The “N” in NGO

Nongovernmental organizations have been on my radar since I heard a pro-family activist from Ireland describe the array of forces pressing for approval of same-sex marriage—many political leaders, business leaders, some church leaders, and NGOs. Where, I wondered, do these NGOs get their resources? Who is actually funding these efforts?

Robert Wuthnow’s Boundless Faith gives some hints. “By definition,” Wuthnow writes, “NGOs are independent of government,” but that doesn’t express their real status: “the very reason for calling them NGOs is that they typically work closely with government agencies and receive legitimacy from government charters. NGOs usually adopt an administrative structure that resembles government bureaus and often play a role in distributing government funds. Governments . . . sometimes initiate NGOs or bring influence to bear on established NGOs to promote government policies” (118). Even religious NGOs come to the trough. Wuthnow acknowledges that “the lion’s share of faith-based NGO funding continues to be from private sources” but they have relationships with governments that “play an important role in shaping what they do and how they do it” (119).

So, for instance: “World Vision International applied for its first government grant in 1975—over opposition from a few of its leaders, but this marked the start of the organization’s increasing reliance on revenue from government grants” (124). According to a 1981 study, Adventist Development and Relief Agency received 78 percent of its funding from governments; World Relief, 55 percent, and Lutheran World Relief 35 percent (124). In 2003, Catholic Relief Services got 74 percent of its support from government; World Relief was at 50 percent.

Government funding has greatly expanded the reach and activity of NGOs, and Wuthnow sees two other developments accompanying this expansion. First, “faith-based NGOs are no longer segmented within particular denominations or confessional traditions.” Catholics, Adventists, Evangelicals, Lutherans are all competing for the same money, and grands are at times shared among different NGOs – a sort of government-encouraged ecumenism. Second, there has been “an increase in formal reporting requirements,” and developments that makes NGOs “dependent to a much greater degree on being integrated into networks of Washington officials” (134).

Governments don’t give money without strings; there are no free gifts. Wuthnow writes, “For purposes of securing government grants, faith-based NGOs must demonstrate that they are nonsectarian, nonpartisan, effective, and willing to abide by such procedural norms as regularly audited financial reporting” (135). What happens to NGOs who don’t toe the line of government policy on, say, gender equality or sexual orientation? Will the funds dry up? Will NGOs stick with principle or chase the money? 

It’s a clever ruse. NGOs, faith-based or not, can get train loads of money. Governments can advance their policy agendas, but make it look as if the policy advocacy is coming from the grassroots rather than from the top. “We’re just responding to popular will,” say the government officials who gave money to the NGOs who express the popular will to which the officials then respond. It’s a great game for everyone, except for those who oppose the policies being advanced by governments and their non-nongovernmental allies.

To circle back to the original question: Who funds the NGOs who agitated for same-sex marriage in Ireland? The Irish government? Did tax money from traditionalist Irish men and women end up in the bank accounts of Irish NGOs, who used the money to undermine their religious beliefs? Were the NGOs funded by foreign governments – the US government? Perhaps someone has investigated; if not, there’s a story there.