Global Affairs Canada (GAC) Statistics on Civil Society Organizations Updated as of June 2016

Transcription

1 Global Affairs Canada (GAC) Statistics on Civil Society Organizations Updated as of June 2016

2 Ten Key Messages 1. Multilateral support from GAC remains strong; civil society support is medium, and bilateral is weak Whereas support to multilateral institutions has shown a steep increase over the past decade, support to foreign and Cdn civil society has shown only a slight increase, and to bilateral governments it has shown a slight decline. 2. Support to civil society has increased since 2012/13 Support to all civil society and just Cdn CSOs has shown a steady increase since 2012/13, ending four years of steady decline. Cdn CSOs receive the majority of funding relative to foreign 80% on average; that said, the amount and percentage of total funding foreign CSOs receive has increased over the past two years. 2

3 Ten Key Messages Despite the recent jump in support since 2012/13, support to Cdn civil society has yet to return to the 2008/09 peak of $690.2 mn. Furthermore, if you exclude humanitarian funding to Cdn CSOs, the period from 2012/13 continues to show a gradual decline for Cdn CSOs. 3. Support to all CSOs as a percentage of total funding has also increased since 2011/12 While support to all civil society has only increased in monetary terms in the last two fiscal years, CSO support as a percentage of total funding has been increasing since 2011/12 from 18.3% (15.1% for Cdn CSOs) to 24.7% (18.9% for Cdn CSOs). 3

4 Ten Key Messages 4. Multilateral Branch and Geographic Branch now provide more support to CSOs than Partnership In 2013/14, support to CSOs from Multilateral Branch rose $130 mn from the last year (from $225.3 to $355.5 mn); funding from Geographic Branch grew by $50 mn (from $224.9 mn to $277.2 mn). That year, both surpassed Partnership Branch ($210.1 mn). Geographic ($268.9 mn) and Multilateral ($369.5 mn) stayed high the next year; Partnership dropped further to $175.1 mn. Support to Cdn CSOs followed suit. In 2014/15, Multilateral provided $250.7 mn to Cdn CSOs (or 38.6% of funding); Geographic provided $212.6 mn (or 32.7% of funding); and Partnership provided $173.3mn (or 26.7%) a ten year low. 4

5 Ten Key Messages 5. Core funding continues to decline Two organizations received core funding in 2014/15, down from 17 in 2005/2006. All core funding came from Multilateral Branch. In 2013/14, Global Affairs Canada began tracking funding in different ways, making it impossible to identify trends around core, responsive and directive funding. 6. Support for CSOs working in Africa continues to increase Between 2005/06 and 2014/15, most funding to Canadian CSOs was allocated to programs in Africa, continuing a general upward trend. Funding for Canadian CSOs in Asia shows a gradual decline, with surges in funding in response to disasters in the region; support to CSOs in the Americas continues on its steady decline since 2009/10. 5

6 Ten Key Messages 7. The number of countries in which CSOs are active is levelling off. Following a sharp decline in the number of countries where CSOs were active between 2008/09 and 2010/11, numbers are levelling off at around 70 countries. 8. The number of Cdn CSOs being supported is showing a rapid decrease, but amount of funding per org is increasing. The number of funded Cdn CSOs steadily declined from a peak of 486 in 2006/07 to 181 in 2014/15. Cdn CSOs receiving less than $100k declined even faster over the same period from 196 to 25. Perhaps not surprisingly, the average amount of funding organizations receive is increasing, biased in part by a few big winners the top three CSOs in 2014/15 got 21% of the funding. 6

7 Ten Key Messages 9. Only the top countries where CSOs work align with the government s top priorities In 2014/15, only the top four countries where CSOs were most active were in-line with the top twenty countries where GAC was allocating its spending, with very little correlation otherwise. 10. Humanitarian, health, education and food security rank highly In 2014/15, top allocations to Canadian CSOs were in humanitarian assistance (30.6%), health (17.9%), education (13.6%), and agriculture, forestry and fishing (11.1%). Material relief assistance and services ($153 mn), basic nutrition ($62 mn), and emergency food aid ($22 mn) remained the top three sectors funded, as in the previous fiscal year. 7

8 Canadian Dollars GAC funding: Organization type $3,000,000,000 $2,500,000,000 $2,000,000,000 $1,500,000,000 $1,000,000,000 $500,000,000 $0 2005/ / / / / / / / / /15 Multilateral Civil Society Gov'tal (incl. paragovt'al) Private Sector Other Unless otherwise indicated, all charts and statistics are derived from GAC ODA Historical Data Sets 2005/06 to 14/15, compiled by CCIC, June Data from 2005/06 to 2012/13 is for the Canadian International Development Agency; for 2013/14 to 2014/15 is for the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development. In 2014/15, overall GAC funding to foreign & Cdn CSOs peaked at $848.0 mn or 24.6% of total spending for that year the highest level in a decade; After a period of relative stagnation from 2009/10 to 2012/13, in the last two fiscal years funding to foreign and Cdn CSOs has increased by $159.9 mn or 23.2%. 8

9 Canadian Dollars GAC funding: Foreign vs. Cdn $900,000,000 $800,000,000 $700,000,000 $600,000,000 $500,000,000 Foreign Non-Profit Making Canadian Non- Profit Making $400,000,000 $300,000,000 $200,000,000 $100,000,000 $0 2005/ / / / / / / / / /15 Cdn CSOs receive the majority of CSO funding averaging 80.6% in the last five years. Funding to Foreign CSOs has been increasing both as an amount (since 2009/10) and as a percentage (above 20% since 2012/13) of total CSO funding peaking at $198.3 mn or 23.4% in 2014/15 9

10 Canadain dolars GAC funding: Cdn CSOs $800,000,000 $700,000,000 $600,000,000 $534,320,617 $525,800,872 $507,939,461 $500,000,000 $400,000,000 $690,162,854 $620,390,071 $583,376,972 $558,965,630 $542,220,464 $673,083,798 $649,747,704 Canadian Non-Profit Making Canadian Non-Profit Making (minus Universities and Colleges) $300,000,000 $200,000,000 $100,000,000 $0 2005/ / / / / / / / / /15 Despite the continued rise in funding to all CSOs, GAC funding to Cdn CSOs peaked at $673.1 mn in 2013/14, and has dropped slightly since. This is still below the 2008/09 peak of $690.2 mn, which subsequently saw four years of steady decline until 2012/13 when funding hit a low of $542.2 mn. 10

11 Canadian Dollars (Millions) $900 $800 Comparing Different Levels of CSO funding Civil Society $700 $600 Grand Total Canadian CSOs $500 $400 $300 Total Canadians CSOs minus Humanitarian Assistance $200 $100 $0 2005/ / / / / / / / / /15 Funding to CSOs is showing an upward trend, after a four year decline from 2008/09. The upward trend is biased by the increase in support to both foreign CSOs and a large increase in funding to humanitarian CSOs; when humanitarian funding is excluded, 11 support to Canadian CSOs shows a continued gradual decline.

12 Percentage GAC funding to CSOs as a percentage of total spending 30.00% 25.00% 26.05% 24.66% 20.00% 21.78% 18.33% 18.89% CSO as a percentage of Total 15.00% 15.13% Canadian CSOs as a percentage of Total 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 2005/ / / / / / / / / /15 While support to civil society has only increased in monetary terms in the last two fiscal years, CSO support as a percentage of total funding has been increasing since 2011/12 albeit still below the peak it hit in 2008/09. Foreign CSOs (6.33%) have seen a higher percentage growth than Cdn (3.76%). 12

13 Canadian dollars All CSOs - allocations by branch $400,000,000 $350,000,000 $300,000,000 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 Multilateral and Global Programs Branch Geographic Program Branch Partnership with Canadians $150,000,000 Strategic Policy and Performance $100,000,000 $50,000,000 $0 2005/ / / / / / / / / /15 In keeping with the increased support to humanitarian CSOs, support to foreign and Cdn CSOs has shown a notable increase from Multilateral Branch since 2012/13; it has also shown increases from Geographic Branch since 2011/12. Partnership Branch has shown a steady decline in support to CSOs since 2011/12. 13

14 Canadian dollars Cdn CSOs - allocations by branch $300,000,000 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 Multilateral and Global Programs Branch Geographic Program Branch $150,000,000 $100,000,000 Partnership with Canadians Strategic Policy and Performance $50,000,000 $0 2005/ / / / / / / / / /15 Funding by branch to Cdn CSOs has followed the same trend as to all CSOs, with a rise in support from Multilateral and Geographic Branches, and a decline from Partnership 14

15 Highs and lows in GAC funding to all CSOs (Cdn CSOs) by branch Support from Partnership Branch to all CSOs hit a peak in 2011/12 of $239.4mn (and $235.5 mn in 2012/13 for Cdn CSOs), with a historic low in 2014/15 of $175.2 mn ($173.3 mn for Cdn CSOs); From Multilateral Branch, funding to CSOs hit a peak in 2014/15 of $369.5 mn ($253.3 mn in 2013/14 to Cdn CSOs), largely due to a leap in funding to Syria and Iraq and the surrounding area; funding from Multilateral hit its lowest level of $161.0 mn in 2005/06 to all CSOs ($83.2 mn to Cdn CSOs in 2006/07). From Geographic Branch, funding hit a peak in 2008/09 of $322.0 mn ($274.6 mn to Cdn CSOs), with a low in 2011/12 of $213.5 mn ($165.5 mn to Cdn CSOs). 15

16 Percentage Cdn CSO allocations by branch as a percentage 100% 90% 19.61% 16.37% 17.89% 80% 27.06% 35.55% 29.55% 28.29% 25.62% 37.63% 38.58% *Office for Democratic Governance 70% 60% 39.84% 50% 38.80% 41.42% 39.79% 29.14% 33.88% 29.61% 30.91% Strategic Policy and Performance Multilateral and Global Programs Branch 40% 31.47% 32.72% Geographic Program Branch 30% Partnership with Canadians 20% 39.09% 10% 43.50% 38.48% 31.16% 35.30% 36.57% 42.07% 43.43% 30.91% 26.68% 0% 2005/ / / / / / / / / /15 As of 2014/15, Partnership Branch accounted for 26.68% of total Cdn CSO funding a drop of 16.75% relative to 2012/13. The drop has been picked up by a slight rise in Geographic branch (1.81%) and an even larger rise in Multilateral (12.96%) over the same time period. 16

17 Percentage Cdn CSO allocations funding type 100% 90% 80% 70% Uncoded 73.32% 60% 78.84% 78.35% 86.39% 87.19% 87.87% 88.08% 88.30% CSO Responsive 50% CSO Directive 40% 30% 55.76% CSO Core Funding 42.97% 20% 14.16% 10.11% 8.87% 10% 12.52% 11.05% 12.78% 0% 5.80% 6.43% 6.68% 6.92% 6.04% 7.81% 6.38% 5.46% 5.00% 4.63% 4.93% 3.81% 8.17% 8.46% With the increase in uncoded funding in 2013/14, it is difficult to make further concrete analysis; uncoded marks a shift from tracking type of funding to programming processes. 17

18 Some trends in GAC funding of CSOs by type of funding Old allocation types The vast majority of CIDA funding remains responsive, although calls-for-proposal are included as a responsive mechanism. While core funding has grown as a percentage of the total type of funding to CSOs, only two organizations actually received core funding (over $1mn) in 2014/15, down from 16 in 2005/06: Micronutrient Initiative ($30 mn) and Canadian Foodgrains Bank ($25 mn). In 2014/15, 100% of core funding (over $1 mn) came from Global Issues and Development Branch (former Multilateral). 18

19 Some trends in GAC funding of CSOs by type of funding New allocation types In 2013/14, DFATD/GAC moved away from tracking funding types to programming processes. The programming process maps four types of funding: 1. Non-Aid: Foreign Affairs & Trade Grants & Contributions 2. Open Track: a) Call for Proposals; b) Request for Proposals 3. Targeted Track: a) Institutional Support; b) Department- Initiated; c) Humanitarian Response; d) Unsolicited Proposal 4. Uncoded: Pre-APP With two years of data, it impossible to analyze any trends 19

20 US dollars (millions) Commitments and disbursements to CSOs 1,200 1,000 Commitments 800 Gross Disbursements Source: OECD Creditor Reporting System, accessed January 2014 According to OECD figures, commitments to CSOs saw a steep decrease in 2012, with a rapid return to 2011 levels by 2014 OECD figures, however, show that actual disbursements have been leveling off since

21 2005/ / / / / / / / / /15 Canadian dollars Cdn CSO funding by continent $350,000,000 $300,000,000 $250,000,000 Civil War (Sudan) Sichuan Earthquake (China), Cyclone Nargis (Burma), Humanitarian Response (Sri Lanka and Afghanistan) Typhoon Haiyan (Philippines), Humanitarian response (Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan) $200,000,000 Haiti earthquake Africa $150,000,000 Americas Asia $100,000,000 Europe $50,000,000 Oceania $0 Uncoded For the past decade, funding to Cdn CSOs working in Africa has typically been higher than any other region; funding to CSOs in Asia has generally been declining, with the exception of peaks in 2008/09 and 2013/2014 in response to humanitarian crises; funding towards the Americas has seen steady decline since 2009/10. 21

22 Number of Countries where Cdn CSOs are active (over $500k) The number of countries where Cdn CSOs are active gradually declined from 2005/06 onwards, levelling of in 2010/11 to around

23 Number of organizations 600 Number of Cdn CSOs receiving funding Number of Cdn CSOs receiving GAC funding Number of Cdn CSOs receiving GAC funding (Partnership Branch) Number of Cdn CSOs receiving CIDA funding less than $100k / / / / / / / / / /15 The total number of Cdn CSOs receiving funding has seen a steady and rapid decline since 2005/06, from 485 then to 181 in 2014/15. While the number of CSOs has declined by 63% in the last ten years (43% in the past five), it has been even steeper among CSOs receiving less than 100k: 87% and 68%. 23

24 Canadian dollars Median and average amount received by Cdn CSOs $4,000,000 $3,500,000 Average amount $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 Average amount minus the top recipient Median amount $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 2005/ / / / / / / / / /15 The average amount and median of funding to Cdn CSOs continue to rise. The significant difference between average and median (especially since 2012/13) signals large amount of funding to a few organizations, biasing the average. For example, in 2014/15, the top three funded CSOs received 21.1% of funding. 24

25 Top 20 GAC-funded countries Total Funding (2014/15) 1. Afghanistan $188,373,998 * 2. Mali $133,419,449 * 3. South Sudan $122,201,887 * 4. Ethiopia $107,168,648 * 5. Iraq $105,087, Tanzania $100,360,200 * 7. Ukraine $99,097,285 * 8. Jordan $82,637,020 * 9. Mozambique $81,694,585 * 10. Ghana $69,624,229 * 11. Bangladesh $69,593,476 * 12. Haiti $65,780,157 * 13. Senegal $65,351,004 * 14. Syria $61,817, Kenya $44,790, Lebanon $43,921, Pakistan $43,651, DR Congo $38,914,942 * 19. Colombia $37,553, Nigeria $31,298,022 * Countries of Focus 25

26 1. Iraq $37,425,268 (5) 2. Ethiopia $31,168,287 (4) * 3. Afghanistan $26,312,515 (1) * 4. Mali $26,228,135 (2) * 5. Ukraine $23,034,240 (7) * 6. Haiti $22,827,784 (12) * 7. Jordan $19,691,652 (8) * 8. Colombia $19,400,395 (19) * 9. Tanzania $18,150,991 (6) * 10. South Sudan $16,082,746 (3) * 11. Senegal $15,469,539 (13) * Top 20 countries by Cdn CSO funding (2014/15) 12. Lebanon $14,204,280 (16) 13. Pakistan $14,112,246 (17) 14. Ghana $13,895,849 (10) * 15. Bolivia $12,454,300 (32) 16. Kenya $11,818,237 (15) 17. Philippines $11,164,027 * 18. Peru $10,914,861 (30) * 19. DR Congo $9,690,276 (18) * 20. Syria $9,457,848 (14) (Overall GAC ranking) 26

27 Some trends in GAC funding of CSOs by country In 2014/15, four of the top five countries where CSOs were most active were in-line with the top five countries where GAC was allocating its spending (Afghanistan, Mali, Ethiopia, and Iraq). Otherwise, there was very little correlation between the top countries where CSOs are operating, and overall GAC country spending CSOs have different priority countries; Thirteen (13) of the top 20 GAC funded countries are countries of focus; for Cdn CSOs, it is 14 of the top 20 where they are active. In 2014/15, Canada was 41 st in terms of countries receiving GAC funding (21 st in terms of funding to CSOs or $9,296,445). Just under half of this, or $4.0mn, went to promoting development awareness; of which $2.7mn went to the Provincial and Regional Councils. 27

28 Cdn CSO funding by sector (2014/15 DAC codes) Other aid expenditures 1.6% Education 13.6% Humanitarian assistance 30.6% Health 17.9% Mutlisecto r aid 1.6% Environmental protection Trade 0.9% 1.1% Industry 3.6% Agriculture, forestry and fishing 11.1% Infrastructure and services 6.6% Government and civil society 7.5% Conflict prevention/resolution, peace and security 0.7% Population policies/programs and reproductive health 1.8% Water supply and sanitation 1.3% Top allocations to Cdn CSOs were in humanitarian assistance (30.6%), health (17.9%), education (13.6%), agriculture, forestry, and fishing (11.1%), and government and civil society (7.5%). 28

29 Percentage 35.00% 30.00% 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% 2012/ / /15 Support for humanitarian assistance has seen a huge rise over the past two years (from below 20% to now above 30%); during that time, government and civil society have seen a steady decline (-26%), as have population policies (37%) and environmental 29 protection (34%).

30 Top 12 areas of Cdn CSO funding 1. Material relief assistance and services - $153,274, Basic nutrition - $62,825, Emergency food aid - $22,500, Basic health care - $16,478, Business support services - $16,159, Higher education- $15,571, Democratic participation - by sector in 2014/15 $15,563, Vocational training - $14,898, Primary education $14,661, Agricultural development - $14,185, Health personnel development - $12,632, Relief co-ordination; protection and support services $12,149,366 30

31 Some trends in GAC funding of Cdn CSOs by sector Material relief assistance and services ($153 mn), basic nutrition ($62 mn), emergency food aid ($22 mn) remain the top three sectors funded, as was the case in the previous fiscal year. Basic health care ($16 mn) moved up the ranks from #6 to #4, and business support ($16 mn) services moved up from #8 to #5. Democratic participation ($15 mn) has dropped off slightly, but still remained in the top 12. Agricultural development ($12 mn) dropped from #5 to #10. Public sector policy and administrative management, food crop production, and human rights dropped out of the top twelve. 31