank today is not enough to pay the outstanding debt already owed today – so putting off paying what is due today until some money comes into the bank.
- Delaying payment of salaries to staff or payments to SARS for employees tax and UIF.
- Letters of demand for payment from suppliers, contractors etc.;
- Using earmarked grants and donations when received into the bank account to immediately pay outstanding debts;
- Taking loans – either personally or from others;
- Depleting reserves or savings – needing to draw down on savings and to cash in or sell investments or other assets to meet ongoing expenditure commitments;
- Borrowing from Peter to pay Paul – using money received for one purpose to pay for expenditure for another purpose often with the intention to repay when ‘other money’ is received. However, the “other money” gets less and less and finally dries up completely leaving you unable to replace the borrowed money and unable to report honestly on the spending; and
- Falsifying reports to funders to cover up the mess and get funds released.
What to do? Make sure that the organisation’s financial systems are sufficient and are operating effectively and that you are constantly aware of your organisation’s actual and accurate financial situation – be wise and take action earlier rather than later.
- CMDS is available to assist, advise and support your organisation. For more about the CMDS, refer to www.cmds.org.za.
The importance of Human Resources (HR) in a non-governmental organisation (NGO) as a means of ensuring sustainable growth for an organisation cannot be overemphasised, as it is the fundamental strength upon which people, strategies, processes and operations are based. Effective employee management should be on top of the list of priorities for progressive improvement of an organisation. A NGO must strive to attract, develop and retain qualified and enthusiastic employees as they are the key to the success of one’s business. HR in a NGO is no different to HR in any other sector, but the problems that HR professionals face within the NGO industry are quite unique.
There are two main problems concerning HR in the NGO environment today:
- The first is the high unemployment rate which causes an exceptionally high number of under qualified job seekers to stream into the childcare environment, the reason for this can also be attributed to an industry that does not have the competitive advantage when it comes to salary benchmarking. This leads to shortages of qualified skilled childcare workers in the industry; and
- The second is retaining highly skilled and qualified people and keeping them motivated. Learning and development are central to both the performance and development of employees. It can be beneficial for an organisation to offer employees equal and full access to learning and development opportunities that are aligned to their career development, as well as the skills and competencies required to meet business performance and growth objectives.
Heads of NGOs and those long associated with the development sector will confirm that the supply of well qualified people, prepared to make the necessary sacrifices in respect of remuneration, for the sake of the cause, has diminished rapidly in the last 18 years or so. Job opportunities for today’s educated youth are more widespread. This has made a career in development less attractive to people in the age group from which the sector drew its strengths from in the 1970s and 1980s. The days when NGOs were driven by social activists are no longer. NGOs now have a high demand for skilled employees to help the organisation function at its best.
In the case of a NGO that works with children or vulnerable people, it is of utmost importance to implement a vetting system that screens all new appointees.
Applicable screenings would be:
- The child protection register;
- Criminal record; and
- Identity and professional registration.
Providing employees with support and understanding is especially important in organisations that work with children and trauma cases. An example is that of a wellness initiative that focuses on the well-being of staff, including, health, trauma and employee stress. Such initiatives are aimed at retaining qualified, enthusiastic employees and developing a positive organisational culture. It is critical for HR practitioners to partner with businesses in understanding the needs of an organisation. As well as what challenges the industry is facing, skills shortages, salary disparities, best practice HR procedures and government policies that stands as a hindrance to the success of a NGO.
The personnel function in the NGO industry has evolved to the HR business partnering concept and is well embraced by many NGOs in recent years. Any NGO using the business partnering model with strategic intent in aligning people to business is bound to achieve organisational success. The NGO world is continuously evolving and is becoming an industry to be recognised as the change frontier in economic and social development in the country and with the right people it’s bound to achieve success.
- Portia Sokkie is human resource manager at Abraham Kriel Childcare. For more about Abraham Kriel Childcare, refer to www.abrahamkriel.org or www.abrahamkriel.tumblr.com.
At present, South Africa (SA) has an extensive and lively non-governmental sector which boasts roughly 100 000 registered nonprofit organisations (NPOs) and an estimated 50 000 unregistered ones.(2) SA’s large nonprofit sector is the product of a diverse society including a variety of ethnic groups and a history that has informed the way in which South African society operates as a whole, as well as the way in which the nonprofit sector conducts its operations.
The prevalence of NPOs in SA can be explained by the postulation that, “Nonprofit provision of collective goods will be large in societies with high levels of inequality in individuals’ effective demand for collective goods or high degrees of religious or ethnic heterogeneity.”(3) SA is, indeed, very ethnically diverse, and the inequality in the effectiveness of individuals’ demand for goods is a common feature of present South African society, brought about, in part, by years of racial segregation and oppression. This was exemplified by a bifurcated welfare system in which the majority of government welfare spending went to a small, white minority.(4) This left vast sections of the population without adequate government support.
Presently, the South African NPO sector is characterised by two types of organisations, the first being service driven, and the second being organisations that focus on human rights, advocacy and monitoring. The former fulfils the role of providing much needed social services to underprivileged communities, and the latter performs the role of social ‘watchdog’. It is widely held that a stable and active civil society aids in poverty alleviation and civil society capacity building, enhancing public debate and participation and the promotion of democracy.(5) Therefore, the need for a healthy and active civil society in SA cannot be overemphasised.
The rise in civil society organisations, not only in South Africa, but around the world, appears to have been influenced by the need for organisations that respond to citizens’ needs at a human level and which can represent them in the face of states of ever-increasing size and a market economy grown so “virtual, large and hyper-real” that it actively alienates most in the general population.(6) Simultaneously, the state continues to perform less of the functions it should, and civil society organisations (CSOs) arise to ‘fill the democratic vacuum’.(7) The state is especially withdrawing from many areas of social support,(8) leaving CSOs to fill the gap. Indeed, it has been argued that the economic imperatives of the neoliberal agenda dictate that “(a) the state, particularly in Third World countries, should withdraw from the social sector; (b) the market should be freed from all constraints; and (c) people in civil society should organise their own social and economic reproduction instead of depending on the state.”(9) Following the end of apartheid, the South African government adopted a neoliberal economic model, marked by the implementation of the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) macroeconomic strategy that prioritised the “for-profit sector in economic growth and service delivery.”(10)
The current NPO sector can be characterised by what is known as new-generation NGOs. Organisationally they are configured to have strong partnerships with the public and corporate sectors, and have innovative funding models and a variety of resource mobilisation strategies. The partnerships with the state have had the effect of introducing public sector concepts and tools, such as the log frame, targets and results-based management, into the NGO sector.(11) Equally, other NGOs have closer relations with corporations, leading them to swing towards increased ‘managerialism’ within their organisations.(12) These factors have led to the “promotion of more streamlined managerial structures and a higher degree of professionalism within the NPO”(13) as, over an extended period, basic strategic planning, monitoring, evaluation and general management skills have entered the sector.(14)
Furthermore, in light of increasing partnerships with the public and corporate sectors, and the need to develop more innovative ways of raising funds, the need for appropriate levels of accountability and transparency, particularly in the context of widespread corruption, has become more pressing than it was in the past. Particularly, recent growth in the NGO sector has led to calls from the corporate, state and civil sectors, for increased accountability of NGOs.(15) NGOs are increasingly required to adhere to monitoring and evaluation standards applied in the public and corporate sectors, forcing many NGOs to ‘corporatise’.(16)
Current issues facing the South African NGO sector
Various factors constrain NGOs in SA in their efforts to fulfil their role of promoting environmental and/or social goals by providing services and performing humanitarian functions, bringing citizens’ concerns to governments, monitoring policies and encouraging political participation.
While the demand for increased accountability and the consequent corporatisation of NGOs are not altogether negative developments, some have argued that they have led to the commercialisation of the NPO sector. NGOs which successfully professionalise stand a better chance of receiving funds from donors, compared to NGOs that follow a more classic donor-beneficiary model.(17) This increased professionalism affects the organisational culture of NGOs, leading many to adopt expertise that is stipulated by donors. In addition, the emergence of a ‘report culture’ has developed, which places more emphasis on measuring and counting ‘activities completed’, ‘performance indicators met’ and ‘outputs achieved,’” than on asking what difference the programme or intervention makes.(18) As such “demands for rigorous standards of accountability, transparency and financial self-sufficiency imposed by donors” on the NPO sector “have the unintended effect of distancing these organisations from the very poor and marginalised communities that they are meant to serve.”(19)
Funding is also a major obstacle that NGOs in SA face. As a result of the global economic crisis, from which SA was not spared, the country’s NGOs are experiencing funding problems, as donations, particularly from individual and private donors, have diminished substantially.(20) The recession has also seen Corporate Social Investment (CSI) budgets reduced.(21) As a result of reduced private and corporate donor funding, many NGOs have sought more funding from government to keep afloat, ultimately creating increased competition among NGOs for government funds. The danger in this is that it is questionable whether, under such monetary dependency, especially on government, NGOs can continue to enjoy relative impartiality,(22) due to the expectation that NGOs should be accountable to, and should mirror, funding agencies in their operations. NGOs will inevitably develop a very close relationship with the state, and may, at times, even be difficult to distinguish from the state.(23) Often NGOs become more like the bodies from which they acquire funding, than the societies they intend to represent.(24) NGOs are arguably being transformed into “development sub-contractors whose primary concerns are to fulfil the multiple objectives and accountability procedures of their diverse funders.”(25) This notion speaks to concerns “that relying on government funding would detract from creating the active citizenry needed to utilise post-apartheid, democratic tools of social change, and that it is possible that diminishing funding has eroded the advocacy function of the NPO sector.”(26)
It is not just ideological or structural issues that constrain South African NGOs. The Nonprofit Organisations Act of 1997, which was drafted to clarify the NPO sector’s role in the new democratic SA, in practice, proves to be problematic. The Act maintains that government is obliged to create an enabling environment for the nonprofit sector: “every organ of state must determine and coordinate the implementation of its policies and measures in a manner designed to promote, support and enhance the capacity of NPOs to perform their functions.”(27) However, many NPOs have difficulty accessing government support, forming partnerships, obtaining funding and building capacity (28) that will allow them to fulfil their mandates.
This is because much government support is geared toward social security, which is characterised by “government’s provision of social grants (which are direct cash transfers) and is strongly remedial and maintenance orientated.”(29) This is in contrast to the developmental social service delivery model that government and the NGO sector have attempted to implement post-1994. Developmental social service delivery is an approach that couples skills development projects with social services such as promotion and prevention services, rehabilitation services, protection services, continuing care services and mental health and addiction services.(30) It is argued that a developmental approach will be more effective in ensuring that those utilising social security eventually reduce their dependency on social grants and services, and become independent and self-sufficient members of society. However, government has not even been able to keep up with the increasing demands of the poor for basic social services,(31) and developmental social services, while viewed as being more sustainable in the long run, do not allow NGOs to meet the immediate and vast demands of the masses living below the poverty line.
The issue of qualifying for funding made headline news in South Africa in January 2013 when the Department of Social Development deregistered 36488 of just over 100000 NGOs.(32) This created widespread fear in the sector that fundraising efforts would be thwarted, because, in order to qualify for funding from the government as well the National Lottery Fund, NGOs are required to have a registration number. The department listed the deregistered NGOs as non-compliant because they had not submitted annual and financial reports.(33) This move was controversial, as some NGOs claimed that their documentation was in order and that the Department of Social Development had deregistered these NGOs merely to compensate for the fact that money had previously been given to NGOs without any monitoring and evaluation standards being in place. Therefore, some NGOs labelled the mass deregistration as an attempt by the department to ‘cover-up’ their past inefficiencies.(34)
Government’s lack of support for NGOs is further evidenced by the fact that many NGOs do not receive government funding because the lack of transparent or standardised criteria for the financing of social services has led to major discrepancies in the allocation of funds to NGOs.(35) The Department for Social Development’s Policy on Financial Awards to Service Providers, for example, includedguidelines for the implementation of the policy, which, although intended to provide broad direction, were nevertheless criticised for being too vague, leaving many NGOs unclear on “norms, service standards and key performance indicators,”(36) which ultimately inhibits NGOs’ ability to procure funding and ensure optimum function. It is not unreasonable for government to expect NGOs to meet certain funding criteria, but the onus is on government to ensure that criteria are clearly outlined and explained, particularly before they deregister so-called non-compliant NGOs.
Another issue plaguing South African civil society is the increase in government criticism of NGOs and the work they perform. The Mail & Guardian newspaper, for example, described how the South African Democratic Teachers’ Union (SADTU), accused education NGOs of pushing neoliberal agendas through their use of foreign funding.(37) SADTU, general secretary Mugwena Maluleke, further accused NGOs of ‘working with other political parties’, and stated that, “they are driving an agenda that education is a national crisis [and] using education to destroy the confidence of the public [in the government].”(38) By accusing NGOs of working with other political parties, Maluleke is implying that the NPO sector is ‘anti-government’. However, simply working with political parties other than the ruling party is not evidence that the NGO sector is anti-government.
It could be argued that Maluleke’s accusations are simply a reaction to NGOs’ exposure of government shortcomings. Many NGOs are independently-funded through foreign and private sources, and, as result, enjoy autonomy, which allows them to lobby and criticise the government. Furthermore, in the case of the textbook crisis that plagued the Limpopo Province, where several schools in the area did not receive the prescribed textbooks that were the responsibility of the Department of Basic Education to provide, NGOs were instrumental in bringing legal action against the government for not meeting its legal and constitutional obligations. Indeed, the basic education department has faced a wave of litigation in 2012, as civil society organisations found themselves ‘forced’ to take legal recourse due to the government's inaction in the face of the crisis in education.(39) Mark Heywood, the director of SECTION27, the organisation that took the basic education department to court twice in 2012 over the non-delivery of textbooks in Limpopo, has alleged that the accusations by SADTU echo those of senior political leaders, South African Communist Party General Secretary, Blade Nzimande, in particular.(40)
The inherent contradiction in the criticisms lodged by SADTU is that, while some government departments view NGOs as a threat mainly because they are independently funded, the government makes it so difficult for NGOs to qualify for funding from government itself.
In light of the global recession, increased corporatisation and competition, reduced government funding, intangible government funding criteria, and a general lack of government support, the nonprofit sector in SA currently faces many challenges. This is true particularly in the broader social welfare context, in that the South African Government has appeared to follow neoliberal socio-economic policies, which, by definition, require social spending rollbacks. It can also be asserted that “the politics of the day substantially influences funding policies”(41) which now seems to be making its way into the current government’s approach to welfare, with the bulk of government spending going to social security as opposed to social service delivery and social development. After all, it is much easier, if short sighted, to keep voters happy with direct cash transfers in the form of grants, than by implementing developmental projects that do not necessarily see immediate results.
Government’s requirements for registration as an NPO are justified and compliance with criteria for registration is necessary. However, regulation and support must act in tandem, because focusing solely on compliance and regulation without providing the necessary support would result in the alienation of a large part SA’s nonprofit sector, particularly smaller NGOs.(42) Furthermore, an unintended consequence of the reorientation of accountability away from the grassroots is that it leads to NGOs and their funders becoming complicit in “perpetuating the syndrome of disadvantage by turning accountability away from the beneficiaries towards the funders.”(43)
The South African nonprofit sector plays a vital part in assisting the government to fulfil its constitutional mandate. The socio-economic rights enshrined in the constitution would be out of reach for most South Africans if not for the presence of a vibrant and active nonprofit sector.(44) Despite this, a disturbing trend of civil society criticism by government factions is creeping into public discourse. Under apartheid, independent civil society was the voice of resistance, and a result was criticised and discriminated against by the government. Arguably, this trend is being revitalised. Should the civil sector suffer such criticism, and, more importantly, can government afford to alienate the sector considering that it is picking up much of government’s slack?
Lauren Stuart, Consultancy Africa’s Intelligence (CAI) Africa Watch Unit (firstname.lastname@example.org). This CAI paper was developed with the assistance of Claire Furphy and was edited by Nicky Berg.
This edition of the CAI Africa Unit Watch Issues Newsletter is republished here with permission from Consultancy Africa Intelligence (CAI), a South African-based research and strategy firm with a focus on social, health, political and economic trends and developments in Africa. For more information, see www.consultancyafrica.com or www.ngopulse.org/press-release/consultancy-africa-intelligence. Alternatively, click here to take advantage of CAI’s free, no obligation, 1-month trial to the company’s Standard Report Series.
In addition to topical discussion papers and tailored research services, CAI releases a number of fortnightly and monthly publications, examining the latest developments in Africa, across a wide range of interest areas. Interested parties can click here to take advantage of CAI’s free, no obligation, 1-month trial to any/all of the CAI publications.
For more information, see www.consultancyafrica.com or www.ngopulse.org/press-release/consultancy-africa-intelligence.
(2) Jankelowitz, L., 2007. Managing South African nonprofit organisations for sustainability.Unpublished Master’s Thesis. University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg; The South African Department of Social Development refers to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and community based organisations (CBOs) collectively as nonprofit organisations.
(3) Weisbrod, B.A., 1986. “Toward a theory of the voluntary non-profit sector in a three sector economy”, in Rose-Ackerman, S. (ed.). The economics of nonprofit institutions.Studies in structure and policy. Oxford University Press: New York.
(4) Patel, L., 2005. Social welfare and social development. Oxford University Press: Cape Town.
(6) Pratt, B. and Myhrman, T., ‘Improving aid effectiveness: A review of recent initiatives for civil society organisations’, International NCO Training and Resource Centre, May 2009, www.intrac.org.
(10) ‘Critical perspectives on sustainability of the South African civil society sector’, Charities Aid Foundation Southern Africa, 2012, www.ngopulse.org.
(11) Pratt, B. and Myhrman, T., ‘Improving aid effectiveness: A review of recent initiatives for civil society organisations’, International NCO Training and Resource Centre, May 2009, www.intrac.org.
(12) Dhunpath, R., 2003. It's all businesslike now: The corporatisation and professionalisation of NGO in South Africa. International Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management, 3, pp. 1109-1124.
(13) Mueller–Hirth, N., 2010. “South African NGOs and the public sphere: Between popular movements and partners for development”, in Fowler, A. and Malunga, C. (eds.). NGO management: The Earthscan companion. Earthscan: London.
(14) Pratt, B. and Myhrman, T., ‘Improving aid effectiveness: A review of recent initiatives for civil society organisations’, International NCO Training and Resource Centre, May 2009, www.intrac.org.
(15) Gray, R., Bebbington, J. and Collison, D., 2006. NGOs, civil society and accountability: Making the people accountable to capital. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19(3), pp. 319-348.
(16) Pratt, B. and Myhrman, T., ‘Improving aid effectiveness: A review of recent initiatives for civil society organisations’, International NCO Training and Resource Centre, May 2009, www.intrac.org.
(19) ‘Critical perspectives on sustainability of the South African civil society sector’, Charities Aid Foundation Southern Africa, 2012, www.ngopulse.org.
(20) Davis, R., ‘The great NGO crisis part II’, The Daily Maverick, 23 October 2012, www.dailymaverick.co.za.
(21) ‘Critical perspectives on sustainability of the South African civil society sector’, Charities Aid Foundation Southern Africa, 2012, www.ngopulse.org.
(22) Habib, A. and Taylor, R., 1999. South Africa: Anti- apartheid NGO’s in transition. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organisations, 10 (1), pp. 73-82
(23) Pratt, B. and Myhrman, T., ‘Improving aid effectiveness: A review of recent initiatives for civil society organisations’, International NCO Training and Resource Centre, May 2009, www.intrac.org.
(25) Dhunpath, R., 2003. It's all businesslike now: The corporatisation and professionalisation of NGO in South Africa. International Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management, 3, pp. 1109-1124.
(26) ‘Critical perspectives on sustainability of the South African civil society sector’, Charities Aid Foundation Southern Africa, 2012, www.ngopulse.org.
(28) Habib, A. and Taylor, R., 1999. South Africa: Anti- apartheid NGO’s in transition. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organisations, 10 (1), pp. 73-82.
(29) Lombard, A., 2008. The impact of social transformation on the non-government welfare sector and the social work profession. International Journal of Social Welfare, 17(2), pp. 124-131.
(30) Social development paper
(32) Child, K., ‘Big back track on NGOs’, Times Live, 28 January 2013, www.timeslive.co.za.
(35) Lombard, A., 2008. The impact of social transformation on the non-government welfare sector and the social work profession. International Journal of Social Welfare, 17(2), pp. 124-131
(37) John, V, ‘SADTU warns it will go after NGOs’, Mail & Guardian, 2 November 2012, http://mg.co.za.
(41) Lombard, A., 2008. The impact of social transformation on the non-government welfare sector and the social work profession. International Journal of Social Welfare, 17(2), pp. 124-131.
(42) Wyngaard, R., ‘The South African NPO crisis - time to join hands’, SANGO Pulse, 12 March 2013, www.ngopulse.org.
(43) Dhunpath, R., 2003. It's all businesslike now: The corporatisation and professionalisation of NGO in South Africa. International Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management, 3, pp. 1109-1124.
(44) Wyngaard, R., ‘The South African NPO crisis - time to join hands’, SANGO Pulse, 12 March 2013, www.ngopulse.org.
According to an article by Alexander O'riordan, when the Institute for Democracy in Africa (Idasa) announced its closure for lack of funds, many asked how this could happen when donor funding to South Africa is at a 10-year high.
O'riordan points out that participating donors report their financial disbursements to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) as part of a coordination and anti-corruption mechanism.
He explains that using the OECD QWIDS database, one can see that in 2011, donors reported US$1.2 billion in disbursements to South Africa with US$90 million (around R820 million) for ‘governance and civil society’.
To read the article titled, “Funding civil society in South Africa - where does the money go?,” click here.Source:All Africa
Post-1994, the tasks of confronting social inequalities and driving development in South Africa have increasingly become the work of civil society organisations (CSOs). This sector is already saddled with a mammoth task, but now also faces challenging economic and political constraints that have forced some CSOs to scale down on their activities, or close their doors altogether.
According to a recent survey conducted by GreaterGood South Africa, 80 percent of CSOs participating in the 2012 Job Losses and Service Cuts study have experienced significant declines in funding. This has also led to increased anxiety about the future health of the sector. The downsizing and closure of several established human rights and peace-building organisations in the country has forced CSOs, as well as government, corporate and philanthropic initiatives, to re-strategise and find new funding practices and alternative models, in order to keep to their mandates in a restrictive climate.
These new challenges raise a few fundamentally relevant questions for the sector. Who should ultimately foot the bill for the crucial work carried out by civil society? How best can the different role-players face the current challenges, and achieve both the support and reforms that the country and the sector so desperately need? How best should these challenges be approached, and what opportunities and new models exist that would aid in overcoming the sector’s current uncertainties?
A look at the civil society landscape reveals that, in the BRICS [Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa] economies alone, there has been a major increase in the numbers of CSOs. The Yearbook of International Organisations estimates that there are approximately 3.3 million registered nonprofits in India, 338 000 in Brazil and 460 000 in China – growth in the sector is particularly pronounced in these emerging economies. With about 90 000 organisations in South Africa working across a range of different focal areas, CSOs take on a substantive role as convenors, facilitators and advocates. However, these high numbers also mean an exceedingly competitive environment and a contest for financial support that plays out across the global stage.
Given these levels of competition, as well as contracting funds from many northern state funders and philanthropic organisations in the continued aftermath of the recession, many CSOs have looked to corporate social responsibility investment (CSI) initiativesas an under-tapped source of support. According to Trialogue’s 15th edition of The CSI Handbook, South African corporates spent R6.9 billion on CSI in 2012. Many corporates, however, have not traditionally funded peace and human rights work, and in fact seem to steer directly away from these areas. There is also a general misperception that CSOs which receive corporate funding are inherently working in opposition to the state, or actively undermining sovereignty. This view has begun to change, however, and many corporates are now both active contributors to governance and economic policy processes, and stakeholders and partners to CSOs.
In fact, partnerships for sustainability between civil society and the private sector should be valued highly now more than ever, and are needed if South Africa is to achieve its developmental goals and realisesolutions for ongoing peace and reconciliation work. But these crucial partnerships can only produce the best results if government is also involved in agenda-setting and joint planning. Civil society also needs to be a part of multi-stakeholder platforms if these are to lead to effective practice. Bearing these considerations in mind, formalised efforts to align strategic priorities could translate into greater impact, compared with fragmented efforts of government, the private sector or civil society acting alone.
South Africa may have some of the best laws and policies in the world, but problems with implementation are principle causes of recent protest and social unrest. Particularly in the wake of the fatal shooting of protestors at the Lonmin-Marikana mine last year, integrated efforts by all stakeholders could lead to greater stability and prevent future tragedies of this kind.
New opportunities for collaboration also exist through the explosion of technology and social media use, which has revolutionised the work of many CSOs. Citizens and organisations involved in the ‘Arab Spring’ uprisings, as well as initiatives such as the Right2Know Campaign in South Africa show just how powerful and effective social media can be as an advocacy and activist tool. Sceptics might question the mobilisation and advocacy capacity of organisations that work, and build a following and support base primarily online, but the results speak for themselves. For CSOs working in a funding-constrained environment, this trend may increase cost-effectiveness, sustainability, and new, replicable modes of working. In fact, with such rapid technological changes afoot, it is becoming clear that organisations without a strong online presence may ultimately be left behind. Strategising and planning around these changes are critical, as is advocacy around increasing internet accessibility for those who aren’t currently connected.
Looking further into the future, the World Economic Forum (WEF) has developed four scenarios on the possible role of civil society organisations in the eventuality of failing economies and political instability. CSOs need to undergo intense and critical self-examination, and assess their roles in relation to both current and future possibilities. Those of us within the sector need to continually ask ourselves whether we are adequately prepared for worst-case scenarios, in which access to funding continues to diminish as a result of scarce resources, global competition and geopolitical uncertainty.
In a turbulent world, it is likely that CSOs will be forced to become more self-critical in order to prepare for new opportunities and challenges – not only in terms of funding practices, but also to ensure their continued relevance in ever-changing times. It is fundamentally important that CSOs begin looking now at new collaborations for sustainability, innovative fundraising and cost-saving tactics, and tests of impact and relevance, and not just simply invoice governments and corporates.
- Juzaida Swain is programme officer for fundraising and strategy at the Institute for Justice and Reconciliation (IJR). This article first appeared in the SA Reconciliation Barometer newsletter.
- The Sustainable Seas TrustPlease note: this opportunity closing date has passed and may not be available any more.Opportunity closing date:Tuesday, April 2, 2013Opportunity type:Employment
Ocean Discovery Centre
The Sustainable Seas Trust is promoting science and maths education, as well as environmental education and sustainability. The Ocean Discovery Centre (ODC) being developed in East London in the Eastern Cape will be a science centre which revolves around interactive and other educational displays. Importantly, disadvantaged schools will be given access to classrooms, laboratories and an auditorium where both formal instruction and fun activities will take place. The display areas will be open to the public as in science centres elsewhere.
The educational programmes must be interactive, challenging, dynamic and constantly upgraded and improved so that all visitors, in formal school groups or as casual holiday makers, will be excited by what they see, stimulated by their interactive experiences and by what they learn and become inspired to take a greater interest and even action to improve our planet and seek better understanding. Applicants must be able to provide such exciting dynamism.
SST seeks to appoint an Education Programme Manager, based in Eastern Cape.
A number of educators will be required in due course, but in the development stage, and in the future, leadership is required from an innovative manager who will design and develop the educational components, linking the displays with the educational programme. As the ODC will be supporting the Department of Education’s endeavours to promote education in South Africa, the programmes need to be aligned to the new CAPS (Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statements) of South Africa. Staff in the education department of the ODC will answer to the programme manager.
The Education Programme Manager will fulfil a leadership role in guiding the development of the educational displays and planning the overall educational programmes for the Ocean Discovery Centre. The responsibilities include, but are not limited to:
- Working with the design teams and educators to develop the content and flow of the display areas. The display and interactive areas need to accommodate the interests of the full spectrum of visitors to the ODC;
- Develop an effective, successful Education Department for the Ocean Discovery Centre;
- Work with educators to develop the content of the educational programmes for the laboratories, classrooms, excursions to the sea shore and educational products;
- Guide animators and film developers on content and presentation of educational computer games and films;
- Ensure that the projects are CAPS compliant ensuring that real benefits accrue to learners and teachers;
- Plan the annual teaching activities, aligning programmes where possible to the schedules of schools activities and CAPS;
- Plan holiday programmes for schools so that children and teachers can benefit from the ODC;
- Work with events organizers to plan a series of educational and promotional events during each year;
- Make materials available to other educational outlets and partners of Sustainable Seas Trust;
- Work with and establish a good relationships with the National and Provincial Departments of Education, Department of Science and Technology, donors and sponsors;
- Develop a good working relationship with schools, school teachers and other educational governmental and non-governmental networks in South Africa;
- Develop teacher training programmes;
- Provide proper supervision and management of those employed or who volunteer to assist in the ODC education department ensuring that the team is strong, productive and well-coordinated
- Assist with effective fund raising to ensure that the ODC educational facilities are financially robust
- Submit progress reports, including performance and financial reports for the ODC education department to the Management Committee;
- Promote staff development including recruitment and orientation of new staff;
- Ensure that staff, including the volunteers, are equipped to undertake their tasks and become effective and innovative;
- Monitor and evaluate the success of the educational programmes and recommend changes where necessary. From time to time hold evaluation workshops calling in educators from elsewhere.
The programme manager of the ODC education department needs to have strengths in science and maths, the environment and conservation, understand issues related to climate change. Teaching experience in science is essential. Management skills, leadership and excellent interpersonal skills, having an engaging personality, are also prerequisites. An exceedingly important criterion for suitably qualified candidates would be a proven record of enthusiasm and innovation. Given the breadth of these requirements persons with the following qualifications may apply:
- Master’s degree, or the equivalent, in science, ideally with mathematics as a major, and/or education in which science courses featured within the degree, and/or environmental education in which science courses featured within the degree. Commerce degrees with exceptional educational experience are also accepted;
- Solid, proven record of teaching, ideally for five years or more;
- Excellent leadership and management skills for both management of staff and projects;
- Experience in the design and implementation of education programmes;
- Interpersonal skills, enjoy public speaking and marketing of education and conservation;
- Experience and success in fund raising, from proposal development to securing the funds;
- Track record of developing educational materials and displays;
- Advantages would be experience in working on physical or biological aspects of ocean science, fluency in isiXhosa, excellent writing ability, enthusiasm for education and issues of sustainability, strong understanding of research methods, excellent computer literacy so that guidance for computer generated games and images is may be provided.
- a brief motivation letter, ideally within one page,
- a curriculum vitae
- a list of referees and
- a brief salary history.
Receipt of all applications will be acknowledged, thereafter, if you have not heard from us by 5 April 2013, assume that your application unsuccessful.
Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted.
For more about the Sustainable Seas Trust, refer to www.sst.org.za.
For other vacancies in the NGO sector, refer to www.ngopulse.org/vacancies.
Need to upgrade your NGO's technology capacity and infrastructure? Need software and hardware at significantly discounted prices? Refer to the SANGOTeCH online technology donation and discount portal at www.sangotech.org.