Policy challenges in South Australia: Working with non-government organisations
Government ministers and public servants cannot avoid non-government organisations (NGOs). Governments fund (through grants and contracts), regulate, tax and sometimes consult NGOs. In return NGOs deliver services on behalf of government, advocate and lobby for change and sometimes actively oppose government policies. No wonder it is a complex relationship!
The community services sector, which includes aged care and community managed child care as well as a range of supports and services for disadvantaged groups in the community, has been growing rapidly in South Australia. In part this is a result of increased funding from the Commonwealth and State governments over past 5 years. It must be noted that this increase was from a low base and, while it has brought SA spending up to the level of other states, there is still evidence of areas of unmet need.
Government funding of NGOs in community services is suggested to make sense for many reasons, not least of which is that community sector NGOs tend to be closer to the service users, and have greater capacity to be innovative and responsive than the public service. `New Public Management' models which separate policy from service delivery argue for the appropriateness of service provision outside of government.
Their adoption has also involved increasing the focus on efficiency, productivity and accountability both within the public sector and for NGOs receiving government funding. This is not a bad thing - the days of `fund us to do good works' are long gone, and some NGOs have reported that this emphasis has helped them improve their service delivery. However the increased monitoring and control of NGOs has also had negative consequences at levels of organisational governance, management, cost, efficiency, and service delivery.
Increased overhead costs from tendering and reporting (usually to multiple program areas each with different demands) have required diversion of staff from service delivery to administration. More prescriptive service agreements and contracts may have reduced the capacity for innovation except in those larger organisations with private sources of funds (donations, bequests and/or investments). Some smaller NGOs have closed, others have amalgamated with larger organisations.
A new report Careers at the Coalface? highlights some of the stresses on NGOs:
- labour costs constitute over 70% of expenditure in the sector
- short term project based funding leading to insecure employment frameworks
- high workloads, low wages (10-25% less than govt award rates for similar positions), aging workforce, short-term contracts
- consequential `leakage' of workers to public service, other sectors and retirement
NGOs can deliver cost-effective services on behalf of government. While this is assisted by the inclusion of volunteer labour and subsidisation of services by NGOs own funds it is also a function of using lower-paid staff. This costs the staff, the NGOs and more importantly the community. Government funders must accept some responsibility.
A recent guide on distributing community services funding, Delivering Community Value, is an indication of a policy shift in the relationship between government and NGOS. Minister Weatherill's announcement of the development of common regional boundaries for government departments will also assist NGOs in service delivery. The challenge for government is to work with the community sector in closer cooperation and with greater consideration of their legitimate management needs and the pressures upon these organizations.
Dr Jo Baulderstone is Director at the Flinders Institute of Public Policy and Management as well as a Senior Lecturer, School of Political and International Studies. She has a particular interest in the non-government sector and maintains a hands-on involvement as a member of the board of Uniting Care Weseley, Adelaide.
