Leveraging the BIG 3 predictors of
NGO sustainability
Blog #3: Sustainability factors
Now that we know the importance of sustaining NGO efforts…think leveraging limited resources and focusing on more innovative approaches rather than reinventing the same “wheel of organization programming” as discussed in the last sustainability blog…the natural thing to delve into is the “what,” as in:
WHAT are the leading predictors of organizational sustainability?
A total of nine factors emerged from a recently conducted systematic review. These factors found a natural grouping that includes the following factors: individual-level, organization-level, and community-level factors.
Individual-level factors. The individual-level predictive factors were found to be the weakest predictors of sustainability in the analysis. This is no surprise as there is very little an individual can do to shoulder the entire burden of sustaining an organization’s existence. These individual-level predictive factors include internal group dynamics and mutual benefits. Examples of how positive internal group dynamics help sustain organizational activities include careful selection of NGO staff/volunteers and the presence of a sense of self-initiative that prompts NGO staff/volunteers to organize their very own “shout leaders” to help them speak with a unified voice as they serve in their communities. Some of the NGOs fortunate enough to report having these positive group dynamics believe them to be partly responsible for sustaining the organization. The mutual benefits that reportedly helped sustain the organization include receiving support (e.g., salary, stipend, means of transportation), having flexible work schedule available to them, and networking opportunities.
Organization-level factors. Under the organization-level predictive factors, we find two of the strongest predictors of sustainability: i) staff training and development and ii) strategic partnership. These sustainability factors are within the control of the organization and are often termed “institutionalization” or “routinization.” Almost 60% of the review articles reported training and development of staff as a predictor of organizational sustainability. These trainings ranged from routine training to supplemental ones such as democratic organization and confidence building. It is no surprise that the training and development of NGO staff/volunteers would emerge as a major sustainability factors since a well-trained group of workers will safeguard the transfer of knowledge and information and help the NGO gain much needed credibility in the community that must accept its existence. Strategic partnership was also found to be salient in almost 60% of the reviewed articles. Examples of strategic partnership include NGOs’ integration of their services with existing providers; seeking out other service providers to refer clients to in order to prevent becoming overwhelmed; and working with their local government in order to gain additional support and credibility. The remaining three organization-level factors uncovered in the review include: funding diversity, leadership and management, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of activities.
Community-level factors. The lone community-level factor is community ownership, which was also salient in almost 60% of the reviewed articles. NGOs found to successfully mobilize their communities are those that made deliberate efforts to mobilize the communities where they operate, inform them and almost get their permission to “set-up shop,” so to speak, in their communities. These NGOs helped create a sense of community ownership by including community members in program planning and decision making. In some communities, the NGOs staff members were deliberately recruited from the communities they serve, and by key community members that are dubbed “champions” or “opinion leaders.”
The BIG 3 predictors, i.e., the strongest predictors of NGO sustainability, are community ownership, strategic partnership, and staff/volunteer training and development
All these predictive factors are not without “threats.” A little over 40% of the reviewed articles identified some form of threats to sustainability. Lack of confidence in the sustainability of funding to cover salaries and stipends was a major reason why many NGOs have to shut down. Poor leadership and the lack of a sound administrative process was found to be another reason. And the inability of NGOs to collaborate with stakeholders was another identified threat to sustainability as these NGO soon lost its essence in the community. Putting all three threats together, one can appreciate its proliferating effect: lack of funding renders an NGO inoperable, which could be a feature of poor leadership. A visionary leader may have been able to foresee and mitigate the funding issue by galvanizing the administrative process in search of sustainable funding. And all these efforts will receive much needed reassurance when meaningful relationships are built with the community that the NGO serves.