Table 9: Capacities for improving the practice of transparent funding of CSOs from the LGU budgets Strong capacities Capacities to be strengthened PROMOTION of transparent funding High level of motivation. Space, mobility, CSO members. Legal framework Years of experience of the organization. CSO network at the Republic level Collaboration with local media. Human resources; collaboration with LGUs Technical equipment. Improvement of collaboration with LGUs. Continuous trainings, education and strengthening of the CSO members. CSO networking at local level. Mentoring; Non-financial support (lack of offices); Lack of operational means and no partner relations with LGUs Knowledge of legislation; MONITORING of transparent funding Work experience Membership and employees (human resources). Expert knowledge. Good practices examples High level of motivation of CSO members Support and networking with other CSOs Technical equipment. Continuous trainings, education and strengthening of the CSO members. Cooperation with LGU representatives Legal regulations (monitoring and exploring relevant regulations) ADVOCACY of transparent funding Personnel qualifications. High level of motivation. Years of experience of the organization in advocacy. Understanding the legislation and guidelines in work of CSOs and good relations with LGU. Trust from the general public; support by the LGU Technical equipment. Continuous trainings, education and strengthening of the CSO members. Collaboration with institution at the Republic level (Government of the RS). CSO networking at local level. Lack of financial support Strong capacities Capacities to be strengthened _____________________________ (other processes in improving transparent funding) Contracting. Creativity and professional competence in art, where the transparency can be taught through seminars Higher inclusion, as much trainings as possible. Promotion
Table 12: “What support from TACSO Serbia and the Office for Cooperation with Civil Society would be important for your organization in the process of improving the practice in transparent funding of CSOs from LGU budget?” Category Number of answers Mentors’ support to CSOs in planning and implementation of the process 19 Organizing workshop for the exchange of “good practices” of CSOs active in this field with other organizations from Serbia 16 Organizing workshop on transparent funding where the participants would be representatives of CSOs and LGUs / The results of the overall evaluation (completed evaluation questionnaire and questionnaires for self-assessment), indicate that the seminar has met the planned objectives, that the level of participant satisfaction was very high and that a mild progress in their knowledge on the seminar topics has been achieved. However, it is indispensable to continue further education, especially joint education with representatives of LGUs, as well as to continue with the support to the networking of civil society organizations at all levels. According to the participants, support to the networking is needed in the form of group trainings and as mentoring with the individual CSOs. “Lessons learned” and recommendations for future activities “Lessons learned” “Lessons learned” are grouped in four categories: Level of knowledge and understanding of the legal framework in transparent funding; Capacities for promotion, advocacy and monitoring of transparent funding from LGU budget; Willingness of CSOs to network at the local level in the field of transparent funding of CSOs from LGU budgets; Cooperation with LGU representatives. (1) Level of knowledge and understanding of the legal framework in transparent funding. Based on the entire communication with the participants of the training, it can be concluded that this group of selected representatives of CSOs on average insufficiently follows the legal framework relevant for the work of CSOs, including legal framework for their funding. The problem is not the lack of understanding of this framework, but a relatively high level of ignorance at a larger number of participants. It can also be concluded that in three out of five training sessions held, there was a clear polarization between a small number of representatives of expert CSOs and CSOs with long experience in activism and advocacy committed to resolving specific problems, on the one hand, and the other representatives of civil society organizations, on the other. The first group was informed and monitors the legal framework, while the other group is passive, has low awareness of the opportunities and