Foreign funds to NGOs: Why better scrutiny is needed

Sanjeev Nayyar 

The Foreign Contribution Regulation Act was passed in 1976. It seeks to regulate receipt of funds by non-governmental organisations (NGOs). It is managed by the Union ministry of home affairs.
Any organisation that wants to receive contributions from abroad has to apply and get approval from the home ministry.
All remittances are received into a single bank account of a scheduled bank. The NGO has to annually submit audited receipts and payments account, balance sheet, etc to the home ministry.
The ministry scrutinises the returns to ensure that contributions received for a particular purpose are used for that purpose only. It does a detailed check of randomly picked associations and then collates the data received to present the FCRA Annual Report, i.e. uploaded on the ministry's web site here.
As on March 31, 2009, there were 36,414 registered associations under FCRA. These organisations could be religious, social, educational, cultural and educational organisations.
Why do we need to analyse inflows under FCRA?
  • Because of the sheer magnitude of inflows. Reported inflows into India were $2.4 billion in 2008-09, $2.15 billion in 2007-08 and $2.45 billion in 2006-07.
  • Reported contributions received from 1993-94 to 2008-09 were to the tune of Rs 84,182 crore (Rs 841.82 billion). Actuals are much higher.
   
Trends in Foreign contributions
Year
Registered Associations (as on 31st March of FY)
Associations who gave details of remittances received
Amounts received Rs crore
1993-94
15,039
Not Available
1,865
2003-04
28,351
61%
5,105
2004-05
30,321
61%
6,257
2005-06
32,144
58%
7,878
2006-07
33,937
56%
11,336
2007-08
34,803
54%
9,663
2008-09
36,414
55%
10,803
Total 1993-94 to 2008-09
84,182

There has been a steady increase in the number of registered associations. Taking 15,039 associations in 1993-94 as the base year, their number grew by 41 per cent in 2000-01, 101 per cent in 2005-06 and 142 per cent in 2008-09.
In 2008-09, as many as 7,679 of the 20,088 associations that submitted their accounts did not receive any foreign contributions -- meaning that reported contributions include amounts received by 43 per cent of the number of associations.
Reported inflows in 2008-09 were higher by Rs 1,140 crore (Rs 11.40 billion) -- 12 per cent -- as compared to the previous year.
Largest donors country-wise (in Rs crore)
Year
USA
Germany
UK
Italy, others
2002-03
1680
715
685
NA
2003-04
1584
757
676
350*
2004-05
1927
931
764
353#
2005-06
2426
1181
1062
500*
2006-07
2949
1033
1428
606&
2007-08
2928
971
1269
515*
2008-09
3433
1103
1131
547*
Total
16,927
6,691
7,015
2,871
*Italy, #Netherlands, & Switzerland.
Largest donor countries are the United States of America - Rs 3,433 crore (Rs 34.33 billion), the United Kingdom -- Rs 1,131 crore (Rs 11.31 billion), Germany -- Rs 1,103 crore (Rs 11.03 billion), Italy -- Rs 547 crore (Rs 5.47 billion), the Netherlands -- Rs 513 crore (Rs 5.13 billion), and Spain -- Rs 437 crore (Rs 4.37 billion.
The top three donor countries are the USA, Germany, and the UK for many years now. The US is consistently the top donor.
In spite of the economic downturn in the US and the UK, rise continued contributions from these countries might be considered noteworthy. Donors should usually look at the needs of their own countrymen first before worrying about others!
Readers must be aware that most Germans pay some sort of a tax to the Church. Is there a correlation between tax paid and inflows into India? That is an issue worth pondering over.
Key Donors: Country-wise trends (In Rs crore)
Country
2008-9
Country
2007-08
USA
3433
USA
2928
UK
1131
UK
1269
Germany
1103
Germany
971
Italy
547
Italy
515
Netherlands
513
Netherlands
414
Spain
437
Spain
401
Switzerland
370
Switzerland
364
Canada
303
Canada
276
France
193
France
196
Australia
131
Australia
138
Belgium
124
Belgium
100
Austria
106
Austria
99
Sweden
103
Sweden
89
UAE
146
UAE
79
Ireland
69
Ireland
77
Countries where contributions in 2008-09 have increased significantly as compared to the previous year are: The US 17 per cent, Germany 14 per cent, the Netherlands 24 per cent, Belgium 24 per cent and the United Arab Emirates 86 per cent.
Note that, except for the UAE, countries above belong to the West -- read as the Christian world.
Media reports indicate that some countries in the Middle East, notably Saudi Arabia, made large remittances to India (http://www.southasiaanalysis.org:80/papers38/paper3725.html). Barring the UAE, the contributions are not reflected above.
So either contributions are not coming in or are coming in through the hawala route

Largest Donors: Agency-wise trends  (In Rs crore)
Donor Name & Country
2008-9
Percent Increase*
Donor Name & Country 2007-08
World Vision International USA
706
22
World Vision International USA
Gospel For Asia Inc USA
596
63
Gospel For Asia Inc USA
Fundacion Vicente Ferrer, Barcelona, Spain
459
85
Fundacion Vicente Ferrer, Barcelona, Spain
Shyam Shyam Dham Samiti India
359
NA
Bramhanand Saraswati Trust UK
Action Aid International, UK
228
24
Action Aid International, UK
Fundacion Vicente Ferrer, Spain
241
53
Fundacion Vicente Ferrer, Spain
Plan International, USA
191
26
Plan International, USA
Oxfam India Trust, UK
163
23
Oxfam India Trust, UK
BAPS, Inc USA
199
NA
Dr Vikram Pandit USA
Christian Children Fund, USA
197
55
Christian Children Fund, USA
Compassion International, USA
347
187
Compassion International, USA
Om Foundation, USA
188
NA
Save the Children, UK
Ahmadiyya Muslim Association, UK
178
NA
Christian Aid, UK
Mata Amritanandmai Centre, USA
176
NA
EED Evagelishcher Entiwicklungsdienst e.v. Germany
The Global Fund to Fight aids, Tuberculosis, Malaria Switzerland
166
61
The Global Fund to Fight aids, Tuberculosis, Malaria Switzerland
 From Top 15 donors
4,394

*% increase between 2007-08 and 2008-09.
Contributions from top 15 donors increased by 55 per cent to Rs 4,394 crore (Rs 43.94 billion).
Largest donors were World Vision USA -- Rs 706 crore  (Rs 7.06 billion); Gospel for Asia Inc USA -- 596 crore (Rs 5.96 billion); Fundacion Vicente Ferrer, Barcelona, Spain -- 459 crore (Rs 4.59 billion); Shyam Shyam Dham Samiti India -- Rs 359 crore (Rs 3.59 billion); Action Aid International -- Rs 228 crore  (Rs 2.28 billion); and Fundacion Vicente Ferrer, Spain Rs 241 crore (Rs 2.41 billion)
Top 15 recipient associations 2008-09 (In Rs crore)
Association
2008-9
Association
2007-08
World Vision of India, Tamil Nadu
192
World Vision of India, Tamil Nadu
212
Rural Development Trust, A.P.
155
Rural Development Trust, A.P.
125
Believers Church India, Kerala
100
Believers Church India, Kerala
102
Action Aid, Karnataka
77
Action Aid, Karnataka
92
Shyam Shyam Dham Delhi
109
Caritas India, Delhi
90
Gospel for Asia, Kerala
-
Gospel for Asia, Kerala
86
Women Development Trust, A.P.
82
Women Development Trust, A.P.
80
Plan International Inc, Delhi
66
Plan International Inc, Delhi
74
Church Auxiliary for Social Action, Delhi
61
Shri Gajanam Maharaj Sansthan, Maharashtra
70
Sri Sri Jagadguru Shankaracharya, Karnataka
60
Oxfam India Trust, Delhi
67
Mata Amritanandmayi Math, Kerala
116
Mata Amritanandmayi Math, Kerala
102
Caruna Bal Vikas, Tamil Nadu
74
Caruna Bal Vikas, Tamil Nadu
93
Boachasanwasi Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha, Gujarat
78
Boachasanwasi Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha, Gujarat
93
Christian Children Fund Inc, Karnataka
62
Christian Children Fund Inc, Karnataka
83
Pratham Mumbai Education Initiative Maharashtra
67
Pratham Mumbai Education Initiative Maharashtra
83
SOS Children's Village of India, Delhi
83
NA
Top 15 recipients received
1,382
1452
Total Contributions received
10,803
9,663
Largest recipients were World Vision of India Tamil Nadu -- Rs 192 crore (Rs 1.92 billion), Rural Development Trust AP -- Rs 155 crore (Rs 1.55 billion); Mata Amritanandmayi Math -- Rs 116 crore (Rs 1.16 billion); Shyam Shyam Dham -- Rs 109 crore (Rs 1.09 billion); Believers Church India, Kerala -- Rs 100 crore (Rs 1 billion); SOS Children's Village of India, Delhi -- Rs 83 crore (Rs 830 million).
The top fifteen donors constitute 41 per cent of reported contributions while corresponding percentage for top fifteen recipients is 11 per cent.
This means that big donors distributed their contribution across many NGOs. For example, World Vision International USA contributed Rs 706 crore but World Vision of Tamil Nadu received only Rs 192 crore (Rs 1.92 billion).
Trends of state-wise receipt of foreign contributions (In Rs crore)
State
2008-9
% rise*
2005-06
2002-03
1.Tamil Nadu
1650
(1)
1609
775
2. Delhi
2013
17
1556
881
3. Andhra Pradesh
1244
7
1012
630
4. Maharashtra
953
8
664
505
5. Karnataka
1009
13
621
489
6. Kerala
991
24
656
409
7. Jharkhand
154
20
97
58
8. West Bengal
598
11
355
272
9. Gujarat
464
23
301
272
10. UP
225
11
103
NA
11. Orissa
228
29
129
NA
12. MP
160
16
77
NA
13. Bihar
161
20
101
NA
14. Rajasthan
138
13
-
NA
15. Himachal Pradesh
129
8
83
NA
16. Assam
-
-
NA
17. Punjab
-
82
NA
18. Others
686
16
432
756
 Total
10,803
12
7,878
5,047
*% increase between 2007-08 and 2008-09.
In absolute terms the contributions received by individual states are huge.
Most of the reported inflows are concentrated in the four southern states, and Delhi and Maharashtra. Wonder why?
The '% rise' (in the table) compares contributions received in 2007-08 against those received in 2008-09. As compared to 2007-08, the percentage increases are significant in Delhi, Karnataka, Kerala, Gujarat, Orissa, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Jharkhand.
Top recipient districts of foreign contributions (In Rs crore)
District
2008-09
2007-08
2002-03
Chennai
756
731
363
Mumbai
575
470
284
Ranchi
-
NA
Bengaluru
702
670
358
Kolkata
371
352
NA
Uttara Kanada
-
NA
Hyderabad/Sec
301
291
181
Ananthpur
309
278
169
Pathanmthitta
250
-
Ahmedabad
237
207
NA
Tirunelveli
-
NA
Madurai
181
187
NA
Quilon (Kollam)
377
-
NA
Ernakulam
209
207
NA
Pune
178
173
NA
Krishna
138
134
NA
Tiruchirapalli
96
NA
Kancheepuram
101
122
NA
Trivandrum
-
NA
KangraDharamsala
116
104
NA
Kottayam
98
NA
NA
NA stands for not available.
Among the districts, the largest recipients of contributions were Chennai -- Rs 756 crore (Rs 7.56 billion); Mumbai -- Rs 575 crore (Rs 5.75 billion); Bengaluru -- Rs 702 crore (Rs 7.02 billion); Kolkata -- Rs 371 crore (Rs 3.71 billion); Hyderabad/Secunderabad -- Rs 301 crore (Rs 3.01 billion); Ananthpur -- Rs 309 crore (Rs 3.09 billion); Ernakulam -- Rs 209 crore  (Rs 2.09 billion);and Ahmedabad -- Rs 237 crore (Rs 2.37 billion).
These are huge sums for individual districts, be it Rs 756 crore for Chennai or Rs 309 crore for Ananthpur in Andhra Pradesh.
Utilisation of foreign contributions (In Rs crore)
Expenditure Head
2008-09
% rise*
Establishment expenses
5,022
47
Rural Development
2,835
59
Relief/rehabilitation of natural calamities
1,345
(20)
Welfare activities for children
2,304
74
Construction/maintenance of schools/colleges
2,031
68
Maintenance of Priests/preachers/others
837
105
Religious school/education of priests/preachers
693
62
*% increase between 2007-08 and 2008-09.
Note the percentage increase for expenditure heads 1, 6 and 7 is very high.
Why did Indian NGOs receive Rs 837 crore (Rs 376 crore from the US, Rs 101 crore from Germany, etc) for maintenance of priests is difficult to fathom? Ditto for education of priests/preachers. This might hold good if India were exporting priests to the West.
So also Rs 57 crore (Rs 570 million) was received towards theatre/films. It would be interesting to know the nature of films produced.
Further, the US/the UK/Germany remitted Rs 101 crore (Rs 1.01 billion) towards publication and distribution of religious literature and Rs 186 crore (Rs 1.86 billion) for religious functions. For what type of literature and functions is important to know?
  
Food for thought
  • NGOs are required to file their accounts by December 31 of the subsequent year. The FCRA report for year ended March 31, 2009 was signed in December 2010, i.e. nearly 12 months after the due date of receipt. So either NGOs filed reports late or there was a delay at the ministry of home affairs. Either way a delayed report has historical value.
  • NGOs should file their audited accounts within six months of March 31 so that FCRA report is ready by December. The MHA site now allows NGOs to file returns electronically, a welcome move. It should help in speedier consolidation.
  • Since 45 per cent of the NGOs have not filed audited accounts, any NGO which does not file accounts for two years should not be allowed to receive further remittances. The bank branch that is authorized to receive remittances should be empowered to ask the NGO for proof of filing annual return.
  • Is the field inspection of books of accounts of a few NGOs good enough to monitor the activities of over 36,000 NGOs countrywide who receive in excess of $3 billion annually?
  • Since that does not seem to be the case, should the ministry of home affairs involve the home departments of respective states? The ministry of home affairs sources say that states have refused to co-operate. The issue should be resolved through a dialogue between the ruling and the opposition parties.
  • The deeper intent behind the Western world remitting thousands of crores (billions) into India annually needs to be probed and acted upon. After all poor people live in the West, the East and also in the Middle East.
  • More importantly should a country growing at 8 per cent-plus per year allow Western NGOs to have such a toehold in India?
  • Would the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, the UAE, and the UK allow Indian NGOs similar freedom as does the government of India?
Speaking in the Rajya Sabha in 2010, whilst moving certain amendments to the FCRA, Home Minister P Chidambaram said that the government would like to ensure "that the foreign money does not dominate social and political discourse in India. There is enough money within India."
Intent exists! However, India needs to improve the monitoring mechanism for funds received.








Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why re-examine the Gadgil Committee report on Western Ghats?

ದುರಂತಮಯ ಬದುಕು, ಆದರೂ ಜನರಿಗೆ ಕೊಟ್ಟರು ಕುಚುಕು!

Important Civil service website