APPENDIX 2
Memorandum submitted by Population Concern
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF EC DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE
Population Concern has been working with the European
Commission since 1986 on sexual and reproductive health issues.
Collaboration has spanned both Directorates I and VIII of the
EC including programmes in Bolivia, Peru, Sierra Leone, Nepal,
Pakistan and Vietnam.
We commend the European Commission for introducing
new terms and conditions and a standard contract for grants to
NGOs, although the process, unfortunately, took several years.
Recently the European Commission went through a rapid consultation
with civil society, including NGOs, in respect of a development
policy paper. UK and other European development agencies were
able to submit very cursory comments, given the impossibly short
time limits.
DFID is increasing multi-lateral contributions
for development to the European Commission. However, the past
performance of the European Commission in its relationships and
work with NGOs has been unacceptably poor. NGOs have had to wait
over a year for programme approval, initial release of funds has
been delayed and even more serious has been the delays in release
of funds for on-going programmes.
Population Concern would like to take this opportunity
to elucidate on the negative effects of delayed release of funds
for development programmes. We use just two examples, Population
Concern's Andean Reproductive Health Initiative and Community
Based Distribution programme and Surgical Centres in Karachi,
Pakistan.
The Andean Reproductive Health Initiative is
funded by DFID, the European Commission and Population Concern.
With regard to EC funding, on 7 July 1998 Population Concern submitted
a request for funds to the European Commission. Eventually funds
were received on 2 August 1999 causing a delay of 13 months in
the implementation of four mini projects in Bolivia and Peru.
One of the mini projects is with CEMSE, a Bolivian
NGO working in a deprived city centre area of La Paz, to develop
a curriculum for secondary school students. With the 13-month
delay, the establishment of a resource centre for materials on
sexual and reproductive health, research and development of research
tools, training of researchers, questionnaires to students in
five schools and involvement of teachers in focus groups was postponed.
This in turn led to young people being denied access to SRH education
which in turn probably led to untold misery from unintended pregnancies,
infections from sexually transmitted infections and violent acts
against young women, among other sufferings.
In addition to this, the setting up of PC offices
and employment of staff in Bolivia and Peru were hampered. The
spin off was delayed implementation of the programme, including
support to potential partner NGOs in those countries. Population
Concern had to use its own funds (which it could ill afford) to
fill the gap in funding which then had a knock-on effect on its
other activities. This particular programme has several donors
with different project year spans. The situation is complicated
even more by delayed funding as some activities are jointly funded.
Parts of some activities now end before the other part because
of staggered funding. The reputation and credibility of Population
Concern has been put on the line due to delays in programme implementation
caused by late receipt of funds.
It is also difficult to pinpoint who is responsible
within the EC bureaucracy for which level of decision. The confusion
within the EC has also contributed towards delays in approval,
etc.
Similarly, the Community Based Distribution
Programme in Karachi, Pakistan has suffered from tardiness of
funds from the European Commission. So late was the approval of
the extension programme that interim funding from the Packard
Foundation had to be sought for a nine-month period between the
two phases of the initiative. Later, the funding situation became
so dire that the Director of the organisation in Pakistan took
out a personal loan to pay staff salaries, using her residence
as collateral. A claim submitted in August 1999 was not actually
paid until March 2000. This was despite the efforts of EC officials
in Islamabad who repeatedly followed the matter up with the European
Commission in Brussels. The staff commitment of the Pakistani
NGO enabled the successful achievement of the purpose of the programme.
However, the partner NGO has requested Population Concern not
to seek financing from the European Commission in the future.
Population Concern would like to suggest that
DFID gives and allocates attention, time and resources to streamline
and make more effective and efficient the work of the EC. Attention
is also needed to ensure greater transparency of the EC bureaucracy
and to more consultation with NGOs. The goal of DFID, the European
Commission and NGOs, including of course Population Concern, is
to support women, men and young people to positively change their
lives and enhance their quality of life.
Sandra M Kabira
Director—International Advocacy and Resources,
Population Concern
June 2000
| 
