They agree common procedures for reporting, monitoring and auditing the NGO's plan of work, and they pool the resources necessary for carrying out this plan in its entirety. In theory this means that the funding for a number of years is assured, and the administrative demands upon the NGO
are reduced. This article suggests that this may not always be the case: donors can be late in disbursing funds, and monitoring and reports may become more and more elaborate and onerous for the NGO. This is especially true if the NGO does not feel on equal terms with the donor consortium
and is reluctant to stand up to the donors' demands.
- Development impact bonds: learning from the Asháninka cocoa and coffee case in Peru
- Trade-off between outreach and sustainability of microfinance institutions: evidence from sub-Saharan Africa
- Value chain development for rural poverty reduction: A reality check and a warning
- Impact assessment of commodity standards: towards inclusive value chains
- What is cocoa sustainability? Mapping stakeholders’ socio-economic, environmental, and commercial constellations of priorities