Explaining CSO Accreditation in Santa Cruz, Laguna

Francis Joseph Dee

The Civil Society Report Card

The Civil Society Report Card (CSRC) survey was administered to fifty (50) respondents from various civil society organizations (CSOs) in Santa Cruz, Laguna to assess CSO satisfaction and relations with the local government unit (LGU) of the municipality. These CSOs represent various sectoral groups in Santa Cruz including farmers, indigenous peoples, urban poor, women, youth, and senior citizens.

Among the respondents, twenty-nine (29) claimed that their respective CSOs were accredited by their corresponding Sangguniang Barangays, while 18 claimed that they were not accredited. (3 did not answer.) Respondents who found the accreditation process difficult noted that there were “too many (maraming) requirements” and that there was a “lack of support from LGUs.”

On the other hand, those who were denied accreditation claimed that “the accreditation process wasn’t finished yet (hindi pa tapos ang process ng accreditation),” “the organization was newly founded (bagong tatag ang organisasyon),” “their application for accreditation was interrupted by calamity (inabot ng calamity ang pagkuha ng accreditation),” or “disunity among the group (hindi nagkakaisa ang grupo).”

Lastly, those who opted not to apply for accreditation gave the following reasons for not doing so: “political affiliation,” being a “private entity,” “still [being] on recruitment phase,” being “accredited already nationally under DSWD,” “lack of financial capabilities,” being “unable to take care of it (hindi maasikaso),” “uselessness of applying for accreditation (walang saysay mag-apply ng accreditation),” “difficulty of accreditation (mahirap magpa-accredit),” lack of “advice or encouragement for accreditation,” “calamity (inabot ng kalamidad),” “members spliting up (naghiwahiwalay na ang member),” and “the leader getting sick (nagkasakit ang lider).”

Accreditation and Satisfaction with Government

Why else wouldn’t CSOs have accreditation?

Flavin and Griffin (2008) find that citizens who are either very satisfied or very dissatisfied with government policies are more likely to be politically involved. They explain that citizens who are very satisfied with government policy participate more as their previous participation yielded favorable results for them, while citizens who are very dissatisfied also participate to roll unfavorable policies back or to prevent even less favorable policies from being passed.

Though the authors measured satisfaction with government through respondents’ policy preferences, it can also be measured through satisfaction with government service. Questions 2a-2n of the CSRC survey asked respondents how satisfied they were with different government services with responses coded using the Likert scale with 1 being “very satisfied” and 5 being “strongly dissatisfied.”

To test whether there is a relationship between respondents’ satisfaction with government and accreditation (a form of political involvement), an index of government satisfaction was calculated for each respondent by computing the average value of their responses to the fourteen questions on satisfaction with government services. A two-tailed t-test was then performed on the indices of respondents whose CSOs had accreditation versus the indices of those whose CSOs were not accredited. Respondents without answers for whether or not their CSOs were accredited or for any of the fourteen questions on satisfaction with government services were removed from the sample, reducing sample size from fifty to thirty-nine.

No significant relationship was found between government satisfaction and accreditation at the 0.05 level of significance. Government satisfaction scores among those whose CSOs had accreditation were statistically similar to the scores of those whose CSOs were not accredited. This affirms most of the aforementioned respondent-generated responses on accreditation as only five responses involve government (“too many requirements,” “lack of support from LGUs,” “the accreditation process wasn’t finished,” “uselessness of applying for accreditation,” and “difficulty of accreditation”).

Accreditation and Perception of Government

Another factor that may affect whether or not CSOs get accredited is political trust, or the degree to which one perceives government as trustworthy.

Li (2008) notes that both high and low levels of political trust can lead to political involvement, finding that high levels of political trust encourages less confrontational forms of political involvement, while low levels of political trust leads to more confrontational forms of involvement.

Question 43 (Q43) of the CSRC survey asked respondents how much they agreed with the statement “I can openly state my complaints and concerns about the local government without having to fear for my safety.” This may be used as an indicator of political trust. Responses were coded using the Likert scale with 1 being “strongly agree,” and 5 being “strongly disagree.”

To test whether there is a relationship between respondents’ political trust and accreditation, a two-tailed t-test was then performed on the responses to Q43 of respondents whose CSOs had accreditation versus the responses of those whose CSOs were not accredited. Respondents without answers for whether or not their CSOs were accredited or for Q43 were removed from the sample, reducing sample size from fifty to forty-three.

No significant relationship was found between responses to Q43 and accreditation at the 0.05 level of significance. Political trust among those whose CSOs had accreditation were statistically similar to the scores of those whose CSOs were not accredited. This affirms both the respondent-generated responses above and the previous finding on government satisfaction and accreditation point to the possibility that factors other than government more strongly affect whether or not CSOs get accredited, at least in the context of Santa Cruz.

Discussion

If government has little effect on whether or not CSOs get accredited, what can be done to encourage accreditation?

Based on respondent-generated responses, organizational development issues seem to be common reasons for difficulty in accreditation (“disunity among the group,” “members splitting up,” “the leader getting sick,” etc.). This apparent need for support for organizational development among CSOs in Santa Cruz may be a demand that the larger non-government organization community can address.

References:

Flavin, Patrick, and John D. Griffin. “Policy, Preferences, and Participation: Government’s Impact on Democratic Citizensihp Citizenship.” The Journal of Politics, 2009: 544-559.

Li, Lianjiang. “Political Trust and Petitioning in the Chinese Countryside.” Comparative Politics, 2008: 209-226.

For the CSRC questionnaire and datasets, please inquire with the Open Heart Foundation, or the Caucus of Development-NGO Networks.

Francis Joseph Dee was one of the participants of the first CODE-NGO’s Young Writer’s Summer Program in May 2013. He stayed with Open Heart Foundation for one week with fellow volunteer Dav Dionisio. He graduated from the University of the Philippines with a degree in BA Political Science (magna cum laude) in 2013. He is currently taking up MSc Political Science and Political Economy at the London School of Economics.