Introduction
The story of a person with a disability is often one of exclusion and hardship. From struggling to get up the stairs that do not have rails and ramps to finding a job and becoming a contributive member of the society, disabled individuals are forced to show greater mental and emotional fortitude to keep up with the rest (Barclay 2011). Nowadays, there are many government and non-government organizations to help disabled individuals along the way.
The two popular organizational paradigms involve trickle-down effect and grassroots organizations (Biswambhar 2007). The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast these types of organization, highlight their strengths and weaknesses, and analyze how the local legal framework affects their performance, using Spain and the USA as examples.
Strengths and Weaknesses of Trickle-Down vs. Grassroots Approach
Trickle-down approach to organizational development suggests a top-to-bottom approach. The resources are distributed from the top of the organization to its various levels (Tricker 2015). This approach allows for higher levels of accountability. It is typically used in large organizations with a strict hierarchical structure and a number of levels of five or more. When it comes to non-government organizations (NGOs), the trickle-down approach is typically used in organizations founded by wealthy individuals or in those that are directly or indirectly supported by the government. All strategic and financial decision-making is typically done at the top, with the branching lower levels carrying out the orders and decisions of the governing body.
When analyzing such an organization, it is important to note that its structure resembles that of a classic corporation, with top-to-bottom leadership, multiple levels of hierarchy, and managers operating at each level. This structure comes with a set of strengths and weaknesses. One of its primary strengths is in the organization’s centralization (Kluyver 2012). It is capable of undertaking large projects and operating with greater amounts of resources and money. Due to having connections to the government and various wealthy donors, a trickle-down organization is more likely to receive grants and funding from various sponsors, as they would be held accountable for the results.
However, large trickle-down organizations have been criticized for losing touch with reality. Since all decisions are made at the top, based on the information sifted through various hierarchical levels, they may not be very effective or even applicable at the ground level. As a result, the aid delivered by large-scale NGOs is often too little, too late, and too inefficient to make a difference (Florian 2010).
Grassroots organizations, on the other hand, evolve from groups of individuals coming together for a common cause (Don 2017). The majority of modern-day disability NGOs were created that way. Most of them came to be during the 19th-20th centuries, back when the governments were not as preoccupied with welfare concerns as they are now. Grassroots organizations usually are created to solve particular problems found in particular communities.
Its members are tied to these locations and have deep knowledge and understanding of the humanitarian issues present there. Connections to people and places are the primary strengths of grassroots organizations. Its membership is voluntary, meaning that all members are highly motivated to perform and help others. The knowledge of people, places, and issues in the community makes interventions made by grassroots organizations more efficient.
However, this type of community-centered framework has plenty of weaknesses to itself. As it was already mentioned, individuals who care about particular social or humanitarian issues typically form grassroots organizations. However, it does not mean that these individuals have the required levels of training and skill to be able to effectively utilize resources available to them (Constantine et al. 2007).
In addition, most grassroots organizations rarely encompass an area larger than a city. Alliances between different groups are not unheard of, but typically their ties are very loose, making it more difficult to commit to a centralized effort, as a trickle-down organization would. Lastly, grassroots organizations find it hard to compete with trickle-down organizations for funding, as the aforementioned weaknesses (lack of skill, lack of centralization) make them less attractive to large investors.
Examples of Trickle-Down and Grassroots Organizations
Spain has a long tradition of grassroots organizations advocating for disabled individuals. The majority of them were founded shortly after the end of the Spanish Civil War. That war left the country with many people crippled, having lost their sight, hearing, or limbs in the fighting. One of the examples of a grassroots organization gone big is ONCE (Organización Nacional de Ciegos Españoles), which translates as Spanish National Organization of the Blind.
It is one of the largest grassroots organizations in the world, comprised out of 63,000 active members (Member detail 2018). The organization represents a conglomerate of smaller grassroots organizations under one banner. This type of structure enables it to compete for funding and represent the interests of individual communities while remaining as grounded to the reality as possible. However, due to such a large number of members, the majority of local organizations maintain their autonomy, with ONCE’s overarching guidance.
An example of a trickle-down organization is the CERMI (Comite Español Representantes de Personas con Discapacidad), which stands for Spanish representative committee of persons with disabilities. It is an overarching non-government organization that seeks to unite other groups and provides them with a platform to manage cooperative efforts. It also serves as a middle-group between various grassroots NGOs and the government (CERMI 2018). Due to its nature, the group has a trickle-down structure, as it received centralized funding, which is later directed to various other NGOs.
American examples of trickle-down and grassroots organizations include Mobility International USA (MIUSA) and Advocacy on the Margins. MIUSA is an influential and powerful organization that receives frequent support from the US Government (MIUSA 2018). Although it started as a grassroots organization created by two women with disabilities, it later expanded and grew to include an office in every state and even outside the country.
It became a trickle-down organization to be able to effectively manage efforts and resources on such a large scale. Advocacy on the Margins, on the other hand, remains a relatively small grassroots organization that focuses on advocacy efforts rather than simply providing aid to communities in need (IDA 2018). Founded and supported by more than 18 academics in gender and social studies, they present their reports on various assemblies in order to attract attention to the problems of disability and gender inequality (Liasidou 2013). This type of organization is not attached to a particular location, but rather specializes in a list of specific issues.
Policies and Principles that Affect Disability Advocacy NGOs in Spain and the USA
Both countries have policies in place that help regulate NGOs in the legal field. The majority of these policies are related to accounting, funding, and responsible management of donated resources. In the USA, there is no single law that regulates the creation of NGOs, as they vary from one state to another. Nevertheless, the majority of them are relatively simple, and allow creating NGOs for virtually any cause, political goal, religion, or purpose (U.S. Department of State 2018). Under the US law, NGOs are exempt from taxes unless they play a partisan political role. They are protected under the Bill of Rights from the government imposing on their freedom of speech. While foreign funding is allowed, it is regulated by the Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, which is a disclosure act.
Several laws and statutes, such as the Constitutional Law 1/2002 and the Royal Decree 1497/2003, regulate Spanish NGOs. These laws provide conditions largely similar to the US laws, with some key differences. Although the Spanish law does not have any direct laws against foreign funding, it requires full disclosure of assets and their spending. NGOs that wish to be exempted from taxes are required to adhere to at least two of the three following criteria (Velasco 2010):
- Total assets of the organization cannot exceed 150,000 euros;
- The average number of employees cannot exceed five;
- Annual revenue is less than 150,000 euros.
Conclusion
Impact of Laws on NGOs
As it is possible to see, both governments are making efforts to simplify registration and provide financial incentives for communities to create NGOs. Tax exemptions in the USA benefit large, trickle-down organizations, which manage large amounts of resources. At the same time, FARA is a very limited instrument of holding these organizations accountable, which resulted in numerous scandals about American NGOs serving as political tools. In Spain, on the other hand, laws seek to protect small grassroots organizations, while not offering tax exemptions for large trickle-down NGOs. It is the reason why a large grassroots organization such as ONCE remains a coalition of smaller organizations, in order to maintain tax exemption.
Reference List
Barclay, L 2011, ‘Justice and disability: what kind of theorizing is needed?’, Journal of Social Philosophy, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 273-287.
Biswambhar, P 2007, ‘Top down or bottom Up? A study of grassroots NGOs approach’, Journal of Health Management, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 257-273.
CERMI 2018, Statutes. Web.
Constantine, MG, Hage, SM, Kindaichi, MM, & Briant RM 2007, ‘Social justice and multicultural issues: implications for the practice and training of counselors and counseling psychologists’, Journal of Counseling & Development, vol. 85, pp. 24-29.
Don, J 2017, Corporate governance, Emerald Publishing, London.
Florian, L 2010, ‘Special education in an era of inclusion: the end of special education or a new beginning?’, The Psychology of Education Review, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 22-29.
IDA 2018, Advocacy on the margins: women with disabilities addressing violence at the grassroots level. Web.
Kluyver, CA 2012, Corporate governance. Saylor Academy, New York.
Liasidou, A 2013, ‘Intersectional understandings of disability and implications for a social justice reform agenda in education policy and practice’, Disability & Society, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 299-312.
Member detail: Spanish National Organization of the Blind. 2018. Web.
MIUSA 2018, History. Web.
ONCE 2018, Introduction. Web.
Tricker, B 2015, Corporate governance: principles, policies, and practices, 3rd edn, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
U.S. Department of State 2018, Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the United States. Web.
Velasco, MT 2010, How to create a non profit organization in Spain and its taxation. Web.