Transparency in our work starts with the allocation of resources, roles, and responsibilities, and the flow of power through finances and grants. Decision-making processes which are open and equitable allows the rest of the project to follow suit, but there’s rarely enough transparency when it comes to who gets funding, the type of grants, and from whom. Foundations and donors are just starting to make their grants lists public, but the decision-making process is still shrouded in mystery. This lack of accountability perpetuates inequities, but it’s a simple enough fix.

The first step is budgeting. In many cases, strategies and their resulting budgets are determined by senior management in donor organisations, with little input from local or more junior staff, let alone communities and grantee partners. This top-down approach can lead to budgets that don’t reflect the real needs and priorities of the community, resulting in potential misalignments in projects.

In the strategy design process then, and when it comes to finalising the budget, consultations with partners, sharing it for staff feedback, and opening up the process can ensure multiple people are involved in the reviews, to ensure alignment. This can help mitigate against the normal budget issues, such as higher salaries and funds for foreign workers than for local staff – further perpetuating those harmful power dynamics. These consultaitons can also open up spaces for more honesty around why certain decisions are made, and the process of finalising budgets.

The next step is in the roles and responsibilities within a project – another instance where the disparity between locals and foreigners is wide. This creates a hierarchical structure that reinforces power imbalances and reinforces silos of working.

Then comes a clearer definition of roles and responsibilities within your team, so roles are based on merit and expertise rather than on nationality or seniority. This might involve creating joint decision-making bodies where local staff have an equal say in the direction of the project, or implementing rotational leadership structures that allow different team members to take on leadership roles at different stages.

Transparency is also critical in the decision-making process itself. Many project-related decisions are made behind closed doors, with little input from those who are most affected by them. This can lead to decisions that do not reflect the needs and priorities of the community, and that may even be detrimental to their needs.

So to address this, create open and inclusive decision-making processes that involve everyone, including community members, local staff, and donors. This might involve holding regular meetings or consultations where everyone can share their views and contribute. It also means being transparent about how decisions are made and why certain options are chosen over others.

Finally, transparency in funding also means being accountable for the outcomes of the project and how those resources are used. This involves regularly monitoring and evaluating the project to ensure that it is meeting its objectives and that the resources are being used effectively. It also means being open and honest about any challenges or setbacks that arise and being willing to adapt the project as needed to address these issues. That can and will involve highlighting where your structures and practices need to change.