Around the world, civil society is caught in a whirlwind of change. Entities ranging from national policy advocacy organizations to humble
community groups are being buffeted by increasing restrictions and government oversight. They are pulled in different directions by donors
who arrive with already finalized theories of change, predetermined goals, and workplans. Also, donors require proof of “compliance” and often
onerous reporting. Competition for donor grants pits organizations against each other, which inhibits shared learning, coordination, or
collaboration. At times, large—even unwieldy—grants, and pressure to implement pushes organizations off of their original charted course.
Conversely, very small grants may come with an equally heavy compliance and reporting burden.
International development suffers from disruption driven by a continuous stream of short project timelines—starting, implementing, and
ending every few years. This precludes medium and long-term visioning and goal setting for organizations, and in turn, their societies. The need
for “guiding stars” (long term strategic visions) and “near stars” (5 to10 year goals) are well established among high-income country actors.
Many LMIC civil society groups are lucky to get as many as five years within which to undergo any given project cycle, before starting over
with new donors, new assessments, new terminology, and new short-term targets. Funding from various donors also often overlaps, so
organizations are simultaneously juggling any number of beginnings, middles, and ends. Derek Brinkerhoff, Michael Sayre, and other capacity
development experts have noted the damaging, even fatal effect of this environment on civil society organizations.
In today’s world of international development, the “project” is often the center of gravity, creating an externally-imposed system that creates its
own orbit of grantees, other in-country partners, international technical assistance, and donor focus areas. To succeed, grantees must
accommodate to each specific project environment, where their own history, sociocultural and political context, ideas, and goals are easily
fragmented, overlooked, and even eclipsed. However, as Brinkerhoff and many others point out, “local” agency and contextualization are
critical to achieving sustainable development results.[ii]