Grantmaking, Social Development

Welfare gets short end of CSI stick

23 February 2010

Not as attractive to some funders as their educational and health counterparts, welfare organsiations are struggling to keep afloat – and this is to SA

Written by Tshikululu’s Learning and Development Manager, Doug Greenshields.

The word “welfare” has different meanings and connotations, especially in the development sector and the social investment context.  There is debate as to whether “welfare” is actually “development” or even part of it.  Nevertheless, in my view, “welfare” falls within what we could call the Social Development sector.  This sector includes entrepreneurship development, skills training and job creation, sustainable livelihoods, community development and welfare. 

In essence, work that happens in the social development sector  represents a progression that begins in a welfare sector that is characterised by a high degree of dependence (those who have lost hope, are disempowered, poverty-stricken, vulnerable, violated and abused) and moves through various community development processes (restoring dignity, self-empowerment and self-worth) to sustainable livelihood programmes (skills training, job creation and economic empowerment), which allow individuals the independence to take control of their lives and to reintegrate themselves into society and the economy.

The basic premise and primary aim of welfare support is to act as a safety net and support mechanism for the most vulnerable in society, to arrest their fall into oblivion, and then to begin a process that restores them back into the mainstream of society, wherever possible.  Even so, I am mindful that there will always be a need for society to provide a humanitarian safety net for those unable to fend for themselves, and who remain at the starting point of the continuum.

In recent times, I have become acutely aware of the powerful forces that are running counter to the interests of welfare funding.  These include changes to international funding priorities, compounded by the global economic situation and, while local CSI spend might have  increased, competition for funding by the different CSI sectors is naturally still fierce, with education and health faring best in this arena.

The sector being most negatively affected is welfare, where the decline in the economy has had a two-fold effect, manifested by a tightening of corporate giving and a rapid inflow of the vulnerable into a contracting welfare net.

Welfare also has its own particular obstacles and these make it especially difficult to work in this sector.  They include a heavy dependence on government subsidies, difficulties establishing monitoring and evaluation criteria, and difficulties in assessing measurable outcomes when compared with other sectors.  In addition, the disappearance of traditional societal support networks, a result of urbanisation and modernisation, and the absence of new social support systems to take their place, has also harmed  the sector.

Tshikululu’s interaction with organisations working in welfare shows that they have adopted various strategies to stave off the effects of diminishing funding.  These include the discontinuation of some projects, the reduction of services, and the development of innovative and more cost-effective interventions.  As this process continues apace, it is alarming  to see how  many of these fine organisations are gradually running down their reserves and, in spite of their best efforts to survive, must eventually be forced to close down.

Yet welfare organisations protect and support the most vulnerable segments of society – the destitute, children, women, the aged, people with disabilities, the abused and victims of violence – and they fulfil a fundamental role in our society.  It isn’t always the most attractive one to funders and company branding, but it is absolutely critical to societal wellbeing and development.  The gradual disappearance of these organisations should concern anyone who cares about South Africa’s future.  With every organisation that disappears, the pressure on those remaining increases and the downward spiral picks up momentum. Once gone, the chances of re-establishing such organisations will be difficult in the extreme.   There are warning signs of an impending crisis in welfare provision, with far-reaching negative consequences.

This needs to be addressed and corporate donors need to step up to the plate.