VZCZCXYZ0012
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHNR #4178/01 2961057
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 231057Z OCT 07
FM AMEMBASSY NAIROBI
TO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 3063

UNCLAS NAIROBI 004178 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
DEPT FOR AF/E, AF/RSA, AF/EPS, AND DRL 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: ECON EAID PHUM PGOV KCRM EFIN KTFN KCOR KE
SUBJECT: Kenya: NGO Board Offers Prize to Encourage Best Practices 
 
 
SENSITIVE-BUT-UNCLASSIFIED 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary: On October 17, Kenya's NGO Coordination Board (NGO 
Board) and the NGO Resource Alliance of the UK launched their new 
"NGO of the Year" awards to be presented in July 2008 to NGOs that 
demonstrate competence and integrity with their service recipients 
and their donors.  Separately, the USG is providing $335,000 of 
computer equipment, software and training to enable the Board to 
guard NGOs from being used for terrorist finance, and to reveal 
corruption and fraud.  Several speakers claimed the awards would 
improve the tarnished image of non-profit organizations in Kenya. 
The award scheme is part of the Board's campaign to become more 
professional and capable of regulating the $1.2 billion/year NGO 
sector, as well as building confidence among civil society that the 
Board will not abuse its powers as it did under the Moi 
administration.  End Summary. 
 
A Little History First 
---------------------- 
¶2. (SBU) Kenya's international NGO sector expanded enormously during 
the Moi administration, when donor governments tried to avoid the 
GOK's corruption and poor governance by channeling their assistance 
through NGOs offering the services the GOK could not or would not. 
Flush with resources, international NGOs became preferred employers, 
offering big off-road vehicles, well-equipped offices and good 
salaries.  GOK officials were naturally jealous of the competition, 
and used the parastatal NGO Board to harass NGOs.  After its victory 
in the 2002 election, the NARC rainbow coalition appointed so many 
NGO personnel to official positions the NGO sector was seriously 
weakened. 
 
Briefcase NGOs Tarnish Local NGO Image 
-------------------------------------- 
¶3. (SBU) The NGO Board is the Kenyan Government (GOK) institution 
responsible for registering and regulating NGOs, which handle Ksh 80 
billion ($1.2 billion) annually.  While most international NGOs have 
a stellar reputation, Kenya has been plagued for years by "briefcase 
NGOs."  It is widely believed these "BRINGOs" are used by their 
corrupt managers for personal enrichment and aggrandizement ahead of 
public service, defrauding their donors.  Under the Moi 
Administration, the NGO Board lacked the institutional capacity to 
locate and weed out the bad actors, but its regulatory powers were 
used to harass NGOs in political disfavor.  An NGO Council was 
created in 1993 to provide leadership among NGOs, improve practices, 
and represent NGOs' interests to the NGO Board and the Government. 
 
 
NGO Council Fails to Improve Sector 
----------------------------------- 
¶4. (SBU) After the 2002 election, the Board's and the Council's 
situations switched.  The NGO Council became increasingly 
dysfunctional due to the politicization of Council activities by the 
Chairperson, divergent interests among Council member NGOs, and poor 
management.  In 2006, the NGO Council reached a crisis when Council 
leaders tried (with the NGO Board's support) but failed to remove 
Chairwoman Ms. Orie Rego Manduli for mismanagement and failure to 
represent the interests of the membership.  The noisy drama, in 
which Manduli locked herself in her office and refused to accept her 
removal, made the Council and local NGOs look ridiculous and 
incapable of self-governance.  Manduli has three years left in her 
term, and the NGO Council has continued to wither in effectiveness. 
 
NGO Council Capacity Building 
----------------------------- 
¶5. (SBU) Under the Kibaki administration, however, the NGO Board has 
enjoyed more enlightened leadership, increased its professionalism, 
and began taking on the NGO Council's role of mobilizing and 
energizing NGOs.  However, it lacked the capacity to effectively 
review and archive NGO registrations and annual reports for signs of 
trouble.  After the 1998 Embassy bombings and the 9/11 attack, there 
was also concern that some NGOs might be used as channels for 
terrorist finance.  In 2004, a joint State Department/U.S. 
Treasury/UK Charities Commission team recommended a major IT upgrade 
and training to give the Board the capacity to carry out its 
supervisory duties and enable it to check for signs of misuse of 
funds and terrorist financing.  The $335,000 IT project should be 
completed in 2008, but has been kept low profile to avoid exciting 
civil society suspicions that the Board's improved capacity could be 
used to harass NGOs that fall into political disfavor. 
 
¶6. (SBU) The NGO Board has carried out surveys on NGOs in six 
provinces to update its information and determine which NGOs are 
actually operating, and will enter this census into its new 
database.  The survey exercise excited suspicions by some NGOs, 
which assumed they were a partisan plot to suppress perceived 
opposition.  However, the Board's leaders appear to have largely 
reassured the NGOs of the benefits for the whole sector of effective 
and transparent supervision that would weed out corrupt NGOs and 
support the good ones. 
Bring on the Awards 
-------------------- 
¶7. (U) As an example of this outreach, on October 17, the NGO Board, 
the Resource Alliance and I&M Bank launched their new "NGO of the 
Year" awards.  NGO Board Executive Director David Isoe noted that 
NGOs in Kenya had improved the lives of 10 million Kenyans, but 
their work is not well publicized, and their image needs improving. 
The purpose of the awards is to encourage best practices to improve 
and standardize fund raising and utilization.  This would enable 
NGOs to source more donations locally and encourage corporate social 
responsibility by providing greater accountability and reporting to 
donors and NGO clients.  Isoe said the Board had worked with 
stakeholders to develop the concept and procedures for the awards. 
 
¶8. (U) A key partner in the process was the UK NGO Resource Alliance 
(RA), which specializes in building non-profit organizations' fund 
raising capacity through workshops, training and awards.  RA will 
hold a workshop in Mombasa November 27-30.  The SISA Centre 
described its performance index for NGOs, and how it could be used 
to improve fund raising by measuring and demonstrating the 
competence and integrity of NGOs in delivering services and helping 
recipients. 
 
A Politician's View 
-------------------- 
¶9. (U) National Heritage Ministry Shakombo, within whose Ministry 
the Board and the Council operate, commended the NGO awards 
initiative.  He claimed the infighting in the Council had 
discredited NGOs and tarnished their image, and called on NGOs to 
critically consider how to recapture their rightful role in society. 
 The awards were part of a wider effort to create a favorable 
operating environment for NGOs.  He asked, "Where does the Ksh 80 
billion NGOs received annually go?  Where are the signboards?" 
 
¶10. (U) Shakombo also noted that NGOs, in this election year, play a 
critical role in civic and voter education.  He reminded them to 
stay neutral, and not abuse their role by criticizing incumbent MPs. 
Shakombo claimed Constituency Development Funds (CDF are GOK funds 
distributed by local committees appointed by their MP) have spent 
only Ksh 2 billion, but have transformed the country and planted 
signs everywhere.  He urged NGOs to see themselves as in competition 
with the (politically managed) CDF program. 
 
Comment 
-------- 
¶11. (SBU) The Board and NGOs appear sincere in their goal of 
improving the performance of the NGO sector, but Minister Shakombo's 
comments revealed the typical politician's jealousy and paranoia 
that generate NGO suspicions of the government's real agenda.  While 
most Kenyans are aware that abuses exist within the local NGO 
sector, they know they have benefited enormously from international 
NGOs, even without signboards.  Post will continue to build the NGO 
Board's capacity and has confidence in its current leadership.  We 
will, however, continue to watch closely for signs the Board is 
coming under pressure to harass or suppress NGOs who fall into 
political disfavor. 
 
RANNEBERGER