Transparency and Accountability of NGOs in Managing Corporate Social Funds

Become a foundation to operate community development and empowerment funds of selected corporate, of course there are many challenges not only in implementing programs but at a strategic level, especially in relation to the public at local, national, and international levels. Non-Government Organization (NGO) has a big responsibility to ensure that the implementation of all activities can run according to the expectations of stakeholders, especially corporate as the main donor. Strategically, implementing a development and empowerment program has challenges in proving from the planning stage to implementation and evaluation. NGO has the challenge of ensuring that all stages are carried out in a transparent and accountable manner. This study aims to look strategically at the standards of transparency and accountability and what the general condition of NGO is regarding these standards. This research was conducted qualitatively through interviews, group discussions, and other related literature references to obtain various information from documents, literature, NGO and corporate management level personnel. Research using the Kepner Tregoe method aims to obtain current conditions, why this happened, recommendations that need to be given, and plan ahead. Transparency and Accountability are two of the various indicators that are really needed as proof to the public starting from beneficiaries, donors, government, and other stakeholders at the local, national and international levels. NGO’s success in carrying out programs and activities in a transparent and accountable manner will provide very influential results and impacts not only to the beneficiary community, but also to the company as donors to ensure a good corporate reputation from a social aspect.

Introduction

According to Diez, companies must perform its CSR communication activity in a reliable, understandable, and timely which is called transparency manner. Through that process, there will be better result in a positive way to increase company reputation (Diezet al., 2018). Above journal stating that transparency is important for company reputation especially in relation with CSR implementation.

According to Carroll, accountability become important mechanism to get better company reputation, and when company fail to manage its accountability, it will lead to unsuccessful corporate reputation (Carroll & Olegario, 2020). This journal provides us further confirmation that corporate reputation and accountability have real and close connection.

Based on Keating journal, there is three issues related between NGO, trust and accountability. First, accountability will lead to trust. Second, trust become main point between donors and NGOs that received the funds. Third, mismanagement of accountability will result to trust issue at the NGOs to manage donors’ fund (Keating & Thrandardottir, 2017). Above journal stating again that accountability have relation with trust, donors, and NGOs as implementor. Above 3 (three) journals show the important of transparency and accountability in NGO implementation that able to support the donors/company reputation from social responsibility aspect.

As corporate, PTXY effort to have the best strategy and implementation from social responsibility aspect through CA (Community Affairs) Division. CA Division have goal to keep reducing PTXY role and increasing government and community role. To achieve that, CA Division create a vision and mission which one of them related with Transparency and Accountability of using the social investment fund. Those standards and regulations of Transparency and Accountability coming from Government and Civil Society Organization. PTXY choose an NGO called NGO-AK to manage its corporate social funds. The agreement which is called Donor Agreement between PTXY and NGO-AK become the legal document for PTXY provide grants to NGO-AK for community development and empowerment surround PTXY working and impacted area. This agreement has taken place since year 2019. From the current symptoms and conditions from year 2019 until 2022, we can see that there are some gaps/differences that happen between PTXY standards and NGO-AK implementation. That’s where this journal will take places which is to find out where’s the general standards, where’s the gaps and how to manage the gaps by reducing and or eliminating. Those activity required involvement from NGO-AK Boards and CA Division management to keep improve and enhancing NGO-AK programs to communities especially for the significant program (Health, Economy, and Education). The questions of this journal are:

1. What are the standards for social investment fund accountability and transparency?

2. What differences exist between the standard and the implementation of NGO-AK in terms of transparency and accountability?

3. Why did the disparities occur, and how did they occur?

4. How, who, and when should various actions be taken by all parties to mitigate and even get rid of the root cause of the differences that now exist?

How NGO-AK may improve afterwards implementations with standard advancements?

The objectives of this journal are:

1. To provide the requirement for transparency and accountability in the social investment fund.

2. To identify the discrepancies at NGO-AK between standard and implementation.

3. To identify the core reasons of the discrepancies that exist.

4. To formulate a comprehensive, responsible, and open strategic action plan.

5. To create a strategy for any standard advancements and the capacity to comply.

Literature Review

When a company working well, there will be large amount of profit generate from those company. There are several ways for company to channeling their profit and one of them is through Corporate Social Responsibility. There is output and outcome for this contribution to society surround to have better life and increase happiness. Through NonProfit Organizations, the process of corporate social responsibility from company can be happen (Islam, 2015). NPO (NonProfit Organizations) is the one of the best ways for company to deliver its social investment fund to the impacted community surround, beneficiary, and stakeholders. This is also part of company to provide contribution to the world today and in the future through NPO or usually people known as NGO (Non-Government Organization).

According to journal by Clarke stated in his article in 2018 there was an Oxfam scandal that involved INGOs (International Non-Government Organizations) which become the shifting moment for all NGOs to become an institution that transparent and accountable in the form of quality, inclusive and management (Clarkeet al., 2021). This is showing to us the important of accountability and transparency in NGO. Without any shifting to the new form, there will be a problem with trust from donors or funders to the NGO.

There has been considerable research on the importance of transparency. According to Liu, transparency become significant influence for corporate social responsibility effectiveness. Today fact show that corporate social responsibility level for transparency is still low. Therefore, public current request for better performance related with transparency. The goal and ideal situation when corporate social responsibility program was managed through high transparency (Liuet al., 2023) Albarracin pointed out related with low accountability and transparency from Non-Profit Organizations that occurred in Spain. Due to this situation, companies must ensure that transparency should become significant aspect when making strategy, including when providing the information and in implementation (Albarracin-Morenoet al., 2021).

Several journal below, showing to us some indicators of transparency. Openness should become part of transparency in the meaning of the availability and accessibility to information (Wyatt, 2018). Clarity in reporting able to enhance the transparency. In healthcare system, it can be perform using real-time information (Patornoet al., 2020). There are three important items which is audited financial statements, CSR or ESG reports, and annual reports. Those reports should be available as part of transparency in reporting (Brookset al., 2022). The availability of data and the accuracy of data become indicators to have the reliability management. This becomes a transparent way to assess the characteristics, scope and indicator related (Heylenet al., 2018). Accessibility to any available public research with detail study component required to improve indicators of reproducibility and transparency to support the contribution to new practice guidelines (Okonyaet al., 2020). One of the principles in transparency related with understandable or simple way. The material of program implementation, communication until monitoring and evaluation should be provided in a easy to understand and using local language (Zadeyet al., 2021). Current initiatives to improve transparency in current practice and future through stakeholder engagement. It is required to have the information about what, why, who and how related when perform engagement with community to achieved relevant objectives (Sampsonet al., 2019). To verify the implementation by NGO, it is required evaluation related with the result of accountability in a transparency way (Rodriguez-Ortegaet al., 2020). Based on the case at government of Ethiopia and other organizations which required collaborative actions. The important of clearance procedure in infrastructure, cargo, and warehouse are important to ensure there is no impact from aid assistance. Appropriate information management system required to support this transparency (Fuad, 2017). The stakeholders feedback demonstrated that proficient forms affected decision-making. They affirmed that proficient validity of those showing prove, as well as clinical authority and ‘soft’ influence aptitudes and relationship-building (counting ‘endless discussions’), empowered prove to be taken genuinely and acted upon. There was acknowledgment that inclinations for prove shifted by partner and so the same prove regularly got to be surrounded in an unexpected way to impact diverse partners, especially the wants of commissioners or funders of potential advancements, ‘as everyone has diverse buttons’ (Simonet al., 2017).

There was much research related with NGO accountability. Cordery stated that NGO accountability required by beneficiaries and stakeholders related with NGOs performance in the society. These demands should become part to balancing the availability of resources, goal of the NGOs, and requirement from each stakeholder or beneficiaries. (Corderyet al., 2019). It is showing that accountability become a mandatory for any NGO. Influence of donors to enable NGOs accountability will provide advantage to the beneficiaries. In this journal, writer show how significant role of donors to influence to ensure the NGO accountability to beneficiary (Uddin & Belal, 2019).

Several journal below, showing to us some indicators of accountability. Acknowledgement from community in the form of compassionate communities able provide solidarity and finitude and social space (Ummelet al., 2022). As funders, the accountability required to meet the expectation and clearing the demands (Hyndman & McConville, 2018). To be part of the governing rules that able to shape the conduct of NGOs-NGO conduct spurred by a crave to be administered in an unexpected way. This reveals how “resistance and run the show can relate to each other in positive and profitable ways” within the prepare through which programs and innovations looking for improved NGO responsibility are developed by government funders and financed NGOs (Boomsmaet al., 2019). NGO institution should go beyond for the best practices in guidelines and demonstrate high quality of implementation in an accountable way (Johnsonet al., 2018). In accountability, a good accounting system and implementation able to address the needs required by public, stakeholders, and donors. (Dillard & Eija, 2019). Grievance channel become the key and important role for communities to sharpen the social accountability mechanism (Sabates-Wheeleret al., 2020). To measure the performance evaluation of government, we able to use one of the accountability mechanisms which is public perception. This measurement become independent variables (Han & Hong, 2019). Performance measurement and accountability research were required in the field of knowledge and intensive NGO and related institutions (Kallioet al., 2020). INGOs should focus on both to the beneficiaries and donors through donors’ agreement. Missing one of the parties, will impact into their performance from the perspectives of both sides (Berghmanset al., 2017). Compliance to the standards should be ome mandatory. When there is poor in compliance, will affect to questionable accountability. Boards which represent the shareholders should perform control and checking to ensure the competency of personnel is adequate to implement the standards (Bakalikwiraet al., 2017).

From above literature, we can conclude that transparency and accountability become mandatory for every NGO/NPO to become a successful foundation. We need to look at the detail of each parameter and test the implementation to find out the current condition exist. Fig. 1 shows us the parameter of from Transparency and Accountability.

Fig. 1. Parameters of transparency & accountability.

Research Method

Research design will be used Kepner Tregoe method. According to the theory, there are four basic steps when using the Kepner Tregoe decision matrix:

1. Situation appraisal—is used to clarify the situation, outline concerns, and choose a direction,

2. Problem analysis—here the problem is defined, and its root cause determined,

3. Decision analysis—alternatives are identified and a risk analysis done for each,

4. Potential problem analysis—the best of the alternatives is further scrutinized against potential problems and negative consequences and actions are proposed to minimize the risk.

Kepner Tregoe method as shown in Fig. 2 is really a good method to help us for proving the transparency and accountability at NGO-AK.

Fig. 2. Kepner Tregoe methods.

These methods lead us is a systematic way to show starting from the current condition, searching if there is any issue with the current condition compare with the standard, find the alternatives course of action to reduce and or rectify the problem arise and lastly how to provide solution for any potential problem arise in the future.

All process will be using qualitative approach. The process according with Fig. 3 will be starting by deeply analyze the current conditions and symptoms. After that, using the Kepner Tregoe method by doing the situation appraisal which will focus on develop standards for transparency and accountability (RQ-1). In this RQ-1, most of the process through literature review and confirmation with the interviewee especially from donors/corporate. Once it completed, researcher move to RQ-2 to find out the current conditions at NGO-AK. Researcher starting with creating several questions for each standard that has been completed from RQ-2. The process of interview involving the NGO-AK boards and corporate management. Researcher also involve corporate management to ensure that have both perspectives related with the current conditions. Once the current conditions available, researcher move to RQ-3 which is problem analysis. Through problem analysis, we will find out why the gaps happen and what is the root causes. Researchers perform the activity through summarize the interview result and perform focus group discussion and reference from several literature related especially with challenges occurred. Once it completed, move to RQ-4 and RQ-5. This will help to get alternative course of actions to help reduce and eliminate the root causes and hopefully able to reduce and eliminate the gap. Furthermore, will using the potential problem analysis as a preventive action in the future related with corporate standards that will keep update and revise following the update from government regulations, international standards and other standards related. After several interview and focus group discussion, most of the responded and researcher agree that RQ-4 and RQ-5 able to be combine because having almost the problem and solution.

Fig. 3. Research design.

In relation to the data collection method, we will be using both primary and secondary sources. The primary data will be obtained through in-depth interviews with the client and problem owner, as well as focus group discussions. Meanwhile, the secondary data will come from existing government regulations and CSO standards/best practices, PTXY and NGO-AK information, as well as relevant literature and journals. The data collection method will focus on gathering existing information, conducting interviews with the client and problem owner (maximum 18 participants) who have both the necessary information and decision-making authority. Additionally, group discussions will be conducted to facilitate deeper analysis, particularly for identifying root causes and exploring alternative courses of action.

Author used qualitative data from depth interviews, focus group discussions, existing data/information, and relevant literature/journal sources. NGO-AK will be asked five questions for each parameter, with an additional question directed to PTXY.

List of questions to NGO-AK and PTXY as follows:

1. What is your understanding for this parameter?

2. Is it NGO-AK already have system to support this parameter?

3. What do you think the evidence that you know showing that NGO-AK already implement this parameter?

4. What do you think the evidence that you know showing that NGO-AK against this parameter? Why had it happened?

5. What kind of recommendation that you can give to NGO-AK for better improvement in the future for this parameter?

And beside those 5 (five) question above, additional question to PTXY is:

6. What is PTXY standard for this parameter?

Above list of questions will be part of the interview material for each parameter of Transparency (10 parameters) as shown at Table I 1 and each parameter of Accountability (10 parameters) as shown at Table II.

Table I. Transparency Parameter

No	Parameter	Definition
1	Openness	All activities can be look by public
2	Clarity	Provide context, understanding and precision in the communication
3	Timely reporting	Consistent and identifying new ways of working to meet earlier reporting deadlines
4	Accurate	Information share is exact and true
5	Accessible	Program and activity is able to be reached or easily obtained
6	Understandable/Simple	Socialization from NGO-AK in a way that community understand (using local language)
7	Engage with stakeholder	Routine sharing and involved community in program and activity planning, implementation, and evaluation
8	Evaluation	Determining whether an activity has happened and whether a program is doing the things that it is supposed to be doing
9	Clearing procedure	The approved practices, procedures and administrative requirements prescribed by law is clear from time to time in effect
10	Feedback from stakeholder	Any input, opinions, or perspectives from anyone who has an interest in a program or activity

Table II. Accountability Parameter

No	Parameter	Definition
1	Acknowledgement	Recognition or favorable notice of an act or achievement
2	Meet expectation	Reach the required standard established
3	Governing rules	General guidelines established which will be used to guide generally the activities to achieve the vision and mission
4	Best practices	The working standards or ethical guidelines that provide the best courses of action in vary situations
5	Address the needs	NGO-AK program and activity is plan according with stakeholder requirement and sustainable development
6	Grievance channel	A process to address beneficiary grievances, and it can be defined as a mechanism that enables beneficiary to communicate their concerns to NGO-AK
7	Public perception	Collective opinion or view about NGO-AK program and activity
8	Performance measurement	The process used to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of projects, programs and initiatives
9	Donor agreement	Compliance to donor (PTXY) through donor agreement document
10	Compliance standard	Meet the institution law and legal requirement in each program and activity

Tables I and II become reference for each responded when provide comment and feedback for each question. Those table also able to provide direction to each respondent to ensure the answer is in accordance with the standard requirement.

In accordance with Kepnoe Tregoe method, the data processing for this qualitative approach was develop through interview, focus group discussion, internal data of NGO-AK and PTXY, and literature reference. The interview was taken through voice recording and researcher put the keyword into excel format. Once all the interview result was available, by using excel (Microsoft office), researcher combine all the keyword from interview and come up with several keyword as mentioned in Tables III and IV.

Table III. Keyword for Transparency

Transparency	Keyword
Openness	Online (5), website (7), socialization (4), media social (4)
Clarity	Information (4), Correct (5), remote village (6), chopper (4), boat (6), budget (4), internet access (4)
Timely reporting	Poor (7), ODOO (5), no system (6), Reporting Taskforce (6), format data (4), centralization (3)
Accurate	Excell (6), manual (5), financial data (5), no system (4)
Accessible	Limited channel (6), website (7), no data (5), oral communication (4)
Understandable/Simple	Great job (5), no difficulties (5), local employee (4)
Engage with stakeholder	Object (7), comfort zone (4), budget and time constraint (5), elite and male (3), old approach (5)
Evaluation	No system (6), focus on output (5), finding (4)
Clearing procedure	Document available (5), implementation problem (6), work attitude (6), NGO-AK boards (5)
Feedback from stakeholder	No system (5), not regular (4), elite and male (4)

Table IV. Keyword for Accountability

Accountability	Keyword
Acknowledgement	Government award (5), community requirement (4), program running (4)
Meet expectation	Multiple standard (5), work attitude (5), contract with partners (4), SOP available (4)
Governing rules	Strategic plan (7), work attitude (5), time to process (4)
Best practices	Anti-corruption (7), integrity pact (4), work attitude (6), routine socialization (5)
Address the needs	Beneficiary needs (6), routine program (6), sustainable development (5), changes (5), grant making (6)
Grievance channel	No system (7), media to access (6), beneficiary at village (4), implementation problem (5)
Public perception	No system (6), boards meeting (4), survey (5), evaluation (6)
Performance measurement	Employee appraisal (6), implementation problem (6), system available (4), assessment (5)
Donor agreement	Board decision (4), financial (6), no system (4), monitoring (4)
Compliance standard	Legal consultant (6), notary (5), must follow (5)

All those keywords then researcher combine into several sentences which will be used for focus group discussion. Before coming to focus group discussion, researcher perform data analysis to compare the keyword with actual performance based on data reporting available at NGO-AK and PTXY. This is important to ensure that the interview result is confirm with actual and to reduce subjectivity. At the focus group discussion, researcher received many confirmations including the main causes and recommendation to reduce and rectify the causes. After the focus group discussion completed, researcher gather again all the information and starting to finalize the data with alternative course of actions. In this part, researcher also using several literatures to ensure that the recommendation based on successful information and action happen based on publish journal. This is important to balance the information and again to reduce the subjectivity because using qualitative approach. At the end, all the information gathered, and action plan was re-confirmed again with PTXY management and NGO-AK board to ensure that it is applicable and able to be execute by NGO-AK personnel.

Result and Discussion

After performing interview, focus group discussion, data confirmation with PTXY and NGO-AK internal data, and reference from selected literature, author able to come into conclusion for each parameter at Transparency which is consist of 10(ten) parameters and at the same time for Accountability.

The business solution shown in Table V in the form of recommendation that coming from interviews, focus group discussions, and searching through several literatures. This information under general recommendation was general conclusion before coming into more details at alternative courses of action. This recommendation to provide us in general the issue that NGO-AK face related with transparency and accountability.

Table V. General Recommendation

Indicator	General recommendation
Transparency (T)	Improved the way for beneficiary and stakeholders able to access NGO-AK programs and activity (TGR–1)
	Creating new method related with reluctance to move from comfort zone and or dealing with new program/activity. (TGR–2)
	Change the scheme of program planning to have more involvement of the beneficiary and stakeholder into planning, implementation, and evaluation. (TGR–3)
Accountability (A)	Centralize data and reporting through reporting taskforce (AGR–1)
	Needs to create the grievance mechanism system (AGR–2)
	Review the current program to match with current beneficiary and stakeholder requirement (AGR–3)
Both Transparency and Accountability (B)	Focus on creating the system to support the implementation of Transparency and Accountability. (BOTH–1)
	Communication method and tool must be revised to reach most of NGO-AK beneficiary and stakeholders as quick as possible in a regular period. (BOTH–2)
	Enhance staff competency (BOTH–3)
	Using professional third party for periodically assessment (BOTH–4)
	NGO-AK management role model to be followed by employees (issue in action and implementation) (BOTH–5)

To reduce the number of improvement and recommendation, below are alternative courses of action which can be use by NGO-AK boards to enhance their transparency and accountability performance as shown at Table VI.

Table VI. Alternative Courses of Action

No	Activity	Alternative courses of action
1	NGO-AK publication at website, social media and online news, including acknowledgement from beneficiary, stakeholder and public.	Enhance the Public Relation Division capacity, including staff competency (PUB-1)
	PIC : NGO-AK Executive Boards	Public Relation Division must working closely with Reporting Taskforce and Program Divisions to provide fast and regular publications (PUB-2)
	PUBLICATION (PUB)	Creatinng routine offline communication/socialization to beneficiary at remote location, together with Program Divisions activity (cost and time saving) (PUB-3)
		Working closely with government and non government for any award/appreciation that related with NGO-AK program and activity (PUB-4)
2	Regular reporting to public, including donor, beneneficiary and stakeholders	Keep consistent to produce financial reporting (ODOO system) (REP-1)
	PIC: NGO-AK Report Taskforce	Provide full support to Reporting Taskforce to complete their task related with centralize data and reporting. (REP-2)
	REPORTING (REP)	Provide detail information (softcopy through online and hardcopy) about each program/activity process and implementation. (REP-3)
3	Change in Program Strategy	NGO-AK Boards must review and approve the NGO-AK strategic plan document (5 years plan) through consultation and discussion with beneficiary and stakeholder. (STR-1)
	PIC : NGO-AK Boards lead by Governing Board	Establish a general standard for NGO-AK performance requirement (in accordance with NGO-AK Strategic Plan) and each unit/division should set specific standard which refer to the general standard. (STR-2)
	STRATEGY (STR)	NGO-AK focus on using the Grantmaking system as a tool or vehicle for program and activity implementation. (STR-3)
		Change the current NGO-AK communication strategy in order to get more involvement from beneficiary, stakeholder, and public (local, national and also international) (STR-4)
4	Monitoring and evaluation	Prioritize the training planning to staff on monitoring and evaluation (M&E-1)
	PIC : NGO-AK Executive Board	Using professional third party to assist NGO-AK in evaluating current program and activity implementation. One of the main focus related with current beneficiary requirement, government goal, and sustainable development plan. The result should be implement in multiyears plan. (M&E-2)
	MONITORING & EVALUATION (M&E)	Using professional third party to assist NGO-AK in evaluating the compliance to selected legal documents such as Donor Agreeemnt, Article of Association, Foundation Regulations and Boards (Governing, Executive and Superivosry) Decision. (M&E-3)
		Any findings from Monitoring and Evaluation should become mandatory item in the next planning activity. (M&E-4)
		Establish a reward and punishment system related with the performance result or any findings not just for internal NGO-AK employees but also for the beneficiary and stakeholders. (M&E-5)
5	Management and employee competency and behavior	Leader as role model and continues in setting good example in implementation (C&B-1)
	PIC : NGO-AK Executive Board	Staff capacity building plan for competency and behavior (C&B-2)
	COMPETENCY & BEHAVIOR (C&B)	Review the current employee performance appraisal method/tool (C&B-3)
		Creating a foundation culture to ensure that all personnel should understand, follow and implement in any program/activity execution. (C&B-4)
6	Grievance channel	Create a channel through online for beneficiary, stakeholder, and public able to share their complaint, input, opinion, suggestion, and perspective. (GRV-1)
	PIC : NGO-AK Executive Board	Provide suggestion box at NGO-AK offices to accomodate offline comments. (GRV-2)
	GRIEVANCE (GRV)	Set special agenda when visiting to beneficiary at remote area to accomodate their complaint and input through discussion or written document. (GRV-3)
		Establish survey form for NGO-AK as overall and or each program/activity (Online or offline) to get community perspective. (GRV-4)
		All above channels should be socialize regularly to public (GRV-5)
		Assign minimum 2 (two) employees to manage this grievance channel. Their main job to ensure all complaint, suggestion, and survey should be manage and respond by NGO-AK and public able to provide and received feedback from NGO-AK until close the loop. (GRV-6)

In overall, researcher able to provide some conclusion to respond and provide several answers to research question and objective as follow:

What are the standards for social investment fund accountability and transparency?

Based on theory, literature, and interview with PTXY as donors; researcher has identified the standards that consist of 10 (ten) parameters for transparency and 10 (ten) parameters for accountability. All definition and standard based on social investment theory and practical.

What differences exist between the standard and the implementation of NGO-AK in terms of transparency and accountability? Starting with several symptoms exist at NGO-AK which is related with financial, reporting, planning, and issue at implementation. By using qualitative approach and literature reference, researcher able to identify more information related with discrepancies between standard and implementation. In general, those differences happen in both transparency and accountability, but in overall more of differences occurred at transparency.

Why did the disparities occur, and how did they occur? Based on interview and focus group discussion, the core reasons the discrepancies exist due to system availability, personnel competency, and behavior/attitude problem. Today most of NGO-AK programs running as usual where some of the method/tool already expiry and not following the current requirement.

How, who, and when should various actions be taken by all parties to mitigate and even get rid of the root cause of the differences that now exist? Based on interview, focus group discussion, and literature reference; there is general recommendation and alternative course of actions has been provided in this research to mitigate those differences. By using Kepner Tregoe method, we have identified at the alternative course of actions not just to solve the current issue but also the potential problem that probably will be arise in the future.

How NGO-AK may improve afterwards implementations with standard advancements? NGO-AK have already some positive systems to support any standard advancement in the future such as having good relationship with beneficiary at the village level and have contract with legal consultant and notary to support related with law and legal requirement. Researcher also has put some alternative course of action to support which is the grievance mechanism system and regular survey for public perception which is able to provide signal to NGO-AK for future improvement. Hopefully NGO-AK Boards as management able to use this research to be one of their considerations to making strategic decision to keep and enhance NGO-AK transparency and accountability indicators.

To become a reputable and trusted NGO, it required several improvements from NGO-AK. That improvement especially in the actual implementation of transparency and accountability will increase NGO-AK performance and it also means will show better implementation in PTXY social investment. Enhancement at PTXY social investment will also contribute not just maintain the current company reputation and the ensure that company reputation in the future. At the end, all indicators are tools to support the common goals which is to provide welfare to the beneficiary and stakeholder surround.