Home Ministry figures on NGOS in India

[Guest guest]

FCRA Act ie foreign contributions regulations act 1976 - To read 2002- 03 Report

published by the Ministry of Home Affairs that gives total contributions recd

from abroad by NGO's in India and more

http://mha.nic.in/fcra/annual/summary_2002_2003.pdf

Highlights -

1. Total contributions received by NGO's in India during the year

2002-03 was Rs 5046 crs.

2. Highest state is Delhi 881 crs, Tamil Nadu 775 crs and Andhra

Pradesh 630 crs in that order.

3. Largest donor countries are U.S.A 1680 crs, Germany 715 crs and

U.K.683 crs in that order.

4. Leading Donors were Ford Foundation U.S.A 122crs, World Vision International

U.S.A 90 crs, Foundation Spain 90 crs.

5. Largest recepients of contributions were World Vision Tamil Nadu

98 crs, Rural Development Trust Andhra 80 crs and Sri Sathya Baba

Trust Andhra 60 crs.

6. The top recepient district was Chennai 363 crs, Bangalore 358

crs, Mumbai 284 crs.

Trends - 1993-94 receipts 1865 crs, 1999-2000 3924 crs, 2002-03 5046

crs. Wonder what is the figure of contributions recd through non-

banking channels ie HAWALA.

Analysis

1. U.S. & German govts are the top donor countries. In Germany they pay a

income tax to the Church.

2. Tamil Nadu and Andhra seem to be the focus of missionary activity.

3. Ford Foundation - wonder if we can have a report of how it utilized the

money in India.

4. World Vision International is the premier Christian NGO and top

receiver of funds from abroad.

5. Chennai is an area of focus for foreign funds.

6. Christian NGOs dominate the list of top receipts of foreign

funds.

7. There are only 3 Muslim associations amongst the top recepients

1 is Saifee Hospital Mumbai, 2 is Aga Khan foundation Delhi.

It is suspected that much unaccounted money comes through Hawala.

This is to disabuse many people on this list and others that HIV/AIDS gets too

much funding. In fact, even though we are in a state of health crisis, there is

only a trickle coming for HIV/AIDS

prevention even from the Bill and Milinda Gates Foundation (BMGF)or the World

Bank or bilaterals.

In India, it pays to be involve yourself in lots of religious mumbo-jumbo.The

gods get lots of money.

For us human beings there is always HIV/AIDS.

Ashok Row Kavi

Mumbai

E-mail: <arowkavi@...>

[Guest guest]

Dear Forum,

Well, I was intrigued to see this kind of an analysis by Ashok Row

Kavi and post it in an international forum with an aggressive tone on

the religious institutions. First and foremost, let me question his

claim that " HIV/AIDS does NOT get lot of funding " as revealed in the

Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Report 2002–03,

http://mha.nic.in/fcra/annual/summary_2002_2003.pdf

A careful look at the report reveals that it gives receipts

of " foreign " contribution. Now let us define this " foreign " as

Government of India defines it under section 2(1)(e)(ii) of the

Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976. According to this

definition, the entire United Nations System (UNDP, UNIFEM, UNICEF,

UNAIDS, UNFPA, UNDCP, UNESCO, ILO, WHO just to name a few); the

entire World Bank Group (IMF, IDA); Regional Development Banks (ADB

type); and " Other International Organisations " ARE NOT covered under

the definition of " foreign source, "

http://mha.nic.in/fcra/intro/exempt.htm Hence, to my mind, any money

received by the NGOs from these organisations, has been excluded from

the calculation of " foreign funding. " I wonder whether SIDA, NORAD,

DANIDA, GTZ, DFID, EU, USAID, CIDA, AUSAid, and a host of other

institutions are covered under the definition of " Other International

Organisations " and hence, by definition, they are also excluded from

the calculation of foreign funding under Section 2(1)(e)(ii) of the

FCRA 1976.

My guess is that, this is probably the case that MHA Report lists

only contributions from those international organisations that are

considered as " foreign. " If this is the case, then you would wonder

how much money HIV received as a single component from these donors!!

Where did all the money go, that is a separate question and I do not

want to raise it here. But if this is not the case, then I seriously

need to recalculate my figures of " foreign funding " received on

HIV/AIDS in India. Singhal and Rodgers (Combating AIDS, Sage, New

Delhi, 2003) reported about 300 million dollars of foreign funding

being available to India for combating AIDS, which in comparison to

other health sector were 20-50 times (upto 100 times) higher at that

time. My belief, situation has gone worse since 2002 with " new

players " being initiated in the act of delivering HIV prevention and

care services. And you would wonder HIV/AIDS is now a buzzword among

NGO-industry in India.

My second reaction is to Mr. Kavi's comment on religious institutions

that " it pays to be involve yourself in lots of religious mumbo-

jumbo... " Yes, it indeed pays, because there is no " male–homosexist–

supremacist discourse " for homosexualising a nation in religious

institutions and hence, they act as a " protective factor " as far as

AIDS epidemic is concerned. Whether the " Gods get a lot of money " (as

you say) that is yet to be proved in view of the above question that

I raise. But for " us human beings " HIV/AIDS will be there for a few

more years before it takes the fate of other development issues over

the last 30 years.

Sincerely

Subir K. Kole

Research Fellow, East–West Center

1601 East-West Road

Honolulu, HI, USA

E-mail: <subirkole@...>