MONTENEGRO BASELINE REPORT,
APRIL 2014
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
1
Synthesis of the baseline survey
Component 1: Conducive environment
Objective 1: An enabling legal and policy environment, for the exercise of the rights of freedom, expression, assembly and association
Result 1.1.: All individuals and legal entities can express themselves freely, assemble peacefully and establish, join and participate in non-formal and/or
registered organisations
Indicator: 1.1.a Quality assessment of existing legislation and policy framework
The Law on NGOs and other related legislation create a basic legal framework for the free functioning of CSOs.
There is a legal framework for establishing associations and foundations (Law on NGOs, 2011), but there is no legal framework for establishing other types of
organisations such as non-profit companies. Foreign non-governmental organisation may operate in the territory of Montenegro in order to achieve goals and
interests, which are not prohibited by the Constitution and the law. Organisations acquire legal personality only after registration. An association may be
established by at least three people. One of them must have a residence, domicile or head office in Montenegro. A person authorised to represent must be a
permanent or temporary resident in Montenegro. There are no sanctions prescribed in case of failure to register. The Law on NGOs allows networking with
organisations in Montenegro and abroad. According to the Labour Law and Rulebook on Registration of Trade Unions and the Rulebook on Registration of
Representative Trade Unions, trade organisations are registered in the Trade Union Register and the Register of Representative Trade Unions is kept at the Ministry
of Labour and Social Welfare of Montenegro. Organisation named the long waiting period for decisions as the main flaw in the registration process (one month
compared to the ten days which is prescribed by law). The registry does not contain contact information.
State control over the work of CSOs is regulated by the Inspection Law. A fine ranging from EUR 500 to EUR 800 shall be imposed on a non-governmental
organisation if it does not report within 30 days to the body in charge of changes in data. The same punishment is also envisaged in the event of failure to publish
financial statements within ten days of adoption. A fine ranging from EUR 500 to EUR 4,000 shall be imposed on non-governmental organisations if, during the
calendar year, they proceed to conduct economic activity after crossing the allowed threshold of EUR 4,000 or 20 percent of their total annual revenue. Over 97
percent of organisations stated that the government did not interfere in their internal affairs. Twenty-five percent of organisations stated that they were sometimes
under pressure during their work. Five organisations had unannounced inspections by state bodies. About 42 percent of organisations have been subjected to
pressure because of their critical attitude towards authority. Organisations are generally not exposed to sanctions. Most of those that are sanctioned consider the
sanctions to be disproportionate.
Non-governmental organisations can directly engage in economic activity specified in the statute if they are registered in the Company Register of the Commercial
Court. Legislation allows CSOs to be funded by foreign institutions and organisation, domestic legal and private individuals as well as corporations. If the income
from economic activities in the current year exceeds EUR 4,000 or 20 percent of the annual income, a non-governmental organisation cannot directly engage in
economic activities during the current year. Over 80 percent of organisations reported that they did not have problems associated with obtaining funds from
abroad. Most of the organisations funded by private sources stated that they had no administrative restrictions and difficulties.
The Constitution of Montenegro guarantees freedom of peaceful assembly without a permit, subject to prior notification to the competent authority. Freedom of
assembly may be temporarily restricted by the decision of the competent authority for the prevention of disorder or crime, protection of health or morals or for the
protection of people and property in accordance with law. Organisations that have organised peaceful gatherings have not been faced with restrictions. Four
organisations have stated that in the event of a counter protest they were not protected by police. Three organisations organised a gathering without prior notice
to state authorities.
According to the Constitution of Montenegro, everyone has the right to freedom of expression by speech, writing, painting, or otherwise. The right to freedom of
expression can be limited only by the other persons’ right to dignity, reputation and honour, and if it threatens public morality or the security of Montenegro.
Defamation was decriminalised, which has contributed to reducing the number of cases brought against journalists. Five organisations had an objection to a
restriction of freedom of expression. Mostly lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) activists had problems in regard to publicly expressing their opinions.
The Law on Free Access to Information Act is not harmonised with other relevant laws. Rules of the working group for the preparation of negotiations restrict CSO
members to inform the public about the work of the working groups. There are no legislated restrictions on the use of different communication and information
tools. The implementation of the new Law on Free Access to Information has started. The Internet and other tools used for collecting information are accessible and
there are no restrictions in practice regarding this.
Recommendations:
BCSDN
Possible others
Legal:
 Seek to clarify in legislation whether registration is mandatory or
 Key: Agree and adopt all relevant legislation regarding CSO
voluntary.
functioning.
 Look for more information comparing sanctioning in registered
 Change the laws, bylaws and internal procedures necessary for the
organisation and informal organisations.
introduction of statistical data related to the work of CSOs in the system
 Look for more information on whether or not legal framework provides
of official statistics.
guarantees against state interference on internal matters of CSOs.
 Revise regulations on the amount of sanctions and on cases when they
 Look for more information on whether or not the state provides
are imposed.
protection from interference by third parties.
 Revise the threshold for economic activities to establish a more
 Further monitor if the legislation of CSOs engaging in economic
effective framework for service provision.
activities is burdensome.
 Harmonise the Law on free access to information with the law of
 Further monitor of funds from individuals, corporations and other
confidentiality of information.
sources is easy, effective and without any unnecessary costs and
 Modify the Rules of Procedure of Working Groups for the preparation of
administrative burden.
negotiations in order to provide space for CSO representatives to inform
 Look for more information related to access of media to assemble.
the public about the work of the working groups.
 Adopt bylaws in accordance with the Law on Free Access to
Information.
Practice:
 Ensure equal principles for all when it comes to founding and registering
organisations.
 Reduce required time for the registration process.
 Expand type of information within the registry, such as contact
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries 2014-2020
19 12 2013
2





information.
Provide an effective system for complaints by CSOs.
Promote funding of CSO projects and activities from individuals and
corporations.
Establish effective system of police protection in case of counterprotests.
Ensure efficient protection for LGBT activists in the country.
Improve web presentations of state authorities through information
provided.
Indicator 1.1.b. Progress with the adoption and implementation of relevant legislation
Progress under this indicator will be monitored after the baseline and after setting the targets.
Result: 1.2. The policies and legal environment stimulate and facilitate volunteering and employment in CSOs
Indicator: 1.2.a. Number of employees in CSO (permanent and part-time)
There is no recent data available in relation to the number of employees in CSOs. According to the survey of ADP ZID from 2010, there are 556 persons employed in
NGOs in line with the Labour Law, while 1,358 of them have worked on the basis of service contracts (short-term or occasional employment). That is less than one
percent (0.86 percent) of the total average number of employees in Montenegro in 2010 (161,742 MONSTAT).


21% of CSOs stated that they do not have employees, 40% have one employee, 19% from 2-5 employees, and 20% over 6 employees.
Out of total number of employees, 2.3% work full time, and 1.7% work part-time.
Indicator: 1.2.b. Number of volunteers in CSOs per type of CSO/sector
There is a lack of information on number of volunteers.






19% of CSOs believe that up to 10% of organisation engaged volunteers, 21% believe that 10-20% of CSOs engage volunteers, 26% believe that 21-50% CSOs
engage volunteers, and 23% of CSOs believe that over 50% of CSOs engage volunteers
69% CSOs stated that they have engaged, 28% stated that have not engaged volunteers in 2013, and for 3% it was not applicable
32% of the organisation had 1-5 volunteers, 36% of CSOs over 15 volunteers, and 33% between 6-15 volunteers in 2013
17% of CSOs paid pecuniary compensations to the engaged volunteers in the amount of their costs, and 63% did not pay any pecuniary costs
85% of CSOs stated that they did not conclude any volunteering contract with volunteers, 4% stated that they have concluded with up to 3 volunteers, 8% if
CSOs concluded volunteering contract with 4-10 volunteers, and 3% with more than 10 volunteers
90% of CSOs did not conclude any other contract with volunteers.
Indicator: 1.2.c. Quality of legislative framework
69% of CSOs were inclined to stating that legal solution in Montenegro are not stimulating at all for volunteers, while 24% inclined stating that it is stimulating.
stimulating
The Labour Law treats CSOs in an equal manner to other employers and does not recognise any advantages of employment and working in the CSO sector. The law
imposes an obligation for creating employee contacts for an unlimited period of time after two years of work and, in the case of involuntary termination of
employment, the employer or organisation has to settle severance pay in the amount of six gross salaries. Taking into consideration that CSOs are mainly financed
through projects and that they do not have their own assets for severance pay as stipulated by the Labour Law, they are exposed to potential threats for further
operations and functioning. There are no statistics in regard to employees and volunteers in the civil sector. Additionally, there are no statistics in regard to income
(donations from domestic and foreign sources, economic activities, membership fees, etc.) for the offices and technical facilities. This deficiency shortens planning
for future directions of development of CSOs. In 2012, the Government provided a new programme for vocational training and employment. CSOs could apply
under the same conditions as state bodies and private companies.
The Law on Volunteering is not in accordance with the situation in practice.
The Volunteer Work Act was intended to create a favourable legal environment for the development of volunteering. The act defines a number of institutes and
issues relevant to the volunteerism: the definition of volunteers, their rights and obligations, the definition of the organisers of volunteer work, rights and
obligations, the definition of user voluntary services, mandatory elements of volunteering, international volunteering, development and monitoring of
volunteerism, etc. The law treats volunteering as a special form of labour law relations, rather than a voluntary, private citizens' initiative. The law prohibits socalled corporate volunteering, even when outside of organised labour and business premises, although this form of volunteering, comparatively speaking, is gaining
in importance. The Law on volunteering prescribes that volunteers should have a contract for volunteering and that the volunteering period will be addressed as
working experience. However, the law does not stimulate and affirm volunteering, but prohibits and bureaucratises participation of citizens in volunteering. It
strongly regulates all forms of citizens’ volunteering and it regulates the punishment offenders. Furthermore, it creates additional financial burdens and puts CSOs
in even an even less favourable position (compulsory health insurance, residence permits for foreign volunteers). Provisions of this law greatly hinder the arrival of
foreign volunteers, as they must have a residence permit or permission for housing. Labour inspection may, without prior warning, prohibit volunteering if a
volunteer or organiser does not have necessary documentation (contract and insurance). But, there is not a single mechanism to prevent potential abuse. The
lawmakers have not adopted the accompanying secondary legislation. Ninety-four percent of surveyed organisations stated that they hire volunteers for their
activities. Organisations mostly hire volunteers in accordance with their internal rules, not by the Law on Volunteering. Volunteering, in practice, is mostly
spontaneous and it is not defined by contractual relations as set by the law.
Recommendations:
BCSDN
Legal:
 Create statistics of employees and volunteers in the civil sector.
 Key: Find way to harmonise the Law on Volunteering with the situation
in practice.
 Develop a national definition and strategy for volunteering, including
volunteering policies.
Practice:
 Examine the possibility of establishing and monitoring specific
information regarding the activities of CSOs and their introduction into
the system of data by the competent authorities.
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
Possible others
 Seek the liberation of employment conditions for CSOs in the Labour
Law.
 Introduce affirming measures related to volunteerism in the relevant
law (support of voluntary activities; support of a structure that develops
and promotes volunteerism; a coordination board whose establishment
was foreseen by the adoption of the Strategy for the Development of
Volunteerism).
 Adopt accompanying secondary legislation for volunteering.
19 12 2013
3

Ensure dissemination of regional and international good practices in
volunteering.
Result 1.3. National and/or local authorities have enabling policies and rules for grassroots organisations and/or civic initiatives.
Indicator: 1.3.a. Quality of the enabling environment for grassroots organisations and/or civic initiatives
There are no sanctions prescribed in cases of failure to register a CSO. Over 90 percent of organisations surveyed in the questionnaire said that they did not have
problems registering their organisations. Few organisations have met with difficulties and additional procedures when registering and with naming their
representatives. Organisations named long waiting periods for the decision as the main flaw of the registering process (one month comparing to ten days which are
prescribed by the law). The registry does not contain contact information for the CSOs.
Freedom of assembly may be temporarily restricted by the decision of the competent authority for the prevention of disorder or crime, protection of health or
morals or for the protection of people and property in accordance with law. The Law on Free Access to Information Act is not harmonised with other relevant laws,
which can hinder the organisation of any CSO, including grassroots organisations. There are no legislated restrictions in the use of different communication and
information tools.
Recommendations:
BCSDN
Legal:
 Harmonise the law on free access to information with the law of
confidentiality of information.
 Adopt bylaws in accordance with the Law on Free Access to
Information.
Practice:
 Ensure equal principles for all when it comes to founding and
registering organisations.
 Reduce waiting time during the registration process.
 Provide more information about CSOs within the registry.
Possible others
 Seek clarity in legislation whether the registration is mandatory or
voluntary. Look for more information in relation to sanctioning if
organisation is acting informally in comparison to the registered ones.
Objective: 2. An enabling financial environment, which supports the sustainability of CSOs.
Result: 2.1. Easy-to-meet financial rules for CSO, which are proportionate to their turnover and non-commercial activities


Indicator: 2.1.a. CSOs' perception of the ease and effectiveness of financial rules and reporting requirements (disaggregated by the type and size of CSO)
15% of CSOs assessed that prescribed financial rule, obligations of bookkeeping and accounting, referring to their organisations are not clear and
understandable, while for 82% were clear and understandable
For 27% of CSOs it is not simple to implement prescribed financial rule, obligations of bookkeeping and accounting, referring to their organisations are not
clear and understandable, while for 71% is simple to implement
Indicator: 2.1.b. Quality assessment of financial rules (with the focus on built-in mechanisms that financial rules and obligations change as the turn-over
and non-commercial activities change).
Twenty-five percent of organisations stated that they were sometimes under pressure during their work in relation to accounting. Five organisations had a case of
unannounced inspections by state bodies. About 42 percent of organisations have been subjected to pressure by inspections because of their critical attitude
towards authority.
Non-governmental organisations can directly engage in economic activity specified in the statute specifically if they are registered in the company register. A nongovernmental organisation needs to cumulatively meet the following conditions in order to conduct economic activity: 1) economic activity must be determined by
the Articles of Association; 2) gained revenues must be used exclusively to finance the statutory goals of the organisation and in the territory of Montenegro; 3)
economic activity must be conducted in line with the regulations governing the area within which the economic activity is conducted; 4) carrying out of the
economic activity must be entered in the Central Register of the Commercial Court, which is done by entering the code and description of the activity, as stipulated
by the regulations on classification of activities. The provision of the law specifies that only economic activity of CSOs is entered in the register. The organisation
itself is not registered in the registry order to avoid the interpretation of whether it needs to be registered as a company or established as a new legal entity. If the
income from economic activities in the current year exceeds EUR 4,000 or 20 percent of the annual income, a non-governmental organisation cannot directly
engage in economic activity later in the year. Legislation allows CSOs to be funded by foreign institutions and organisations, domestic legal and private individuals as
well as corporations. Over 80 percent of organisations reported that they did not have the problems associated with obtaining funds from abroad. Most of the
organisations funded by private sources stated that they had no administrative restrictions and difficulties. All donations, domestic or foreign are subject to taxes.
Recommendations:
BCSDN
Possible others
Legal:
 Look for more information to discover whether financial reporting and
 Consider revising the threshold for economic activities to establish a more
accounting rules take into account the specific nature of CSOs and are
effective framework for service provision.
proportionate to the size of the organisation and their type and scope of
Practice:
activities.
 Provide an effective system for complaints by CSOs.
 Further monitor if the legislation of CSOs engaging in economic
 Promote funding of CSO projects and activities by individuals and
activities is burdensome.
corporations.
 Further monitor whether funds from individuals, corporations and other
 Facilitate the tax liability of donations and grants from foreign or
sources are easy, effective and without any unnecessary costs and
domestic natural or legal persons.
administrative burden.
Result: 2.2. Donations are stimulated with adequate legislation and regulations
Indicator: 2.2.a. Quality and applicability/practice of the legal framework for individual and corporate giving
Most of the donations to CSOs are subjected to tax.
The Law on Income Tax stipulates that expenditures on health, education, sports, culture and environmental protection are recognised as expenses for up to 3.5
percent of the total revenue. A similar provision is contained in the Law on Corporate Income Tax. The Law on Corporate Income Tax and the Law on Personal
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
4
Income Tax stipulate narrowly defined and limited lists of areas of public interest. These regulations have not covered a number of other areas, not even those that
are otherwise recognised and protected as constitutional values (human and minority rights, the rule of law), or those on whose importance in society there is a
broad consensus (fight against corruption, sustainable development). The definition of areas of public interest specified in these regulations is inconsistent with a
considerably broader list of the areas of public interest in which CSOs operate, which is regulated by the Law on NGOs, and which is not limited. The difference
between the tax and statutory regulations leads to a situation where there are two public policies when it comes to the areas of public interest in which CSOs
operate, depending on whether CSOs are funded directly by the state or through tax incentives. For example, a CSO operating in the field of human rights meets the
general requirements prescribed to apply for financing from the budget, however, a grant to such a CSO by legal entities or natural persons does not represent a
recognised tax expenditure. There are no official statistics that show the degree of utilisation of these benefits. The culture of giving and corporate social
responsibility is not being encouraged, despite the amendment to the Law on Corporate Income Tax.
Recommendations:
BCSDN
Legal:
 Key: To exempt from taxes donations to CSOs including public
donations and those from foreign donors.
 In the tax laws, change concept of public interest activities to agree with
the provisions of the Law for NGOs in order to fully realise the potential
for the development of philanthropy in Montenegro.
 Conduct gap analyse of the legal framework in terms of its enabling
aspects for a culture of giving enterprises (corporate philanthropy), and
consequently undertake necessary changes.
Practice:
 Expand the narrowly defined range of activities of public interest and,
consequently, make changes to the Law on Profit Tax to extend the
abovementioned range of activities of public interest.
Possible others
 Harmonise relevant public policies.
 Seek the establishment of official statistics that show the degree of
utilisation of benefits related to individual and corporate giving.
Result: 2.3. Financial (e.g. tax or in-kind) benefits are available
Indicator: 2.3.a. Quality of the system of tax benefits for the CSOs’ operational and economic activities
The state provides tax benefits for non-governmental organisations in accordance with the law. The provisions of the new law specify that only economic activity of
CSOs is entered in the Central Register held by the Commercial Court, rather than within the organisation itself in order to avoid interpretations of whether it needs
to be registered as a company or established as a new legal entity. The Law on Income Tax stipulates that expenditures on health, education, sports, culture and
environmental protection purposes are recognised as expenses up to 3.5 percent of total revenue. A similar provision is contained in the Law on Corporate Income
Tax. CSOs are subject to the same provisions of the Value Added Tax (currently paid at the standard rate of 19 percent) as private companies, although CSOs are not
VAT registered if their total annual income is less than the statutory limit of EUR 18,000. Only grants coming directly from an EU institution are tax-exempt. All other
donations, domestic or foreign, are subject to taxes. There is no tax exception for economic activities.
Recommendations:
BCSDN
Legal:
 Improve the legal framework for tax relief for the economical CSOs
activities.
 Change the Law on Income tax in order to spread the areas of public
interests (i.e.: human rights, anti-corruption activities, antidiscrimination activities, etc.).
Practice:
 Facilitate the tax liability on donations and grants from foreign or
domestic natural or legal persons.
Possible others
 Seek legislation that will stimulate economic activities of CSOs.
Result 2.4.: Government support to CSOs is available and provided in a transparent, accountable, fair and non-discriminatory manner
Indicator 2.4.a.: Ratio of amount sought vs. amount approved/disbursed annually through state funding to CSOs (this proves availability of funds)
Government financial support for CSOs is ensured from several sources.
Total allocations for CSOs from the state budget were reduced from EUR 4 million in 2010 to 1.7 million in 2013 (from 0.73 percent in 2010 to 0.24 percent in 2013).
The Commission for Allocation of Revenues from Games of Chance distributes 60 percent of all annual revenues from games of chance, out of which 75 percent is
allocated for “plans and programmes of non-governmental organisations”. This is why this is the most important source of public financing for CSOs. The
commission has had available funds determined by the annual Law on Budget. However, these funds are significantly different compared to the exact amount of
the legally established percentage allocated by the Commission and CSOs in accordance with the provisions of the Law on Games of Chance. According to available
information, the funds allocated and planned by the budget for the period 2008-2013, were less than the funds that had been allocated on the basis of the law on
Games of Chance for EUR 4,743,390.38. Regulation on the Criteria for Determining the Beneficiaries and Manner of Distribution of the Revenues from Games of
Chance (August 2011), determines that out of the total available funds:
o Seventy-five percent is distributed to plans and programmes of NGOs,
o Ten percent is for media pluralism,
o Fifteen percent for other non-profit organisations and public institutions,
o For the area of “social protection and humanitarian activities“ 12 percent is set aside for “meeting the needs of persons with disabilities”, 40 percent for
culture and technical culture, 12 percent for non-institutional education and upbringing of children and young people, ten percent for contributions to the
fight against drugs and all other forms of addiction.
The Commission for the Allocation of Funds to NGOs (appointed in 2011 by the Parliament of Montenegro) is still positioned in the budget, even though it has not
performed allocation since the entry into force of the Law on NGOs. Around EUR 560,000 (EUR 200,000 for 2011/2012 and EUR 160,000 for 2013) have not been
distributed to NGOs from this budget item.
The Fund for Minorities was established in 2008, in accordance with the Law on Minority Rights and Freedoms to support the activities for the preservation and
development of national and ethnic particularities of minority people and other minority ethnic communities and their members in the fields of national, ethnic,
cultural, language and religious identity. In September 2013, the fund adopted a decision to finance projects with the total value of EUR 500,000.
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
5
Certain ministries and other state administration bodies continue to allocate funds for projects of CSOs, even though there are no clearly visible funds for CSOs in
the budgets of these bodies. According to data from the Report on Cooperation between the Ministries/State Administration Bodies and CSOs in 2012, the bodies
financed CSOs with about EUR 175,000 from their budgetary positions, mainly based on the applications of CSOs to help certain organisations. In the first six
months of 2013, this amount was slightly less than EUR 39,000.
Indicator 2.4.b.: Quality of state funding frameworks for civil society organisations (focusing on a procedural document)
There is inefficient financial state support for CSOs.
The Law on NGOs envisages that government provides funding support to CSO programmes and projects from the state budget. Even though, the law prescribes
centralised state funding to CSOs, there are no legal preconditions created for the successful implementation of centralised funding. According to the Law on NGOs,
distribution of state funds is carried out by a commission established by the Government. That commission has not yet been formed, and the largest state funds for
CSOs are allocated based on the decisions of the commission for the allocation of revenue from the games of chance. The commission of the games of chance
allocates funds on the basis of a public call for proposals. The amount of funds allocated trough the commission is set by the Law on Games of Chance that is not in
completely in accord with other legislation and is not fully obeyed. The Law on NGOs does not preclude the ability of NGOs to be funded by ministries and other
budget users. The legal basis for the allocation of funds to NGOs by local governments is contained in Article 116 of the Law on Local Self-Government, which
stipulates that cooperation between local governments and NGOs is achieved under conditions and procedures prescribed by the general act of the municipality,
including financing. State funds have not been allocated in accordance with the law. The Minority Fund, the Commission for the Distribution of Funds to NGOs
within Parliament, and the Commission for the Allocation of Revenue from Games on Chance are still positioned in the budget, but not complying with the law on
NGOs. There has been a declining trend of state support to CSO projects in past three years (in comparison to 2010, funds are reduced for 50 percent).
According to the NGO law, the commission should allocate funds on the basis of a public competition to be published on the web site of the Government and in all
newspapers that are printed and distributed in Montenegro. Special bylaws will determine criteria for appointing members of commission, including measures of
conflict of interest. A decree on determining beneficiaries and criteria for distribution of revenues from games of chance envisages clear criteria for distribution of
fund, monitoring rules and transparency measures. Criteria for distribution of these funds are available to the public. The Commission for the Allocation of
Revenues from Games of Chance made all supported projects integrally available on their web site. Currently, the only existing source of constant funding to
Montenegrin CSOs is the Commission for the Allocation of Revenues from Games of Chance. CSOs may place a complaint about the decision of this commission
according to the procedures set by the Law on Administrative Procedure.
According to the Law on NGOs, the commission shall submit to an advisory body, once a year, a report on the implementation of projects and programmes funded.
Control of the appropriate use of funds allocated to CSOs should be undertaken by external auditors engaged by the advisory body. Procedures for the monitoring
of project implementation from the Commission for Allocation of Revenues from Games of Chance have not been developed or are not sufficiently developed. The
Commission for the Allocation of Revenues from Games of Chance engaged an auditing company for the audit of a certain projects supported in 2012.
A report on cooperation between ministries, state authorities and CSOs in 2012 shows that, in practice, there have been cases where the ministries have been
renting space or boardroom for meetings.
There is no CSOs participation in providing state services at a sufficient level.
The Law on Public Administration offers the possibility of the transfer of certain obligations of state authorities to other entities. The law does not define in detail
the manner in which these obligations are assigned, but points out that it is possible to enable it with separate laws and regulations by the Government. Legislation
states that ministries can define the transfer of certain obligations to other entities; however, CSOs are not clearly recognised in these laws. Due to the ambiguity of
the legislation, it is not clear which practices can be perceived as provision of social service. There are examples of short-term service provision in cooperation with
the Government. Examples of licensing of CSO for social service provision have not been identified. There are examples of CSOs providing trainings and education
for state authorities.
The budget does not specifically provide funding for various types of services, nor for the multi-year funding. CSOs cannot be recipients of funding for these kinds of
services. There is no licensing and there are no services that are fully funded by the Government. However, there are services that CSOs’ provide that are funded by
the international organisations.
The state did not clearly defined procedures for contracting services, which allows for transparent selection of service providers, including CSOs. There are only a
couple of examples of contractual relations between the Government and CSOs in regard to service provision.
There is no legislation regulating monitoring both spending and quality of service provision. Since there is no legislation regulating service provision, all concrete
examples are being monitored based on individual arrangements from case to case.
Recommendations:
BCSDN
Legal:
 Key: Regulate state financing of NGOs
 Adopt all laws that are necessary for undisturbed implementation of the
Law on NGOs, particularly in the area of finance.
 Define stronger links between public policy setting government's priority
in a given period and the programmes and projects of NGOs that are
funded from the same budget.
 Harmonise the Minority Fund, Parliamentary Commission and the
Commission for the Allocation of Revenues from Games of Chance with
the Law on NGOs.
 Consider introducing a decentralised system of CSO financing.
 Adequate implementation of the Decree on Determining Beneficiaries
and Criteria for Distribution of Revenues from Games of Chance.
 Key: Regulate the role of CSO involvement in service provision
 Creation of specific legislation regulating CSOs engagement in providing
services, in the cooperation with the state, including, specifically,
funding, licensing, regulation of criteria for choosing CSO service
providers, regulation of the process of monitoring and evaluation of
service provision.
Practice:
 Since a centralised model has been shown as non-effective, transform
the model into a decentralised one where ministries will have the role
of allocating funds to the CSOs acting in their field of work.
 Increase public funding support at least to the level of 2010 - EUR Four
million.
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
Possible others
 Closer monitoring of the entire process of the public funding cycle.
 Seek greater clarification regarding the law about the manner of
assigning obligations of state authorities to others, and look for
clarification of status and position of CSOs in this process.
 Introduce in legislation licencing possibilities of CSOs for provision of
social services.
 Closer monitoring of opportunities for CSOs to provide social services.
 Ensure that the legislation stipulates clear and transparent procedures
through which the funding for services is distributed among providers.
 Ensure that the criteria for selection are not price driven, but driven by
both service quality and the financial statements of contenders.
 Ensure that there are clear guidelines on how to ensure transparency
and how to avoid conflict of interest.
 Ensure possibilities for appeal against completion results.
 Monitor state capacities to organise procedures related to tendering of
state services.
 Ensure that legislation recognises quality standards of provision of
services.
 Ensure that once introduced, monitoring does not turn into excessive
control of CSOs.
19 12 2013
6





Include external evaluators in criteria for the distribution of public funds.
Increase the transparency of the allocation of public funds.
Strengthen controls and procedures for monitoring the implementation
of projects and the proper use of funds by external auditors.
Identify the space and property (decommissioned office furniture and
equipment, written-off vehicles, etc.) owned by the state that are not in
use, and define a transparent process and criteria for use of these assets
by CSOs, in case of delivery of joint or of common interest programmes
and projects.
Promote regional and international practice of CSO participation in
service delivery.
Changing relations; CSOs and government
Objective 3: Civil society and public institutions work in partnership through dialogue and cooperation based on willingness, trust and mutual
acknowledgment around common interests
Result: 3.1. Public institutions recognise the importance of CSOs in improving good governance through CSOs' inclusion in decision-making processes
Indicator: 3.1.a. Percentage of laws, bylaws, strategies and policy reforms effectively* consulted with CSOs
* in terms of: adequate access to information, sufficient time to comment, selection and representativeness, diversity of working groups, acknowledgement of input, degree
to which input is taken into account, feedback, publication of consultation results
Indicator: 3.1.b Quality* of structures and mechanisms in place for dialogue and cooperation between CSOs and public institutions
* in terms of: CSO representation in general, representation of smaller or weaker CSOs, its visibility and availability, government perception of quality of structures and
mechanisms, CSOs perception of structures and mechanisms








38% of CSOs in Montenegro were consulted in the process of preparation of drafts of local strategies, 34% of local action plans, 26% of specific laws, 26% of
national strategies, 20% of national action plans, 13% of IPA programming of EU financial support, 13% of policy documents, 43% were not present in such
consultations
90% of CSOs believe that they have adequate access to information
75% of CSOs believe that they have enough time for comments
70% of CSOs believe that their attitudes/positions were not taken into consideration during the consultations, while 21% believe that their inputs were take
into consideration
22% of CSOs assessed that there neither feedback nor consultancy results were published, 57% believe there was no feedback, and that some consultancy
results were published by the public administration bodies, 18% of CSOs assessed that public administration provided detailed enough feedback, and
consultancy results were easily available to all parties
24% of CSOs stated that are not familiar with the structures and mechanisms between CSOs and governments, 42% state that are familiar, but do not
believe that they have actual use, 33% stated that are familiar with the structures and mechanisms and consider them useful
16% of CSOs stated that are not familiar with the structures and mechanisms for cooperation with local governments, 41% stated that are familiar, but
believe that they have no actual use, and 41% stated that are familiar with the structures and mechanisms and consider them useful
20% CSOs believe that attending the consultations, 29% that providing suggestions, and 19% that informing the public about the progress course of
negotiation is the most important role CSOs have for monitoring the process of reporting on country’s progress towards EU
Mechanisms created for improving cooperation between government and CSOs are not using their full potential.
In 2009, the Government adopted the "Strategy for Cooperation between the Government of Montenegro and NGOs" with the implementation of the Action Plan
for the period 2009-2011. The Strategy for the Development of the Non-governmental Sector in Montenegro for the period of 2014-2016, including the Action Plan,
was adopted in December 2013. These two strategic documents have embraced goals and measures for cooperation of the two sectors that have been developed
in consultations with CSOs. In 2012, state bodies involved eighty-three CSO representatives in working groups for drafting public policies in different areas. The
involvement of CSOs in the monitoring of public policies is not on a satisfactory level. According to the Report of Cooperation between State Bodies and CSOs, in the
first half of 2013 only eight out of forty-three bodies involved CSOs in monitoring. In 2012, the Government of Montenegro joined the global Open Government
Partnership initiative, launched by the United States and seven other countries in 2011.
The existing legislation obliges public institutions to make all draft and adopted laws and policies public. This topic is covered by a number of laws and regulations
(Law on Free Access to Information, Law on NGOs, Regulation Concerning Public Discussions, etc.). Clear mechanisms and procedures for access to public
information and documents exist and there are guidelines concerning this topic, which can be found on the websites of almost every ministry and local selfgovernment. There are prescribed mechanisms for appeals to the decision of the body that is in charge for sharing the requested information or making it public.
There is also the possibility to appeal to the Agency for the Protection of Personal Data and Free Access to Public Information. However, there is no possibility to
complain in a case where the requested information is labelled as secret because that information is under the jurisdiction of the Administrative Court of
Montenegro. All the laws and regulations are published in the Official Gazette in its printed and online versions. The explanations for the reasons for refusal of the
requests for access to information are often not clear, but they are included in the response. There is a lack of respect by a large number of government bodies for
the time frame in which requests for access to information must be answered. There are no known cases of individuals sanctioned for violation of the Law for Free
Access to Information. There are cases in which the appeal was approved by the agency or the administrative court.
Public authorities are under Articles 2 and 3 of the Decree on the Manner and Procedure for Achieving Cooperation between State Authorities and NGOs, and are
obliged, when creating documents from the annual work programmes (strategy and analysis of the situation in a particular area of draft laws, regulations and
bylaws that regulate the manner of exercising the rights and freedoms of citizens) to invite CSOs to participate in working groups. There is a clear and detailed
mechanism for appointing CSO representatives in these bodies that ensures the quality of the representatives and the representation. All the advisory bodies
relevant to civil society include CSO representatives. According to the questionnaire, 68 percent of CSOs participated in some way in working groups or bodies that
were in charge of creating laws and regulations. CSO representatives in these bodies are able to freely present and defend their attitudes, although some believe
that their proposals should be taken under consideration more often. CSO representatives are selected through selection processes, which are considered fair and
transparent. There are cases in which CSO representatives are not allowed to share the information on the work of the body/working group, as in the case of the
CSO representatives and members of working groups for negotiating with the EU.
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
7
There is a governmental Office for Cooperation with NGOs. The Office for Cooperation with CSOs has a limited capacity and authority to fully carry out its duties.
The office only employs three persons, the head of the office, an advisor and administrative secretary. Within the newly amended act on organisation of working
positions in the General Secretariat, an additional advisor position is planned within the office. The office does not have a clear and precisely determined budget
and its competences to coordinate with contact persons in public administration bodies have not been clearly defined. Also, being a part of the Government
General Secretariat, it lacks the authority to act independently. The long-term sustainability and effectiveness of the office is still a challenge. There is a Council for
Cooperation between the Government of Montenegro and NGOs; however, there are no allocated funds in the budget for its work. There are contact persons for
cooperation with non-governmental organisations appointed from 61 government bodies, but often there are too many replacements of contact persons. Being a
contact person for CSOs is only their secondary engagement. The decree on the procedure for achieving cooperation between state bodies and CSOs stipulates that
state bodies should involve CSOs in all phases of public policy development, and CSOs should be informed, consulted and regularly involved in working bodies. The
decrees are not fully respected.
The Decree on the Procedure for Cooperation between State Authorities and Non-governmental Organisations is the obligatory document for state bodies to
inform, consult and involve CSO representatives in drafting public policies. The Decree on the Manner and Procedure for Conducting Public Consultation is in
preparation. It is an obligatory document for ministries to consult in drafting laws for civil society. Internal regulations require specified units or officers in
government, line ministries or other government agencies to coordinate, monitor and report CSO involvement in their work. There has been certain improvement
in this field. Only six of sixteen ministries invited civil society in the early consultation phase when drafting laws. With 83 representatives of CSOs working in the
working groups on an annual basis, it can be concluded that the process of selection of CSO representatives defined in this decree is applicable and effective. Most
of the state administration still does not publish either annual work programmes on their web sites or details of a contact person in charge of cooperation with
NGOs. Only 30 of 53 authorities informed the public about the contact persons via web site; three of sixteen ministries publish the list of laws that will be drafted on
an annual level; three of sixteen ministries publish reports from public discussion containing written feedback on the consultation process. There is no public
information on trainings in which civil servants in charge of drafting public policies have participated.
Generally, CSOs have a negative opinion on the current mechanisms for dialogue and cooperation between CSOs and state bodies. According to the TACSO survey
from November 2013:
 Fifty-one percent of CSOs were aware of the existence of these structures and mechanisms, but they believed that they existed only to fulfil a form.
 Twenty-three percent of CSOs said that they were not aware of the mechanisms for dialogue and cooperation between CSOs and state bodies.
 Twenty-six percent of organisations said that they were familiar with the mechanisms for dialogue and cooperation and that they also considered them useful.
However, a relatively high participation of CSOs in consultation processes at the national and local level was registered. Fifty-seven percent of organisations in the
past three years participated in some consultation process at the local or national level.
Recommendations:
BCSDN
Legal:
 Key: Provide institutional and financial independence for the Office of
Cooperation and Council for Cooperation between the Government of
Montenegro and CSOs.
 Change the legislation needed to fulfil steps prescribed by the action
plan.
 Harmonise the Law on Free Access to Information with international
standards.
 Ensure adequate implementation of the Decree on the Manner and
Procedure for Achieving Cooperation between State Authorities and
CSOs.
 Make the council and the office institutionally and financially
independent.
 Amend the Rulebook on Organisation and Systematisation of the State
Administration in regard to the position and responsibilities of contact
persons for CSOs.
Practice:
 Ensure further participation of CSO from different areas of interest in
working groups for drafting public policies.
 Improve communication channels and ways for informing CSOs.
 Improve joint monitoring and evaluation of public policies by both
sectors.
 Provide efficient monitoring of the implementation of the strategies.
 Make answering requests clearer, including written explanations on the
reasons for refusal. Highlight the right to appeal and the procedure for
appealing.
 Regulate breaches of the legal requirements to access to public
information by civil servants by focusing more on the individual than on
the body that breached the requirements.
 Develop contact lists of CSOs that have experience in relevant areas so
government can contact them when implementing certain plans and
programmes.
 Enable rules of procedures of working groups as part of the negotiation
process to allow CSO representatives to inform the public about the
work of those groups.
 Redefine the status and mandate of the Office for Cooperation with
NGOs.
 Provide financial support to the budget to the Council for Cooperation
with NGOs.
 Strengthen the capacity of government contact persons for cooperation
with CSOs.
 Introduce mechanisms for higher compliance with decrees and
introduce sanctions for their disregard.
 Improve the capacity of government officials for the proper
implementation of the decree on the manner and procedure of
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
Possible others
 Seek to increase the number of employees in the Office for Cooperation
with CSOs.
19 12 2013
8

cooperation with NGOs and the decree on conducting public discussion
in preparing laws.
Monitor the implementation of both decrees.
CSOs Capacities
Objective 4.: Capable, transparent and accountable CSOs
Result 4.1.: CSOs' internal governance structures are transparent and accountable to members/constituents/beneficiaries




Indicator 4.1.a.: Percentage of CSOs publishing their governance structure and internal documents (statutes, codes of conduct etc.)
27% of CSOs believe that decision making in CSOs in Montenegro is in compliance with prescribed rules and laws of the organisation, 57% believe that
decisions are made by some individual or top management, 15% that decisions are made with prescribed rules including consultations with the employees
and volunteers
27% of CSOs stated that decision making in their organisation is in compliance with prescribed rules and laws of the organisation, 57% stated that decisions
are made by some individual or top management, 16% that decisions are made with prescribed rules including consultations with the employees and
volunteers
77% of CSOs stated that they have prescribed obligations to inform the members, or Managerial or Supervisory Board, customers or general public about
the results of your work
91% CSOs inform members of their organisation about the results of their work, 81% inform founders of their organisation, 70% inform management
board, 75% inform beneficiaries of their organisation, 82% inform general public, 72% general assembly, and 56% inform supervisory board
Result 4.2.: CSOs are able to communicate the results of their activities to the public







Indicator 4.2.a.: External perception of importance and impact of CSOs activities.
49.9% of surveyed trust to NGOs in their country, general population trust the most to the President of the state Presidency 52.3% of surveyed, and the
least to political parties 29.2% of surveyed
43.6% of general population do not trust to NGOs
56.4% of the general population believes that NGOs support dealing with problems in their country, 52.4% of population believe that the President of the
state Presidency supports in dealing with problems, and political party support the least 37.7%
38% of CSOs believe that the reason for lack of public presence of CSOs is insufficient interest of the media in reporting on CSOs activities, while 60% of
CSOs believe it is due insufficient (or inadequate) CSO activities
Almost all topics and issues listed in the survey were assessed as relevant in the range over 90%, only protection of animals was assessed with 83%1
71% of surveyed believe that CSOs in their country are active in fighting problems in human rights area, 72% believe in the area of ecology, and 76% in
rights of women
54% of surveyed believe that CSOs in their country are not active in fighting problems in safety area, 58% believe in the area of employment, and 59% in
rural development
Result 4.3.: CSOs are transparent about their programme activities and financial management










Indicator 4.3.a.: Percentage of CSOs making their (audited) financial accounts and annual reports publicly available
34% CSOs stated that they publish their statute on their web page, 30% stated that the statute is accessible to the public, 35% stated that the statute is not
accessible to the public
2% of CSOs stated that their statute is accessible to public from their office
21% of CSOs stated that they have a rulebook and it available on their web page, 16% stated that they have a rulebook, 31% stated that have a rulebook,
but it is not accessible to the public, and 32% stated that they do not have a rulebook
24% of CSOs (majority) stated that the rulebook is accessible in the written form
28% of CSOs believe that up to 10% of CSOs in Montenegro publish organisational Annual Program Statement of Work, 23% believe that only 11-30% of
CSOs do so, 25% believe that 31%-70% organisation publish APS of Work, and 18% believe that more than 70% do so
30% of CSOs stated that they publish their APS of Work on their web page, and 42% stated that they do not have APS of Work accessible to public
27% of CSOs belie that up to 10% of CSOs publish organisational financial reports, 26% of CSOs believe that 11%-30% publish financial report, 27% believe
that from 31-70% and 13% of CSOs believe that more than 70% of CSO publish financial reports
30% of CSOs stated that they have financial reports accessible to public and published on the web page, while 45% stated they do not have financial reports
available to the public
46% of CSOs believe that up to 10% of CSOs publish audited reports, and 12% believe that more than 70% publish audited reports
20% of CSOs stated that they have audited financial reports accessible to the public by publishing it on their web page, 58% of CSOs stated that they do not
have audited financial reports available to the public
Result 4.4.: CSOs monitor and evaluate the results and impact of their work





1
Indicator 4.4.a: Share of CSOs that monitor and evaluate their projects and programmes using baselines and quality indicators
31% of CSOs evaluate their projects pro forma, while 66% evaluate projects with the purpose of establishing efficiency and drawing a lesson for further
projects
29% of CSOs use external evaluation for realisation of their projects
12% use external evaluator for assessment of implementation of their organisational strategy
73% of CSOs have established system for assessment of efficiency for realisation of conducted projects
60% of CSOs have established system for assessment for implementation of organisation’s strategic plan
Topics and issues assessed included: education, social care and humanitarian activities, human rights, employment, the young and their problems, culture and art, ecology, violence, rights of women,
fight against corruption, fight agaiinst drug abuse and aloholism, safety, overseen government and local governemnets performances, rural development, protection of animals.
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries 2014-2020
19 12 2013
9
Objective 5.: Effective CSOs
Result 5.1.: CSO activities are guided by strategic long-term organisational planning





Indicator 5.1.a: Share of CSOs which have developed strategic plans including human resources development activities in order to attract and retain talent
62% of CSOs have developed strategic plan, 23% do not have a strategic plan
76% use internal evaluation when employing staff in their organisation
46% of CSOs neither have established system for assessment of efficiency of employees in their organisation, nor internal strategic plan dealing with these
issues.
46% of CSOs stated that they have a human resources development plan aimed at attacking and keeping talented associates, while 18% stated that they are
developing such plan
75% of CSO stated that they manage to keep talented associates, and 80% believe that they manage to attract quality new people
Result 5.2.: CSOs use research and other forms of evidence to underpin their activities



Indicator 5.2.a.: Number of CSOs' who use adequate argumentation and analysis for achieving advocacy goals
49% of CSOs active in public advocacy, mainly/frequently uses research for their advocacy actions, while 47% of them mainly/very rarely use research
73% of CSOs believe that they have enough information at their disposal
52% of CSOs use official data of national statistical offices, ministries, 25% conduct their own studies, 10% use academic studies
Result 5.3.: CSOs regularly network within and outside country borders and make use of coalition-building for increased impact in campaigning and advocacy








Indicator 5.3.a: Share of CSOs taking part in local, national, regional and international networks
66% of CSOs indicated that they do not belong to any international network, 20% stated that belong to one international network, 7% stated that they
belong to 2 international networks, 6% belong to more than 3 international networks
0% of CSOs are not active in any of international networks, 63% are active in one international network, 16% are active in 2 international networks, and 18%
are active in more than 3 international networks
45% of CSOs indicated that they do not belong to any national network, 29% stated that belong to one national network, 12% stated that they belong to 2
national networks, 14% belong to more than 3 national networks
2% of CSOs are not active in any of national networks, 59% are active in one national network, 16% are active in 2 national networks, and 21% are active in
more than 3 national networks
55% of CSOs indicated that they do not belong to any local network, 22% stated that belong to one local network, 9% stated that they belong to 2 local
networks, 12% belong to more than 3 local networks
4% of CSOs are not active in any of local networks, 49% are active in one local network, 17% are active in 2 local networks, and 27% are active in more than
3 local networks
36% of CSOs do not find CSO networks efficient, while 61% find them efficient
15% of CSO stated that their contributed in terms of the exchange of experience/knowledge from being member of a network, 5% gained in terms of
greater visibility
Objective 6.: Financially sustainable CSOs
Result 6.1.: Fund-raising activities are rooted in CSOs' long-term strategic plans and the core mission of the organisation


Indicator 6.1.a.: Percentage of CSOs that confirm that they are able to raise funds according to their strategic plans
65% of CSOs believe that CSOs in Montenegro mainly adopt to donors’ priorities and collect funds also for other activities not in line with their
organisational strategic plan, while 34% of CSOs believe that CSOs in Montenegro mainly stich with their strategic plan and collect funds for activities in line
with their strategic plan
60% of CSOs stated that they mainly stick t their strategic plans and collects fund for activities in line with its strategic plan, while 38% stated that they
adapt to donors’ priorities and collect funds also for other activities not in line with its strategic plans
Result 6.2.: CSO have a diversified funding base, including membership fees, corporate/individual giving and social entrepreneurship



Indicator 6.2.a.: Diversity in CSO sources of income
15% of CSOs stated that they did not have any donors in the past year, 20% had one donor, 20% had between 2-3 donors, 19% had 4-5 donors, and 14%
over 6 donors
28% of CSOs had income from membership fees, 24% had from citizens, 44% form local self-government and/or regional administration, 23% from other
foreign private or state resources, 22% form the EU funds, 36% form governments/ministries/state administration bodies, 30% from private companies
operating in the country, 8% from public companies.
68% of CSOs did not have income from membership fees, 71% did not have from citizens, 52% form local self-government and/or regional administration,
71% from other foreign private or state resources, 72% form the EU funds, 59% form governments/ministries/state administration bodies, 65% from private
companies operating in the country, 79% from public companies.
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
10
Objectives
Criteria against which indicators were assessed
Baseline findings (BCSDN country report and TACSO Needs
Assessment Report)
Scoring
Recommendations
Conducive environment
1. An enabling legal and
policy environment,
for the exercise of the
rights of freedom,
expression, assembly
and association,
.
Results: 1.1. All individuals and legal entities can express themselves freely, assemble peacefully and establish, join and participate in non-formal and/or registered organisations
Indicator: 1.1.a. Quality assessment of existing legislation and policy framework
Freedom of establishment and participation in informal/ formal
Freedom of establishment and participation in informal/ formal
52/100
Freedom of establishment and participation in informal/ formal
organisations online/offline of individuals/ organisations
organisations online/offline of individuals/ organisations
organisations online/ offline of individuals/ organisations
Legislation:
Legislation:
Legislation (BCSDN):
1) There is a legal framework according to which any person can
 There is a legal framework for establishing associations and
 Changes of the laws / by-laws and internal procedures of the
establish associations, foundations and other types of non-profit,
foundations (Law on NGOs, 2011). There is no legal framework for
necessary statistical data related to the work of CSOs and the
non-governmental entities (e.g., non-profit company) for any
establishing other types of organizations such as non-profit
manner of their introduction into the system of official statistics;
purpose. (1.1.1.L1)
companies.
Legislation (possible other):
2) The legal framework allows both individual and legal persons to
 Foreign non-governmental organization may operate on the
 Seek for clarity in the legislation if the registration is
exercise this right without discrimination (age, nationality, legal
territory of Montenegro in order to achieve goals and interests
mandatory or not.
capacity, gender etc.). (1.1.1.L2)
which are not prohibited by Constitution and the law.2
3) Registration is not mandatory, and in cases when organizations
 Organizations acquire legal personality only after registration
decide to register, the registration rules are clearly prescribed and
 The Association may be established by at least 3 people, one of
allow for easy, timely and inexpensive registration and appeal
whom must have residence, domicile or head office in Montenegro
process (1.1.1.L3)
 A person authorized to represent must be permanent or temporary
4) The law allows for networking among organizations in the countries
resident in Montenegro
and abroad without prior notification. (1.1.1.L4)
 There are no sanctions prescribed in case of failure to register
 Law on NGOs allows networking with organizations in Montenegro
and abroad
 According to Labor Law and Rulebook on Registration of Trade
Unions and Rulebook on Registration of Representative Trade
Union, trade organizations are registered in Trade Union Register
and Register of Representative Trade Union kept at the Ministry of
Labor and Social Welfare of Montenegro. 3
Practice (BCSDN):
Practice
Practice:
 Ensure equal principles for all when it comes to founding and
 Over 90% of organizations referred to the questionnaire said that
1) Every individual or legal entity in practice can form associations,
registering organizations.
they didn’t have problems registering the organizations
foundations or other non-profit, non-governmental organizations
 Reduce time of waiting during the registration process
 Few organizations have met with difficulties and additional
offline or online. (1.1.1.P1)
 Provide more information within Registry, such as contact
procedures when registering and with naming their representatives
2) Individuals and legal entities are not sanctioned for not-registering
information
 As the main flaw of the Registering process organizations named
their organizations. (1.1.1.P2)
Practice
(possible other):
long (one month comparing to 10 days which are prescribed by the
3) Registration is truly accessible within the legally prescribed

Look for more information in relation to sanctioning or
Law) waiting for the decision.
deadlines; authorities decide on cases in non-subjective and
not if organisation is acting informally in comparison to
 Registry does not contain contact information
apolitical manner. (1.1.1.P3)
registered ones.
4) Individuals and CSOs can form and participate in networks and
coalitions, within and outside their home countries. (1.1.1.P4)
Freedom of CSOs operations in relation to unwarranted state
interference in CSOs’ internal governance and activities
Legislation:
5) The legal framework provides guarantees against state interference
in internal matters of associations, foundations and other types of
non-profit entities. (1.1.2.L1)
6) The state provides protection from interference by third parties.
(1.1.2.L2)
7) Financial reporting (including money laundering regulations) and
accounting rules take into account the specific nature of the CSOs
2
3
Freedom of CSOs operations in relation to unwarranted state
interference in CSOs’ internal governance and activities
Legislation
 State control over the work of CSOs is regulated by the Inspection
Law
 A fine ranging from EUR 500 to EUR 800 shall be imposed on a nongovernmental organization if it does not report the body in charge
about the changes in data which are to be entered in the register
within 30 days.
 The same punishment is also envisaged in the event of failure to
Montenegro Needs Assessment Report, TACSO, December 2013, pg. 8
Ibid 1 pg.9
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
11
Freedom of CSOs operations in relation to unwarranted state
interference in CSOs’ internal governance and activities
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Revise regulations on the amount of sanctions and on cases
when they are being imposed
Legislation (possible other):
 Look for more information whether or not legal
framework provides guarantees against state interference
in internal matter of CSOs,
 Look for more information whether or not state provides
and are proportionate to the size of the organization and its
type/scope of activities. (1.1.2.L3)
8) Sanctions for breaching legal requirements should be based on
applicable legislation and follow the principle of proportionality.
(1.1.2.L4)
9) The restrictions and the rules for dissolution and termination meet
the standards of international law and are based on objective
criteria which restrict arbitrary decision making. (1.1.2.L5)
Practice:
There are no cases of state interference in internal matters of
associations, foundations and other types of non-profit entities.
(1.1.2.P1)
1) There are no practices of invasive oversight to which impose
burdensome reporting requirements. (1.1.2.P2)
2) Sanctions are applied in rare/extreme cases, they are proportional
and are subject to a judicial review (1.1.2.P3)
3)
Freedom of CSOs in seeking and securing financial resources from
various domestic and foreign sources to support CSOs’ activities
Legislation:
1) Legislation allows CSOs to engage in economic activities (1.1.3.L1)
2) CSOs are allowed to receive foreign funding (1.1.3.L2)
3) CSO are allowed to receive funding from individuals, corporations
and other sources (1.1.3.L3)
Practice:
1) Legislation on CSOs engaging in economic activities is implemented
and is not burdensome for CSOs. (1.1.3.P1)
2) There are no restrictions (e.g. administrative or financial burden,
preapprovals, or channelling such funds via specific bodies) on CSOs
to receive foreign funding. (1.1.3.P2)
3) Receipt of funding from individuals, corporations and other sources
is easy, effective and without any unnecessary cost or
administrative burden. (1.1.3.P3)
Freedom of peaceful assembly of CSOs’ representatives, individuals or
CSOs
Legislation:
1) The legal framework is based on international standards and
provides the right for freedom of assembly for all without any
discrimination (1.2.1.L1).
2) The laws recognize and do not restrict spontaneous, simultaneous
and counter-assemblies (1.2.1.L2)
3) The exercise of the right is not subject to prior authorization by the
authorities, but at the most to a prior notification procedure,
which is not burdensome. (1.2.1.L3)
4) Any restriction of the right based on law and prescribed by
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
publish financial statements within 10 days of adoption.
 A fine ranging from EUR 500 to EUR 4,000 shall be imposed on nongovernmental organizations if, during the calendar year proceed to
conduct economic activity after crossing the allowed threshold of
4,000 or 20% of total annual revenue
Practice:
 Over 97% of organizations stated that the government did not
interfere in their internal affairs
 25% of organizations stated that they were sometimes under
pressure during their work
 5 organizations had a case of unannounced inspections of state
bodies
 About 42% of organizations have been subjected to pressure
because of their critical attitude towards authority
 Organizations are generally not exposed to sanctions, but most of
those that are, consider them as disproportionate sanctions.
Freedom of CSOs in seeking and securing financial resources from
various domestic and foreign sources to support CSOs’ activities
Legislation:
 Non-governmental organizations can directly engage in economic
activity specified in the statute if they are registered in the
Company Register of the Commercial Court.
 Legislation allows CSOs to be funded by foreign institutions and
organization, domestic legal and private individuals as well as
corporations.
 If the income from economic activities in the current year exceeds
4,000 or 20% of the annual income, a non-governmental
organization cannot directly engage in economic activities later this
year.
Practice:
 Over 80% of organizations reported that they did not have the
problems associated with obtaining funds from abroad
 Most of the organizations funded by private sources stated that
they had no administrative restrictions and difficulties
Freedom of peaceful assembly of CSOs’ representatives, individuals or
CSOs
Legislation:
 The Constitution of Montenegro guarantees freedom of peaceful
assembly, without a permit, subject to prior notification to the
competent authority.
 Freedom of assembly may be temporarily restricted by the decision
of the competent authority for the prevention of disorder or crime,
protection of health or morals or for the protection of people and
property in accordance with law.
12
protection from interference by third party
Practice:
 Provide an effective system for complaints by CSOs on account of
pressure
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCDN’s
Freedom of CSOs in seeking and securing financial resources from
various domestic and foreign sources to support CSOs’ activities
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Continuation of adequate implementation of legislation in this
field
 Consider revising threshold for economic activities, in the
purpose of establishing more effective framework for service
provision
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Practice (BCSDN):
 Promote funding of CSO projects and activities from individuals
and corporations
Practice (possible other):
 Further monitor if the legislation of CSOs engaging in
economic activities is burdensome
 Further monitor of funds from individuals, corporations
and other sources is easy, effective and w/o any
unnecessary costs and administrative burden
Freedom of peaceful assembly of CSOs’ representatives,
individuals or CSOs
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Continuation of adequate implementation of legislation in this
field
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
regulatory authority can be appealed by organizers (1.2.1.L4)
Practice:
1) There are no cases of encroachment of the freedom of assembly,
and any group of people can assemble at desired place and time, in
line with the legal provisions. (1.2.1.P1)
2) Restrictions are justified with explanation of the reason for each
restriction, which is promptly communicated in writing to the
organizer to guarantee the possibility of appeal.
3) (1.2.1.P2) Simultaneous, spontaneous and counter-assemblies can
take place, and the state facilitates and protects groups to exercise
their right against people who aim to prevent or disrupt the
assembly. (1.2.1.P3)
4) There are cases of freedom of assembly practiced by CSOs
(individually or through their organizations) without prior
authorization; when notification is required it is submitted in a
short period of time and does not limit the possibility to organize
the assembly. (1.2.1.P4)
5) No excessive use of force is exercised by law enforcement bodies,
including pre-emptive detentions of organizers and participants.
(1.2.1.P5)
6) Media should have as much access to the assembly as possible
(1.2.1.P6)
Freedom of expression of individuals or through their organisations
Legislation
1) The legal framework provides freedom of expression for all
(1.2.2.L1)
2) Restrictions, such as limitation of hate speech, imposed by
legislation are clearly prescribed and in line with international law
and standards (1.2.2.L2)
3) Libel is a misdemeanor rather than part of the penal code
(1.2.2.L3)
Practice:
1) CSO representatives, especially those from human rights and watch
dog organizations enjoy the right to freedom of expression on
matters they support and they are critical of. (1.2.2.P1)
2) There are no cases of encroachment of the right to freedom of
expression for all. (1.2.2.P2)
3) There are no cases where individuals, including CSO representatives
would be persecuted for critical speech, in public or private.
(1.2.2.P3)
4) There is no sanction for critical speech, in public or private, under
the penal code. (1.2.2.P4)
5)
Rights of CSOs representatives, individuals and through their
organisations to safely receive and impart information through any
media
Legislation:
1) The legal framework provides the possibility to communicate via
and access any source of information, including the Internet and
ICT; if there are legal restrictions, these are exceptional, limited
and based on international human rights law (1.2.3.L1)
2) The legal framework prohibits unjustified monitoring of
communication channels, including Internet and ICT, or collecting
users’ information by the authorities (1.2.3.L2)
Practice
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
Practice:
 Organizations that have organized peaceful gatherings have not
been faced with restrictions
 4 organizations have stated that in the event of a counter protest
weren’t protected by police
 3 organizations organized a gathering without prior notice state
authorities
Freedom of expression of individuals or through their organisations
Legislation:
 By The Constitution of Montenegro everyone has the right to
freedom of expression by speech, writing, painting, or otherwise.
 The right to freedom of expression can be limited only by the other
persons’ right to dignity, reputation and honor, and if it threatens
public morality or security of Montenegro.
 Defamation was decriminalized
Practice:
 5 organizations had an objection to a restriction of freedom of
expression
 Mostly LGBT activists had problems in regard to publicly expressing
their opinion
 Decriminalization of defamation has contributed to reducing the
number of cases brought against journalists.
Rights of CSOs representatives, individuals and through their
organisations to safely receive and impart information through any
media
Legislation:
 The Law on Free Access to Information Act is not harmonized with
other relevant laws
 Rules of the working group for the preparation of negotiations
restrict CSO members to inform the public about the work of the
working group.
 There are no legislated restrictions in the use of different
communication and information tools.
Practice:
13
Practice:
 Establish effective system of police protection in case of counterprotests
Practice (possible other):
 Look for more information related to access of media to
assembly
Freedom of expression of individuals or through their
organisations
Legislation (BCDN):
 Continuation of adequate implementation of legislation in this
field
Legislation (possible other):
 Greater monitoring of practical manifestation of
implementation of legislation.
Practice (BCSDN):
 Ensure efficient protection for LGBT activists in the country
Practice (possible other):
 Seek for greater monitoring of sanctions of critical speech,
in public or private, under the penal code.
Rights of CSOs representatives, individuals and through their
organisations to safely receive and impart information through
any media
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Harmonize the Law on free access to information with the law of
confidentiality of information
 Modify the Rules of Procedure of working groups for the
preparation of negotiation in order to provide space for CSO
representatives to inform the public about the work of the
working groups
 Adopt bylaws in accordance with the Law on Free Access to
Information
1) There are no cases in practice where restrictions are imposed on
accessing any source of information, including the Internet or ICT.
(1.2.3.P1)
2) The Internet is widely accessible and affordable(1.2.3.P2)
3) There is no practice or cases of unjustified monitoring by the
authorities of communication channels, including the Internet or
ICT, or of collecting users’ information. (1.2.3.P3)
4) There are no cases of police harassment of members of social
network groups. (1.2.3.P4)
 The implementation of the new Law on Free Access to Information
has started
 The internet and other tools used for collecting information are
accessible and there are no restrictions in practice regarding this.
Indicator: 1.1.b. Progress with the adoption and implementation of relevant legislation
Progress
Will be monitored as of this baseline in accordance to the adopted
recommendations
Result: 1.2. The policies and legal environment stimulate and facilitate volunteering and employment in CSOs
Indicators: 1.2.a. Number of employees in CSO (permanent and part-time)
 There is no recent data available in relation to number of
employees in CSOs.
 According to the survey of ADP ZID from 2010, there are 556
persons employed in NGOs in line with the Labour Law32, while
1,358 of them have worked on the basis of service contracts (shortterm or occasional employment). That is less than 1% (0.86%) out of
the total average number of employees in Montenegro in 2010
(161,742 MONSTAT).4
 21% of CSOs stated that they do not have employees, 40% have one
employee, 19% from 2-5 employees, and 20% over 6 employees.
 Out of total number of employees, 2.3% work full time, and 1.7%
work part-time.5
Indicator: 1.2.b. Number of volunteers in CSOs per type of CSO / sector
 There is a lack of information on number of volunteers
 19% of CSOs believe that up to 10% of organisation engaged
volunteers, 21% believe that 10-20% of CSOs engage volunteers,
26% believe that 21-50% CSOs engage volunteers, and 23% of CSOs
believe that over 50% of CSOs engage volunteers
 69% CSOs stated that they have engaged, 28% stated that have not
engaged volunteers in 2013, and for 3% it was not applicable
 32% of the organisation had 1-5 volunteers, 36% of CSOs over 15
volunteers, and 33% between 6-15 volunteers in 2013
 17% of CSOs paid pecuniary compensations to the engaged
volunteers in the amount of their costs, and 63% did not pay any
pecuniary costs
 85% of CSOs stated that they did not conclude any volunteering
contract with volunteers, 4% stated that they have concluded with
up to 3 volunteers, 8% if CSOs concluded volunteering contract with
4-10 volunteers, and 3% with more than 10 volunteers
 90% of CSOs did not conclude any other contract with volunteers. 6
Indicator: 1.2.c. Quality of legislative framework
4
Ibid 1 pg. 28
Baseline Survey Ipsos, Paril 2014
6 Ibid 5
5
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
14
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Practice (BCSDN):
 Improve web presentations of state authorities in the sense of
information provided
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Equality of treatment of CSOs’ employees in comparison with other
employees
Legislation:
1) CSOs are treated in an equal manner to other employers by
law and policies. (2.3.1.L1)
Practice:
2) If there are state incentive programs for employment, CSOs are
treated like all other sectors.
3) There are regular statistics on the number of employees in the
non-profit sector.
Enabling volunteering policies and laws
Legislation:
4) Legislation stimulates volunteering and incorporates best
regulatory practices, while at the same time allowing for
spontaneous volunteering practices. (2.3.2.L1)
5) There are incentives and state supported programs for the
development and promotion of volunteering. (2.3.2.L2)
6) There are clearly defined contractual relationships and
protections covering organized volunteering. (2.3.2.L3)
7
Ibid 1, pg. 12
8
Ibid 1, pg. 12
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
Equality of treatment of CSOs’ employees in comparison with other
employees
Legislation:
 The Labor law treat CSOs in an equal manner to other employers
 The Labor Law does not recognize any advantages of employment
and working in CSO sector. The Law imposes an obligation for
creating employee contact for unlimited period of time after two
years of work, and in the case of involuntary termination of
employment, the employer i.e. organization has to settle severance
pay in the amount of six gross salaries.7
 There is no statistics in regard to employees and volunteers in civil
sector
Practice:
 In 2012, Government provided new program for vocational training
and employment. CSOs could apply under the same conditions as
state bodies and private companies
 Lack of official statistics on employees and volunteers, income
(donations from domestic and foreign sources, economic activities,
membership fees, etc.) for the offices, technical facilities. This
deficiency has the effect shortness of planning of future directions
of development NGOs.
 Taking into consideration that CSOs are mainly financed through
projects and that they do not have their own assets for severance
pay as stipulated by the Labor Law, they are exposed to potential
threats for further operations and functioning.8
Enabling volunteering policies and laws
Legislation:
 Volunteer Work Act was intended to create a favorable legal
environment for the development of volunteering. The Act defines a
number of institutes and issues relevant to the volunteerism: the
definition of volunteers, their rights and obligations, the definition
of the organizers of volunteer work, rights and obligations, the
definition of user voluntary services, mandatory elements of the
volunteering, international volunteering, development and
monitoring of volunteerism, etc..
 Law treats volunteering as a special form of labor-law relations,
rather than voluntary, private citizens' initiative
 The law prohibits so-called corporate volunteering, even when
outside of an organized labor and business premises of the
company, although this form of volunteering, comparatively
speaking, is gaining in importance
 Law on volunteering prescribes that volunteers should have a
contract on volunteering and that volunteering period will be
addressed as working experience.
 The Law does not stimulate volunteering, but prohibits and makes
bureaucratic the manner of participation of citizens in volunteering,
and therefore, instead of making efforts to strongly regulate all
forms of citizens in volunteering and instances on punishment the
offenders, the Law should have the approach of affirming
volunteerism.
15
Equality of treatment of CSOs’ employees in comparison with
other employees
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Create statistics of employees and volunteers in civil sector
Legislation (possible other):
 Seek for liberation of the employment conditions in the
Labour Law.
Practice (BCSDN):
 Examine the possibility of establishing and monitoring specific
information regarding the specific activities of NGOs and their
introduction into the system of data by the competent
authorities
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Enabling volunteering policies and laws
Legislation (BCSDN)
 A national definition and strategy should be developed with
respect to volunteering.
 Volunteering policies should be developed within the
framework of the abovementioned national definition and
strategy.
Legislation (possible other):
Apart from the BCSDN’s
 Introduce affirming measures related to the volunteerism
in the relevant Law (support of voluntary activities,
support of structure that develops and promotes
volunteerism, the coordination board whose
establishment was foreseen by the conclusion of the
Strategy for the Development of Volunteerism)
 Adopt accompanying secondary legislation.
Practice:
1)
Incentives and programs are transparent and easily available to
CSOs and the policy/strategic document/ law is fully implemented,
monitored and evaluated periodically in a participatory manner.
2) Administrative procedures for organizers of volunteer activities or
volunteers are not complicated and are without any unnecessary
costs.
3) Volunteering can take place in any form; there are no cases of
complaints of restrictions on volunteering.
 Provisions of this Law greatly hinder the arrival of foreign
volunteers, as they must have a residence permit or permission for
housing.
 This law creates additional financial burdens and puts CSOs in even
less favorable position (compulsory health insurance, residence
permits for foreign volunteers).
 Labor inspection may without prior warning prohibit volunteering if
a volunteer or organizer do not have necessary documentation
(contract and insurance), but there is not a single mechanism to
prevent potential abuse.
 The lawmakers have not adopted the accompanying secondary
legislation in due time. 9
Practice:
 94% of organizations from our survey stated that they hire
volunteers for their activities.
 Organizations mostly hire volunteers in accordance with their
internal rules, not by the Law on Volunteering.
 Volunteering in practice is mostly spontaneous and it is not defined
by contractual relation as set by the Law
Practice (BCSDN):
 Ensure dissemination of regional and international good
practices in this field
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Result: 1.3. National and/or local authorities have enabling policies and rules for grass-roots organisations* and/or civic initiatives.
*A grass-roots organisation is a self-organised group of individuals pursuing common interests through a volunteer-based, non-profit organisation. Grassroots organisations usually have a low degree of formality but a
broader purpose than issue-based self-help groups, community-based organisations or neighbourhood-associations.
Indicator: 1.3.a. Quality of the enabling environment for grass-roots organisations and/or civic initiatives
9
Registration, informal vs. formal
Legislation:
1)
Registration is not mandatory, and in cases when organizations
decide to register, the registration rules are clearly prescribed and
allow for easy, timely and inexpensive registration and appeal
process. (1.1.1.L3)
Practice:
1) Every individual or legal entity in practice can form associations,
foundations or other non-profit, non-governmental organizations
offline or online. (1.1.1.P1)
2) Individuals and legal entities are not sanctioned for not-registering
their organizations. (1.1.1.P2)
3) Registration is truly accessible within legally prescribed deadlines;
authorities decide on cases in non-subjective and apolitical
manner. (1.1.1.P3)
Registration, informal vs. formal
Legislation:
 There are no sanctions prescribed in case of failure to register a
CSOs
Practice:
 Over 90% of organizations referred to the questionnaire said that
they didn’t have problems registering the organizations
 Few organizations have met with difficulties and additional
procedures when registering and with naming their representatives
 As the main flaw of the Registering process organizations named
long (one month comparing to 10 days which are prescribed by the
Law) waiting for the decision.
 Registry does not contain contact information
Spontaneity
Legislation
1) The laws recognize and do not restrict spontaneous, simultaneous
and counter-assemblies. (1.2.1.L2)
2) The exercise of the right is not subject to prior authorization by the
authorities, but at the most to a prior notification procedure,
which is not burdensome. (1.2.1.L3)
3) The legal framework provides the possibility to communicate via
Spontaneity
Legislation:
 Freedom of assembly may be temporarily restricted by the decision
of the competent authority for the prevention of disorder or crime,
protection of health or morals or for the protection of people and
property in accordance with law.
 The Law on Free Access to Information Act is not harmonized with
other relevant laws
Ibid 1, pg. 11
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
16
Registration, informal vs. formal
Legislation (BCSDN):
N/A
Legislation (possible other):
 Seek for clarity in the legislation if the registration is
mandatory or not.
Practice (BCSDN):
 Ensure equal principles for all when it comes to founding and
registering organizations.
 Reduce time of waiting during the registration process
 Provide more information within Registry, such as contact
information
Practice (possible other):
 Look for more information in relation to sanctioning or
not if organisation is acting informally in comparison to
registered ones.
Spontaneity
Legislation:
 Continuation of adequate implementation of legislation in this
field
 Harmonize the Law on free access to information with the law
of confidentiality of information
 Modify the Rules of Procedure of working groups for the
preparation of negotiation in order to provide space for CSO
and access any source of information, including the Internet and
ICT; if there are legal restrictions, these are exceptional, limited
and based on international human rights law. (1.2.3.L1)
Practice:
There are no cases of police harassment of members of social network
groups. (1.2.3.P4)
2. An enabling financial
environment which
supports sustainability
of CSOs.
representatives to inform the public about the work of the
working groups
 Adopt by-laws in accordance with the Law on Free Access to
Information
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Practice (BCSDN):
N/A
Practice (possible other):
N/A
Result: 2.1. Easy-to-meet financial rules for CSO, which are proportionate to their turn-over and non-commercial activities
Indicator: 2.1.a. CSOs' perception of the ease and effectiveness of financial rules and reporting requirements (disaggregated by type / size of CSO)
 15% of CSOs assessed that prescribed financial rule, obligations of
bookkeeping and accounting, referring to their organisations are
not clear and understandable, while for 82% were clear and
understandable
 For 27% of CSOs it is not simple to implement prescribed financial
rule, obligations of bookkeeping and accounting, referring to their
organisations are not clear and understandable, while for 71% is
simple to implement10
Indicator: 2.1.b. Quality assessment of financial rules (with the focus on built-in mechanisms that financial rules and obligations change as the turn-over and non-commercial activities change).
Legislation:
Financial reporting
Financial reporting
1) Financial reporting (including money laundering regulations) and
Legislation:
Legislation (BCSDN):
accounting rules take into account the specific nature of the CSOs
 N/A.
 N/A.
and are proportionate to the size of the organization and its
Legislation (possible other):
type/scope of activities. (1.1.2.L3)
 Look for more information whether or not financial
reporting and accounting rules take into account the
specific nature of the CSOs and proportionate to the size
of the organisations and its type/scope of activities.
Practice:
Practice:
Practice (BCSDN):
1) There are no practices of invasive oversight which impose
 25% of organizations stated that they were sometimes under
 Provide an effective system for complaints by CSOs on account of
burdensome reporting requirements. (1.1.2.P2)
pressure during their work in relation to accounting
pressure
Practice (possible other):
 5 organizations had a case of unannounced inspections of state
bodies
 Same as BCSDN’s
 About 42% of organizations have been subjected to pressure
because of their critical attitude towards authority
Economic activities
Legislation:
1) Legislation allows CSOs to engage in economic activities. (1.1.3.L1)
2) CSOs are allowed to receive foreign funding. (1.1.3.L2)
3) CSO are allowed to receive funding from individuals, corporations
and other sources(1.1.3.L3)
10
 Rules of the working group for the preparation of negotiations
restrict CSO members to inform the public about the work of the
working group.
 There are no legislated restrictions in the use of different
communication and information tools.
Practice
 N/A
Economic activities
Legislation:
 Non-governmental organizations can directly engage in economic
activity specified in the statute if they are registered in the
Company Register. The provision of the Law specify that only
economic activity of CSOs is entered in the Register, rather than the
organization itself in order to avoid interpretation whether it needs
to be registered as a company or established as a new legal entity or
Ibid 5
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
17
Economic activities
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Consider revising threshold for economic activities, in the
purpose of establishing more effective framework for service
provision
 Continuation of adequate implementation of legislation in this
field
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
not
 Non-governmental organization needs to cumulatively meet the
following conditions in order to conduct economic activity: 1)
economic activity mush be determined by Articles of Association; 2)
gained revenues must be used exclusively to finance the statutory
goals of the organization and on the territory of Montenegro; 3)
economic activity must be conducted in line with the regulations
governing the area within which the economic activity is conducted;
4) carrying out of the economic activity must be entered in the
Central Register of the Commercial Court, which is done by entering
the code and description of the activity, as stipulated by the
regulations on classification of activities..11
 If the income from economic activities in the current year exceeds
4, 000 or 20 % of the annual income, a non-governmental
organization cannot directly engage in economic activity later this
year.
 Legislation allows CSOs to be funded by foreign institutions and
organization, domestic legal and private individuals as well as
corporations.
 Legislation allows CSOs to be funded by foreign institutions and
organization, domestic legal and private individuals as well as
corporations.
Practice:
 Over 80% of organizations reported that they did not have the
problems associated with obtaining funds from abroad
 Most of the organizations funded by private sources stated that
they had no administrative restrictions and difficulties
 All other donations, domestic or foreign are subject to taxes
Practice:
1) Legislation on CSOs engaging in economic activities is implemented
and is not burdensome for CSOs. (1.1.3.P1)
2) There are no restrictions (e.g. administrative or financial burden,
preapprovals, or channeling such funds via specific bodies) on CSOs
to receive foreign funding. (1.1.3.P2)
3) Receipt of funding from individuals, corporations and other
sources is easy, effective and without any unnecessary cost or
administrative burden. (1.1.3.P3)
4) Endowments are established without major procedural difficulties
and operate freely, without administrative burden or high financial
cost (2.1.1.P4)
Result: 2.2. Donations are stimulated with adequate legislation and regulations
Indicators: 2.2.a. Quality and applicability/practice of the legal framework for individual and corporate giving
Incentives for individual and corporate giving
Incentives for individual and corporate giving
Legislation:
Legislation:
1) The law provides tax deductions for individual and corporate
 The Law on Income Tax stipulates that expenditure on health,
donations to CSOs (2.1.2.L1)
education, sports, culture and environmental protection purposes
2) There are clear requirements/conditions for receiving deductible
are recognized as expenses up to 3.5% of total revenue. A similar
donations and these include a wide range of publicly beneficial
provision is contained in the Law on Corporate Income Tax.
activities. (2.1.2.L2)
 Law on Corporate Income Tax and Law on Personal Income Tax
stipulate narrowly defined and limited list of areas of public
interest. These regulations have not covered a number of other
areas, not even those that are otherwise recognized and protected
as constitutional values (human and minority rights, the rule of law),
or on whose importance in society there is a broad consensus (fight
against corruption, sustainable development). Definition of areas of
public interest specified in these regulations is inconsistent with
considerably broader list of areas of public interest in which NGOs
operate, which is regulated by the Law on NGOs, and which is not
limited.12
11
Ibid 1, pg 9
12
Ibid 1, pg. 10
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
18
Practice (BCSDN):
 Promote funding of CSO projects and activities from
individuals and corporations
 Facilitate the tax liability on donations and grants from foreign
or domestic natural or legal persons.
Practice (possible other):
 Further monitor if the legislation of CSOs engaging in
economic activities is burdensome
 Further monitor of funds from individuals, corporations
and other sources is easy, effective and w/o any
unnecessary costs and administrative burden
Incentives for individual and corporate giving
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Changes in the tax laws in terms of concept of public interest
activities agreed with the appropriate provisions of the NGOs in
order to fully realize the potential for the development of
philanthropy in Montenegro.
 Development of the Analysis of the legal framework for the
promotion of a culture of giving enterprises (corporate
philanthropy), and the development and change to existing
regulations in line with the analysis.
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Practice:
1) There is a functional procedure in place to claim tax deductions for
individual and corporate donations. (2.1.2.P1)
2) CSOs working in the main areas of public interest, including human
rights and watchdog organizations, effectively enjoy tax deductible
donations. (2.1.2.P3)
 The legislation is not encouraging enough for the CSR.
Practice:
 The provisions of legal and natural persons-taxpayers in the area of
human rights are not recognized as an expense, although human
rights are recognized as a fundamental constitutional value.
 The difference between the tax and statutory regulations leads to a
situation where there are two public policies when it comes to areas
of public interest in which CSOs operate, depending on whether
CSOs are funded directly by the state or through tax incentives. So
for example, CSO operating in the field of human rights meets the
general requirements prescribed to apply for financing from the
budget, however, grant to such CSO by legal entities or natural
persons does not represent recognized tax expenditure.
 There are no official statistics that show the degree of utilization of
these benefits.13
 The culture of giving and corporate social responsibility is not being
encouraged, despite the amendment of the Law on Corporate
Income Tax
2.3. Financial (e.g. tax or in-kind) benefits are available
2.3.a. Quality of the system of tax benefits for the CSOs’ operational and economic activities
Tax benefits for CSOs
Tax benefits for CSOs
Legislation:
Legislation:
1) The law provides tax free treatment for all grants and donations
 The state provides tax benefits for non-governmental organizations,
supporting non-for-profit activity of CSOs. (2.1.1.L1)
in accordance with the law.
2) The law provides tax benefits for economic activities of CSOs.
 The provisions of the new Law specify that only economic activity of
(2.1.1.L2)
the CSO is entered in the Central register held by Commercial Court,
3) The law provides tax benefits for passive investments of CSOs.
rather than the organization itself in order to avoid interpretations
(2.1.1.L3)
whether it needs to be registered as a company or established as a
4) The law allows the establishment of and provides tax benefits for
new legal entity or not
endowments. (2.1.1.L4)
 The Law on Income Tax stipulates that expenditure on health,
education, sports, culture and environmental protection purposes
are recognized as expenses up to 3.5% of total revenue. A similar
provision is contained in the Law on Corporate Income Tax.
 CSOs are subject of the same provisions of the Value Added Tax
(currently paid at the standard rate of 19%) as the private
companies, although CSOs are not VAT registered if their total
annual income is less than the statutory limit of 18,000 EUR
Practice:
Practice:
 Only grants coming directly from and EU institution are tax exempt
1) There is no direct or indirect (hidden) tax on grants reported
 All other donations, domestic or foreign are subject to taxes
(2.1.1.P1)
 There is no tax exception for economic activities.
2) Tax benefits for economic activities of CSOs are effective and
support the operation of CSOs (2.1.1.P2)
3) Passive investments are utilized by CSOs and no sanctions are
applied in doing so. (2.1.1.P3)
4) Endowments are established without major procedural difficulties
and operate freely, without administrative burden nor high
financial cost (2.1.1.P4)
Practice (BCSDN):
 Expand narrowly defined range of activities of public interest,
for example, giving of legal and physical persons-tax payers in
the field of human rights
 Make changes to the Law on Profit Tax, to extend the above
mentioned range of activities of public interest
Practice (possible other):
 Harmonise relevant public policies
 Seek for official statistics that show the degree of
utilization of benefits related to individual and corporate
giving.
Tax benefits for CSOs
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Improve the legal framework for tax relief for the economical
CSOs activities
 Change the Law on Income tax in order to spread the areas of
public interests (i.e.: human rights, anti-corruption activities,
anti-discrimination activities etc.)
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Practice (BCSDN):
 Facilitate the tax liability on donations and grants from foreign
or domestic natural or legal persons.
Practice (possible other):
 Seek for legislation that will stimulate economic activities
of the CSOs.
Result: 2.4. Government support to CSOs is available and provided in a transparent, accountable, fair and non-discriminatory manner
Indicator: 2.4.a. Ratio of amount sought vs. amount approved/disbursed annually through state funding to CSOs. (this proves availability of funds)
Legislation:
1) The law provides tax free treatment for all grants and donations
13
Legislation:
 The state provides tax benefits for non-governmental organizations,
Ibid 1 pg. 11
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
19
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Improve the legal framework for tax relief for the economical
2)
3)
4)
supporting non-for-profit activity of CSOs. (2.1.1.L1)
The law provides tax benefits for economic activities of CSOs.
(2.1.1.L2)
The law provides tax benefits for passive investments of CSOs.
(2.1.1.L3)
The law allows the establishment of and provides tax benefits for
endowments. (2.1.1.L4)
Practice:
1) There is no direct or indirect (hidden) tax on grants
reported(2.1.1.P1)
2) Tax benefits for economic activities of CSOs are effective and
support the operation of CSOs(2.1.1.P2)
3) Passive investments are utilized by CSOs and no sanctions are
applied in doing so. (2.1.1.P3)
4) Endowments are established without major procedural difficulties
and operate freely, without administrative burden nor high
financial cost (2.1.1.P4)
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
in accordance with the law.
 The provisions of the new Law specify that only economic activity of
the NGO is entered in the Central register held by Commercial
Court, rather than the organization itself in order to avoid
interpretations whether it needs to be registered as a company or
established as a new legal entity or not
 The Law on Income Tax stipulates that expenditure on health,
education, sports, culture and environmental protection purposes
are recognized as expenses up to 3.5% of total revenue. A similar
provision is contained in the Law on Corporate Income Tax.
 CSOs are subject of the same provisions of the Value Added Tax
(currently paid at the standard rate of 19%) as the private
companies, although CSOs are not VAT registered if their total
annual income is less than the statutory limit of 18,000 EUR
CSOs activities
 Change the Law on Income tax in order to spread the areas of
public interests (i.e.: human rights, anti-corruption activities,
anti-discrimination activities etc.)
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Practice:
 Only grants coming directly from and EU institution are tax exempt
 All other donations, domestic or foreign are subject to taxes
Practice (BCSDN):
 Facilitate the tax liability on donations and grants from foreign
or domestic natural or legal persons.
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
 Total allocations for NGOs from the state budget are reduced from
EUR 4 million in 2010 to 1.7 million in 2013. Seen as a percentage of
the current budget of Montenegro, this reduction was concerningly
reduced from 0.73 in 2010 to 0.24% in 2013.
 Commission for allocation of revenues from games of chance
distributes 60% of all annual revenues from games of chance, out of
which 75% is foreseen for “plans and programs of non-governmental
organizations”, which is why this is the most important source of
public financing of CSOs.
 The Commission has had available the funds determined by the
annual Law on Budget. However, according to NGO data, these funds
are significantly different compared to the exact amount of the
legally established percentage allocated for the Commission and
NGOs in accordance with the provisions of the Law on Games of
Chance.
 According available information, the funds under this legal basis
allocated and planned by the Budget over the period 2008-2013,
were less than the funds that had to be allocated on the basis of the
Law on Games of Chance for EUR 4,743,390.38.
 Regulation on the Criteria for Determining the Beneficiaries and
Manner of Distribution of the Revenues from Games of Chance7 in
force as of August 2011, determines that out of the total available
funds
o 75% is distributed to plans and programs of NGOs,
o 10% for media pluralism
o 15% for other non-profit organizations and public institutions.
o It is foreseen that for the area of “social protection and
humanitarian activities“ 12% is set aside for “meeting the needs of
persons with disabilities”, 40% for culture and technical culture,
12% for non-institutional education and upbringing of children
and young people, 10% for contribution to the fight against drugs
and all other forms of addiction.
o Allocation of funds is done on the bases of four criteria which bear
different number of points: public usefulness, i.e. public interest
30%, quality of the proposed plan and program 30%, the capacity
of the organization to implement the plan and program 25% and
budget 15%.
20
 Commission for the Allocation of Funds to NGOs (appointed in 2011
by the Parliament of Montenegro) is still positioned in the budget,
even though it has not performed allocation since the entry into
force of the Law on NGOs. Around EUR 560,000 (EUR 200,000 for
2011 and 2012 and EUR 160,000 for 2013) has not been distributed
to NGOs from this budget item.
 Fund for Minorities was established in 2008, in accordance with the
Law on Minority Rights and Freedoms in order to support the
activities that are of importance for preservation and development of
national and ethnic particularities of minority people and other
minority ethnic communities and their members in the field of
national, ethnic, cultural, language and religious identity. In
September 2013, the Fund has adopted a decision on financing
projects of the total value of EUR 500,000.
 Certain ministries and other state administration bodies continue to
allocate funds for projects of CSOs, even though there are no clearly
visible funds for CSOs in the budgets of these bodies. According to
data from the Report on Cooperation between the Ministries/State
Administration Bodies and CSOs, in 2012, the bodies financed NGOs
with about EUR 175,000 from their budgetary positions, and mainly
based on the applications of CSOs to help certain organizations. In
the first six months of 2013, this amount was slightly less than EUR
39,000. It should be noted that there are no written, transparent
procedures for distribution of these funds. 14
Indicator: 2.4.b. Quality of state funding frameworks for civil society organisations (focusing on procedural document)
Availability of public funding for institutional development of CSOs,
project support and co-financing of EU and other grants
Legislation
1) There is a law or national policy (document) that regulates state
support for institutional development for CSOs, project support
and co-financing of EU funded projects. (2.2.1.L1)
2) There is a national level mechanism for distribution of public funds
to CSOs. (2.2.1.L2)
3) Public funds for CSOs are clearly planned within the state budget.
(2.2.1.L3)
4) There are clear procedures for CSO participation in all phases of
the public funding cycle(2.2.1.L4)
14
Availability of public funding for institutional development of CSOs,
project support and co-financing of EU and other grants
Legislation:
 The Law on NGOs envisages that Government provides funding
support to CSOs programs and projects from the state budget
 The Law prescribes centralized state funding to CSOs
 There are no legal preconditions created for the successful
implementation of centralized funding.
 According to the Law on NGOs distribution of state funds is carried
out by the Commission established by the Government.
 That Commission has not yet been formed, and the biggest state
funds for CSOs is allocated based on the decisions of the
Commission for the allocation of revenue from the Games on
chance.
 The Commission allocates funds on the basis of a public call for
proposals
 Amount of funds allocated trough the Commission is set by the Law
on Games on Chance that is not in complete accordance with other
legislation and it is not fully obeyed.
 Law on NGOs does not preclude the ability of NGOs to be funded by
ministries and other budget users
 The legal basis for the allocation of funds to NGOs by local
governments is contained in Article 116 of the Law on Local SelfGovernment, which stipulates that cooperation between local
governments and NGOs achieved under conditions and procedures
prescribed by the general act of the municipality. It includes
financing
Ibid 1, pg 13
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
21
Availability of public funding for institutional development of
CSOs, project support and co-financing of EU and other grants
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Adopt all laws that are necessary for undisturbed
implementation of the Law on NGOs, particularly in the area of
finance
 The definition of stronger links between public policy that are
the government's priority in a given period and the programs
and projects of NGOs that are funded from the same budget
 Harmonize the Law on the games on chance with other
relevant legislation.
 Consider introducing decentralized system of CSO financing
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Practice (BCSDN):

Practice:
Practice:
 State funds have not been allocated in accordance with the Law
1) Available public funding responds to the needs of the CSO sector.
 Minority Fund, Commission for distribution of funds to NGOs within
(2.2.1.P1)
Parliament and Commission for the allocation of revenue from the
2) There are government bodies with a clear mandate for
games on chance are still positioned in the budget, but not
distribution and/or monitoring of the distribution of state funding.
complying with the law on NGOs.
(2.2.1.P2)
 There is a declining trend of state support to CSO projects in past
3) Funding is predictable, not cut drastically from one year to
three years (in comparison to 2010, funds are reduced for 50%
another; and the amount in the budget for CSOs is easy to
identify. (2.2.1.P3)
4) CSO participation in the public funding cycle is transparent and
meaningful. (2.2.1.P4)
Procedures and transparency of distribution of public funding
Legislation:
1) The procedure for distribution of public funds is transparent and
legally binding. (2.2.2.L1)
2) The criteria for selection are clear and published in advance.
(2.2.2.L2)
3) There are clear procedures addressing issues of conflict of interest
in decision-making. (2.2.2.L3)
Practice:
1) Information relating to the procedures for funding and
information on funded projects is publicly available. (2.2.2.P1)
2) State bodies follow the procedure and apply it in a harmonized
way. (2.2.2.P2)
3) The application requirements are not too burdensome for CSOs.
(2.2.3.P3)
4) Decisions on tenders are considered fair and conflict of interest
situations are declared in advance (2.2.3.P4)
System for accountability, monitoring and evaluation of public funding
Legislation:
1) The procedure for distribution of public funds prescribes clear
measures for accountability, monitoring and evaluation. (2.2.3.L1)
2) There are prescribed sanctions for CSOs that misuse funds which
are proportional to the violation of procedure. (2.2.3.L2)
Practice:
1) Monitoring is carried out continuously and in accordance with
predetermined and objective indicators. (2.2.3.P1)
2) Regular evaluation of effects/impact of public funds is carried out
by state bodies and is publicly available. (2.2.3.P2)
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
 Harmonize the Minority Fund, Parliamentary Commission and
the Commission for the allocation of revenues from games of
chance with the Law on NGO
 Since centralized model has shown as non-effective, transform
the model into the decentralized one where ministries will have
the role of allocating funds to the CSOs acting in their field of
work
 Increase public funding support at least to a level from 2010- 4
million euros
Practice (possible other):
 Closer monitoring of the entire process of public funding
cycle.
Procedures and transparency of distribution of public funding
Legislation:
 According to the NGO Law, the Commission should allocate funds
on the basis of a public competition to be published on the website
of the Government and in all newspapers that are printed and
distributed in Montenegro
 According to the NGO Law, the decision on the allocation of funds
shall be published on the website of the Government and in all
newspapers that are printed and distributed in Montenegro.
 According to the NGO Law, Special by-law will determine criteria for
appointing members of commission, including measures of conflict
of interest
 According to the NGO Law, special by-law will determine criteria for
distribution of funds and those will be available to public
 Decree on determining beneficiaries and criteria for distribution of
revenues from games of chance envisages clear criteria for
distribution of fund, monitoring rules, transparency measures
Practice:
 Criteria for distribution of these funds are available to public
 Commission for the allocation of revenues from games of chance
made all supported projects integrally available on the website
 The only existing source of constant funding to Montenegrin CSOs
currently is Commission for the allocation of revenues from games
of chance
 CSOs may put a complaint on the decision of this Commission
according to the procedures set by Law on Administrative
procedure
Procedures and transparency of distribution of public funding
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Adopt all laws that are necessary for undisturbed
implementation of the Law on NGOs, particularly in the area of
finance
 Adequate implementation of the Decree on determining
beneficiaries and criteria for distribution of revenues from
games of chance
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
System for accountability, monitoring and evaluation of public funding
Legislation:
 According to the Law on NGOs, The Commission shall submit to an
advisory body, once a year, a report on the implementation of
projects and programs funded.
 According to the Law on NGOs, Control of the appropriate use of
funds allocated to NGOs should be undertaken by external auditors
engaged by the advisory body
System for accountability, monitoring and evaluation of public
funding
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Adopt all laws that are necessary for undisturbed
implementation of the Law on NGOs, particularly in the area of
finance
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN
Practice:
 Procedures for monitoring of project implementation from the
Commission for allocation of revenues from games of chance and
reporting have not been developed, or are not sufficiently
developed,
 Commission for the allocation of revenues from games of chance
Practice (BCSDN):
 Strengthen controls and procedures for monitoring the
implementation of projects and the proper use of funds by the
external auditors
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
22
Practice (BCSDN):
 Criteria for distribution should involve external evaluators in
the process of evaluation of CSO projects and programs
 Increase the transparency of the allocation of public funds
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
engaged audit company for the audit of a certain projects
supported in 2012
Availability of the state non-financial support
Legislation:
1) Legislation allows state authorities to allocate non-financial
support, such as state property, renting space without financial
compensation (time-bound), free training, consultations and other
resources, to CSOs. (2.2.4.L1)
2) The non-financial support is provided under clearly prescribed
processes, based on objective criteria and does not privilege any
group. (2.2.4.L2)
Practice:
1) CSOs use non-financial state support(2.2.4.P1)
2) CSOs are treated in an equal or more supportive manner as
compared to other actors when providing state non-financial
resources. (2.2.4.P2)
3) There are no cases of state authorities granting non-financial
support only to CSOs which do not criticize its work; or of cases of
depriving critical CSOs of support; or otherwise discriminating
based on loyalty, political affiliation or other unlawful terms.
(2.2.4.P3)
CSOs’ engagement in different state services and equality of
competition among all providers for state contracts
Legislation:
1) Existing legislation allows CSOs to provide services in various
areas, such as education, healthcare, social services .(3.3.1.L1)
2) CSOs have no barriers to providing services that are not defined by
law (“additional” services). (3.3.1.L2)
3) Existing legislation does not add additional burdensome
requirements on CSOs that do not exist for other service
providers. .(3.3.1.L2)
Practice:
1) CSOs are able to obtain contracts in competition with other
providers and are engaged in various services (e.g., education,
health, research, and training). (3.3.1.P1)
2) CSOs are included in all stages of developing and providing
services (needs assessment, determining the services that best
address the needs, monitoring and evaluation). (3.3.1.P2)
3) When prior registration/licensing is required, the procedure for
obtaining that is not overly burdensome. (3.3.1.P3)
Commitments of state to funding services and predictability and longterm availability of the funding
Legislation:
1) The budget provides funding for various types of services which
could be provided by CSOs, including multi-year funding. (3.3.2.L1)
2) There are no legal barriers to CSOs receiving public funding for the
provision of different services (either through procurement or
through another contracting or grants mechanism). (3.3.2.L2)
3) CSOs can sign long-term contracts for provision of services
(3.3.2.L3)
Practice:
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
Availability of the state non-financial support
Legislation:
 According to the Law on NGOs, the Commission shall submit to an
advisory body, once a year, a report on the implementation of
projects and programs funded.
 According to the Law on NGOs, control of the appropriate use of
funds allocated to CSOs should be undertaken by external auditors
engaged by the advisory body.
Practice:
 Report on cooperation between ministries / state authorities and
CSOs in the 2012th year, shows that, in practice, there have been
cases where the ministries have given way to the use of their spaceboardroom for the meetings.
Availability of the state non-financial support
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Adopt all laws that are necessary for undisturbed
implementation of the Law on NGOs, particularly in the area of
finance
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN
Practice (BCSDN):
 It is necessary to note the space and property (decommissioned
office furniture and equipment written-off vehicles, etc.)
owned by the state that are not in use, and to define a
transparent process and criteria for using these areas by CSOs,
in order to realize programs and projects of common interest or
joint.
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
CSOs’ engagement in different state services and equality of
competition among all providers for state contracts
Legislation:
 The Law on Public Administration offers the possibility of the
transfer of certain obligations of state authorities to other entities.
The law does not define in detail the manner in which these
obligations are assigned, but points out that it is possible to enable
it with separate laws and regulations of the Government.
 Legislation states that Ministries can define the transfer of certain
obligations to other entities; however CSOs are not clearly
recognized in these laws.
Practice:
 There are examples of short-term service provision in cooperation
with the Government
 We didn’t come to the examples of licensing of CSO for service
provision
 Since the legislation is not clear enough on this manner, it is not
clear whether certain practices can be perceived as service
provision in this regard
 There are examples of CSOs providing trainings and educations for
state authorities
CSOs’ engagement in different state services and equality of
competition among all providers for state contracts
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Creation of specific legislation regulating CSOs engagement in
providing services, in the cooperation with the state
Legislation (possible other):
 Seek for greater clarification in the Law about manner of
assigning obligations of the state authorities to others, and
look for clarification of status and position of CSOs in this
process.
Commitments of state to funding services and predictability and longterm availability of the funding
Legislation:
 The budget does not specifically provide funding for various types of
services, nor for the multi-year funding.
Commitments of state to funding services and predictability and
long-term availability of the funding
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Creation of specific legislation regulating CSOs engagement in
providing services, in the cooperation with the state, that
would specifically regulate funding, and licensing
Legislation (possible other):
 Introduce in legislation licencing possibilities of CSOs for
provision of social services.
Practice (BCSDN):
23
Practice (BCSDN):
 Promote regional and international practice of CSO
participation in service delivery
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Practice:
 CSOs cannot be recipient of funding for these kinds of services,
there is no licensing, and there are no services that are fully funded
by the Government.
 However there are exemptions of services that CSO provide but are
funded by the international organizations.
 Promote regional and international practice of CSO
participation in service delivery
Practice (possible other):
 Closer monitoring of opportunities for CSOs to provide
social services.
Clarity of procedures for contracting services and transparency in
selection of service providers including CSOs
Legislation:
1) There is a clear and transparent procedure through which the
funding for services is distributed among providers.(3.3.3.L1)
2) Price is not the lead criterion for selection of service providers and
best value is determined by both service quality and a financial
assessment of contenders. (3.3.3.L2)
3) There are clear guidelines on how to ensure transparency and
avoid conflict of interests. (3.3.3.L3)
4) There is a right to appeal against competition results. (3.3.3.L4)
Clarity of procedures for contracting services and transparency in
selection of service providers including CSOs
Legislation:
 The state did not clearly defined procedures for contracting services
which allow for transparent selection of service providers, including
CSOs
Practice:
1) Many services are contracted to CSOs. (3.3.3.P1)
2) Competitions are considered fair and conflicts of interest are
avoided. (3.3.3.P2)
3) State officials have sufficient capacity to organize the procedures.
(3.3.3.P3)
Practice:
 There are only couple of examples of contractual relations between
Government and CSOs in regard to service provision
Clarity of procedures for contracting services and transparency in
selection of service providers including CSOs
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Creation of specific legislation regulating CSOs engagement in
providing services, in the cooperation with the state, that
would, among other things, regulate criteria for choosing CSOservice providers.
Legislation (possible other):
 Ensure that the legislation stipulates clear and transparent
procedures through which the funding for services is
distributed among providers
 Ensure that criteria for selection is not price driven, but
selection is driven by both service quality and a financial
statement of contenders
 Ensure that there are clear guidelines on how to ensure
transparency ad avoid conflict of interest.
 Ensure possibilities for appeal against completion results.
Practice (BCSDN):
 Promote regional and international practice of CSO
participation in service delivery
Practice (possible other):
 Monitor state capacities to organise procedures related to
tendering o the state services.
Clarity of a system for accountability, monitoring and evaluation of
service provision
Legislation:
1) There is legal possibility for monitoring both spending and the
quality of service providers. (3.3.4.L1)
2) There are clear quality standards and monitoring procedures for
services. (3.3.4.L2)
Clarity of a system for accountability, monitoring and evaluation of
service provision
Legislation:
 There is no legislation regulating monitoring both spending and
quality of service provision
Practice:
1) CSOs are not subject to excessive control. (3.3.4.P1)
2) Monitoring is performed on a regular basis according to preannounced procedures and criteria. (3.3.4.P2)
3) Regular evaluation of quality and effects/impact of services
provided is carried out and publicly available. (3.3.4.P3)
Practice:
 Since there is no legislation regulating service provision, all concrete
examples of this-like cooperation are being monitored based on
individual arrangements from case to case
1)
2)
3)
CSOs are recipients of funding for services. (3.3.2.P1)
CSOs receive sufficient funding to cover the basic costs of the
services they are contracted to provide, including proportionate
institutional (overhead) costs. (3.3.2.P2)
There are no delays in payments and the funding is flexible with
the aim of providing the best quality of services. (3.3.2.P3)
Changing relations CSOs and government
3
Civil society and
public institutions
work in partnership
through dialogue and
cooperation, based
on willingness, trust
and mutual
Result: 3.1. Public institutions recognise the importance of CSOs in improving good governance through CSOs' inclusion in decision making processes
Indicator: 3.1.a. Percentage of laws/bylaws, strategies and policy reforms effectively* consulted with CSOs
* in terms of:
- adequate access to information
- sufficient time to comment
- selection and representativeness / diversity of working groups
- acknowledgement of input
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
24
Clarity of a system for accountability, monitoring and evaluation
of service provision
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Creation of specific legislation regulating CSOs engagement in
providing services, in the cooperation with the state, that
would, among other things, regulate process of monitoring and
evaluation of service provision
Legislation (possible other):
 Ensure that legislation recognises quality standards of
provision of the services.
Practice (BCSDN):
 Promote regional and international practice of CSO
participation in service delivery
Practice (possible other):
 Ensure that once introduces, monitoring does not turn
into excessive control of the CSOs.
acknowledgment
around common
interests
- degree to which input is taken into account
- feedback / publication of consultation results
3.1.b Quality* of structures and mechanisms in place for dialogue and cooperation between CSOs and public institutions
* in terms of:
- CSO representation in general
- representation of smaller/weaker CSOs
- its visibility and availability
- government perception of quality of structures and mechanisms
- CSOs perception of structures and mechanisms
CSO-government cooperation strategic document
CSO-government cooperation strategic document
Legislation:
Legislation:
1) There are strategic documents dealing with the state-CSO
 The Government has in 2009. adopted the, "Strategy for
relationship and civil society development. (3.1.1.L1)
Cooperation between the Government of Montenegro and NGOs"
2) The strategic document includes goals and measures as well as
with the implementation of the Action Plan for the period 2009funding available and clear allocation of responsibilities (action
2011.
plans incl. indicators). (3.1.1.L2)
 Strategy for development of non-governmental sector in
3) The strategic document embraces measures that have been
Montenegro for period of 2014-2016 and the Action Plan for the
developed in consultation with and/or recommended by CSOs.
same period has been adopted in December 2013.
(3.1.1.L3)
 These two strategic documents have embraced goals and measures
for cooperation of the two sectors, that have been developed in
consultations with CSOs
Practice:
Practice:
1) CSOs from different areas of interest regularly participate in all
 CSOs participate in different phases of development of different
phases of the strategic document development, implementation
strategies and policy documents
and evaluation. (3.1.1.P1)
 In 2012, state bodies involved 83 CSOs representatives in working
2) There are examples demonstrating that cooperation between state
groups for drafting public policies in different areas
and CSOs and civil society development is improved and
 The involvement of CSOs in monitoring of public policies is not on
implemented according to or beyond the measures envisaged in the
satisfactory level (According to the report of cooperation between
strategic document. (3.1.1.P2)
state bodies and CSOs in the first half of 2013, only 8 out of 43
3) The implementation of the strategic document is monitored,
bodies involved CSOs in monitoring)
evaluated and revised periodically. (3.1.1.P3)
 The Government of Montenegro has in 2012. joined the global
Open Government Partnership initiative, launched by the United
States and seven other countries 2011th year.
Accessibility of all draft policies and laws to the public (easiness and
timelines)
Legislation:
1) Existing legislation obliges public institutions to make all draft and
adopted laws and policies public, and exceptions are clearly defined
and in line with international norms and best practices. (3.2.2.L1)
2) Clear mechanisms and procedures for access to public
information/documents exist. (3.2.2.L2)
3) There are clearly prescribed sanctions for civil servants/units for
breaching the legal requirements on access to public information.
(3.2.2.L3)
Practice:
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
Accessibility of all draft policies and laws to the public (easiness and
timelines)
Legislation:
 The existing legislation obliges public institutions to make all draft
and adopted laws and policies public. This topic is covered by a
number of laws and regulations (Law on free access to information,
Law on NGOs, Regulation concerning public discussions etc.)
 Clear mechanisms and procedures for access to public information
and documents exist and there are guidelines concerning this topic,
which can be found on the websites of almost every ministry and
local self-government.
 There are prescribed mechanisms for appeals to the decision of the
body that is in charge for sharing the requested information or
making them public. There is also the possibility to appeal to the
Agency for the protection of personal data and free access to public
information. However there is no possibility to complain in a case
where the requested information is labeled as Secret. In that case
the authority in charge of the case, is the Administrative Court of
Montenegro
 All the laws and regulations are published in the Official Gazette in
its printed and online version.
25
67/ 100
CSO-government cooperation strategic document
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Start with the legislation changes needed to fulfil steps
prescribed by the Action plan
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Practice (BCSDN):
 Ensure further participation of CSO from different areas of
interest to participate in working groups for drafting public
policies
 Improve communication channels and ways for informing the
CSOs
 Improve joint monitoring and evaluation of public policies by
both sectors
 Provide efficient monitoring of implementation of the
Strategies
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Accessibility of all draft policies and laws to the public (easiness
and timelines)
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Ensure adequate implementation of relevant legislation
 Harmonize Law on free access to information with international
standards
 Government bodies should think about creating contact lists of
CSOs that have experience in some relevant areas and contact
them individually when implementing certain plans and
programs
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN
1) Public institutions actively publish draft and adopted laws and
policies, unless they are subject to legally prescribed exceptions.
(3.2.2.P1)
2) Public institutions answer the majority of requests for access to
public information within the deadline prescribed by law, in a clear
format, provide written explanations on the reasons for refusal, and
highlight the right to appeal and the procedure for appealing.
(3.2.2.P2)
3) Cases of violations of the law are sanctioned. (3.2.2.P3)
Practice:
 The explanations on the reasons for refusal of the requests are
often not clear, but they are included in the response. There is a
lack of respect for the time frame in which it has to be responded to
the request by the large number of government bodies.
 As it was earlier stated there are no known cases of sanctioned
individuals. There are cases in which the appeal was approved by
the Agency or the Administrative court
Practice (BCSDN):
 The answers to requests have to be clearer, have to include
written explanations on the reasons for refusal, and highlight
the right to appeal and the procedure for appealing.
 There is a lack of responsibility for breaching the legal
requirements on access to public information by the civil
servants. The focus is more on the body that breached the
requirements
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN
Representativeness of CSOs in discussions in cross-sector bodies and
clarity of criteria and selection process
Legislation:
1) Existing legislation requires public institutions to invite CSO
representatives on to different decision-making and/or advisory
bodies created by public institutions. (3.2.3.L1)
2) There are clear guidelines on how to ensure appropriate
representation from civil society, based on transparent and
predetermined criteria. (3.2.3.L2)
Representativeness of CSOs in discussions in cross-sector bodies and
clarity of criteria and selection process
Legislation:
 Public authorities are under Articles 2 and 3 of the Decree on the
Manner and Procedure for achieving cooperation between state
authorities and NGOs ("Off. Gazette of Montenegro", no. 07/12 of
30.01.2012), obliged when creating documents from the annual
work program (strategy and analysis of the situation in a particular
area of draft laws, regulations and by-laws that regulate the manner
of exercising the rights and freedoms citizens) to invite NGOs to
participate in working groups
 There is a clear and detailed mechanism for appointing CSO
representatives in these bodies that ensure the quality of
representative and representation
Practice:
 All the advisory bodies relevant for civil society include CSO
representatives
 According to the questionnaire, 68% of the CSOs participated in
some way in working groups or bodies that were in charge for
creating laws and regulations.
 CSO representatives in these bodies are enabled to freely present
and defend their attitudes, although some believe that their
proposals should be taken under consideration more often
 CSO representatives are selected through selection processes which
are considered fair and transparent
 There are cases in which the CSO representatives are not allowed to
share the information on the work of the body/working group, like
in the case of the CSO representatives/members of the working
groups for negotiating with the EU.
Representativeness of CSOs in discussions in cross-sector bodies
and clarity of criteria and selection process
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Ensure adequate implementation of Decree on the Manner and
Procedure for achieving cooperation between state authorities
and NGOs
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN
Practice:
1) Decision-making and advisory bodies on issues and policies relevant
for civil society generally include CSO representatives. (3.2.3.P1)
2) CSO representatives in these bodies are enabled to freely present
and defend their positions, without being sanctioned. (3.2.3.P2)
3) CSO representatives are selected through selection processes which
are considered fair and transparent. (3.2.3.P3)
4) Participation in these bodies does not prevent CSOs from using
alternative ways of advocacy or promoting alternative stand-points
which are not in line with the position of the respective body.
(3.2.3.P4)
Recognition of the state, through the operation of its institutions, of
the importance of the development of and cooperation with the CS
Legislation:
1) There is a national level institution or mechanism with a mandate to
facilitate cooperation with civil society organizations (e.g.,
Unit/Office for cooperation; contact points in ministries; council).
(3.1.2.L1)
2) There are binding provisions on the involvement of CSOs in the
decisions taken by the competent institution or mechanism(s).
(3.1.2.L2)
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
Recognition of the state, through the operation of its institutions, of
the importance of the development of and cooperation with the CS
Legislation:
 There is governmental Office for Cooperation with NGOs
 The Office for Cooperation with CSOs has a limited capacity and
authority to fully carry out its duties. The Office only employs three
persons, the Head of the Office, an advisor and administrative
secretary. Within newly amended act on organization of working
positions in the General Secretariat, additional advisor position is
planned within the Office. The Office does not have a clear and
precisely determined budget and its competences to coordinate the
contact persons in public administration bodies have not been
clearly defined. Also, being a part of the Government General
Secretariat, it lacks the authority to act independently. As things
stand at the present, the long-term sustainability and effectiveness
26
Practice (BCSDN):
 Rules of procedures of working groups as part of negotiation
process should allow CSO representatives to inform public
about the work of those groups
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Recognition of the state, through the operation of its institutions,
of the importance of the development of and cooperation with the
CS
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Make Council and the Office institutionally and financially
independent
 Amendments to the Rulebook on organization and
systematization of the state administration in regard to the
position and responsibilities of contact persons for CSOs.
Legislation (possible other):
 Seek for increasing number of employees in the Office for
Cooperation with CSOs.
Practice:
1) The national level institution or mechanism(s) has sufficient
resources and mandate for facilitating CSO-government dialogue,
discussing the challenges and proposing the main policies for the
development of Civil Society. (3.1.2.P1)
2) CSOs are regularly consulted and involved in processes and
decisions by the competent institution or mechanism(s). (3.1.2.P2)
Recognition of the state, through the operation of its policies and
strategies, of the importance of the development of and cooperation
with the CS
Legislation:
1) There are clearly defined standards on the involvement of CSOs in
the policy and decision making processes in line with best regulatory
practices prescribing minimum requirements which every policymaking process needs to fulfil.(3.2.1.L1)
2) State policies provide for educational programs/trainings for civil
servants on CSO involvement in the work of public institutions.
.(3.2.1.L2)
3) Internal regulations require specified units or officers in government,
line ministries or other government agencies to coordinate, monitor
and report CSO involvement in their work. (3.2.1.L3)
Practice:
1) Public institutions routinely invite all interested CSOs to comment on
policy/legal initiatives at an early stage. (3.2.1.P1)
2) CSOs are provided with adequate information on the content of the
draft documents and details of the consultation with sufficient time
to respond. (3.2.1.P2)
3) Written feedback on the results of consultations is made publicly
available by public institutions, including reasons why some
recommendations were not included. .(3.2.1.P3)
4) The majority of civil servants in charge of drafting public policies
have successfully completed the necessary educational
programs/training.(3.2.1.P4)
5) Most of the units/officers coordinating and monitoring public
consultations are functional and have sufficient capacity. (3.2.1.P5)
15
of the Office is still a challenge.15
 There is a Council for Cooperation between the Government of
Montenegro and NGOs.
 There are Contact persons for cooperation with non-governmental
organizations appointed 61 government bodies
 Decree on procedure for achieving cooperation between state
bodies and NGOs stipulates that state bodies should involve CSOs in
all phases of public policy development. According to this Decree,
CSOs should be informed, consulted and regularly involved in
working bodies
Practice:
 The Office for Cooperation with NGOs lacks the institutional
independence and does not operate as a separate government
authority.
 Council for Cooperation between the Government and NGOs has no
allocated funds in the budget for its work.
 Often there are too many replacements of contact persons. Being
contact person for CSOs is only their secondary engagement
 The Decrees are not being fully respected
Recognition of the state, through the operation of its policies and
strategies, of the importance of the development of and cooperation
with the CS
Legislation:
 There is Decree on the procedure for cooperation between state
authorities and non-governmental organizations as the obligatory
documents for state bodies to inform, consult and involve CSOs
representatives in drafting public policies
 There is Decree on manner and procedure of conducting public
consultation in the preparation as obligatory document for
ministries to consult civil society in drafting laws.
 Internal regulations require specified units or officers in
government, line ministries or other government agencies to
coordinate, monitor and report CSO involvement in their work and
there has been a certain improvement in this field.
Practice:
 Only 6 out of 16 ministries invited civil society in early consultation
phase when drafting laws
 With 83 representatives of NGOs working in the working groups on
an annual basis, it can be concluded that the process of selection of
NGO representatives defined in this Decree is applicable and
effective.
 Most of the state administration still does not publish annual work
programs on its website, as well as details of a contact person in
charge of cooperation with NGOs. Only 30 out of 53 authorities that
were obliged to inform the public about the contact persons via
website, did so.
 Only 3 out of 16 ministries publish the list of laws that will be
drafted on annual level
 Only 3 out of 16 ministries publish reports from public discussion
containing written feedback to consultation process
Ibid 1 pg. 20
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
27
Practice (BCSDN):
 It is necessary to redefine the status and mandate of the Office
for Cooperation with NGOs
 Provide financial support from the budget to the Council for
Cooperation with NGOs
 Strengthen the capacity of contact persons for cooperation
with NGOs
 Introduce mechanisms for higher compliance with the
mentioned Decrees and introduce sanctions for their disrespect
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
Recognition of the state, through the operation of its policies and
strategies, of the importance of the development of and
cooperation with the CS
Legislation (BCSDN):
 Ensure adequate implementation of relevant legislation
Legislation (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN
Practice (BCSDN):
 Improve the capacity of government officials for the proper
implementation of the Decree on the manner and procedure
of cooperation with NGOs
 Improve the capacity of government officials for the proper
implementation of the Decree on conducting public discussion
in preparing laws
 Continue with monitoring of implementation of both Decrees
Practice (possible other):
 Same as BCSDN’s
 There are no public information on trainings in which civil servants
in charge of drafting public policies have participated.
 Generally, CSOs have a negative opinion on current mechanisms for
dialogue and cooperation between CSOs and state bodies.
 According to the TACSO survey from November 2013:
o 51% of CSOs were aware of the existence of these structures
and mechanisms, but they believed that they existed only to
fulfill a form. In addition
o 23% of CSOs said that they were not aware of the mechanisms
for dialogue and cooperation between CSOs and state bodies
o 26% of organizations said that they were familiar with the
mechanisms for dialogue and cooperation, and that they also
considered them useful
 However, a relatively high participation of CSOs in the consultation
processes at the national and local level was registered - 57% of
organizations in the past three years participated in some
consultation process at the local or national level. 16
CSOs Capacities
4. Capable, transparent
and accountable CSOs
4.1. CSOs' internal governance structures are transparent and accountable to members/constituents/beneficiaries
4.1.a. Percentage of CSOs publishing their governance structure and internal documents (statutes, codes of conduct etc.)

4.1.a. independent survey run by TACSO



27% of CSOs believe that decision making in CSOs in
Montenegro is in compliance with prescribed rules and laws of
the organisation, 57% believe that decisions are made by some
individual or top management, 15% that decisions are made
with prescribed rules including consultations with the
employees and volunteers
27% of CSOs stated that decision making in their organisation is
in compliance with prescribed rules and laws of the
organisation, 57% stated that decisions are made by some
individual or top management, 16% that decisions are made
with prescribed rules including consultations with the
employees and volunteers
77% of CSOs stated that they have prescribed obligations to
inform the members, or Managerial or Supervisory Board,
customers or general public about the results of your work
91% CSOs inform members of their organisation about the
results of their work, 81% inform founders of their organisation,
70% inform management board, 75% inform beneficiaries of
their organisation, 82% inform general public, 72% general
assembly, and 56% inform supervisory board17
4.2. CSOs are able to communicate the results of their activities to the public
4.2.a. External perception of importance and impact of CSOs activities.
16
Ibid 1 pg. 22
Ibid 5
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
17
2014-2020
19 12 2013
28

4.2.a. independent survey run by TACSO






49.9% of surveyed trust to NGOs in their country, general
population trust the most to the President of the state
Presidency 52.3% of surveyed, and the least to political parties
29.2% of surveyed
43.6% of general population do not trust to NGOs
56.4% of the general population believes that NGOs support
dealing with problems in their country, 52.4% of population
believe that the President of the state Presidency supports in
dealing with problems, and political party support the least
37.7%
38% of CSOs believe that the reason for lack of public presence
of CSOs is insufficient interest of the media in reporting on CSOs
activities, while 60% of CSOs believe it is due insufficient (or
inadequate) CSO activities
Almost all topics and issues listed in the survey were assessed as
relevant in the range over 90%, only protection of animals was
assessed with 83%18
71% of surveyed believe that CSOs in their country are active in
fighting problems in human rights area, 72% believe in the area
of ecology, and 76% in rights of women
54% of surveyed believe that CSOs in their country are not
active in fighting problems in safety area, 58% believe in the
area of employment, and 59% in rural development19
4.3. CSOs are transparent about their programme activities and financial management
4.3.a. Percentage of CSOs making their (audited) financial accounts and annual reports publicly available

4.3.a independent survey run by TACSO






34% CSOs stated that they publish their statute on their web
page, 30% stated that the statute is accessible to the public, 35%
stated that the statute is not accessible to the public
2% of CSOs stated that their statute is accessible to public from
their office
21% of CSOs stated that they have a rulebook and it available on
their web page, 16% stated that they have a rulebook, 31%
stated that have a rulebook, but it is not accessible to the public,
and 32% stated that they do not have a rulebook
24% of CSOs (majority) stated that the rulebook is accessible in
the written form
28% of CSOs believe that up to 10% of CSOs in Montenegro
publish organisational Annual Program Statement of Work, 23%
believe that only 11-30% of CSOs do so, 25% believe that 31%70% organisation publish APS of Work, and 18% believe that
more than 70% do so
30% of CSOs stated that they publish their APS of Work on their
web page, and 42% stated that they do not have APS of Work
accessible to public
27% of CSOs belie that up to 10% of CSOs publish organisational
financial reports, 26% of CSOs believe that 11%-30% publish
financial report, 27% believe that from 31-70% and 13% of CSOs
believe that more than 70% of CSO publish financial reports
18
Topics and issues assessed included: education, social care and humanitarian activities, human rights, employment, the young and their problems, culture and art, ecology, violence, rights of women, fight against corruption, fight agaiinst drug abuse and aloholism, safety, overseen
government and local governemnets performances, rural development, protection of animals.
19 Ibid 5
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
29



30% of CSOs stated that they have financial reports accessible to
public and published on the web page, while 45% stated they do
not have financial reports available to the public
46% of CSOs believe that up to 10% of CSOs publish audited
reports, and 12% believe that more than 70% publish audited
reports
20% of CSOs stated that they have audited financial reports
accessible to the public by publishing it on their web page, 58%
of CSOs stated that they do not have audited financial reports
available to the public20
4.4. CSOs monitor and evaluate the results and impact of their work
4.4.a. Share of CSOs that monitor and evaluate their projects and programmes using baselines and quality indicators

4.4.a. independent survey run by TACSO
31% of CSOs evaluate their projects pro forma, while 66%
evaluate projects with the purpose of establishing efficiency and
drawing a lesson for further projects
29% of CSOs use external evaluation for realisation of their
projects
12% use external evaluator for assessment of implementation of
their organisational strategy
73% of CSOs have established system for assessment of
efficiency for realisation of conducted projects
60% of CSOs have established system for assessment for
implementation of organisation’s strategic plan 21




5. Effective CSOs
5.1. CSO activities are guided by strategic long-term organisational planning
5.1.a. Share of CSOs which have developed strategic plans including human resources development activities in order to attract and retain talent

5.1.a. independent survey run by TACSO
62% of CSOs have developed strategic plan, 23% do not have a
strategic plan
76% use internal evaluation when employing staff in their
organisation
46% of CSOs neither have established system for assessment of
efficiency of employees in their organisation, nor internal
strategic plan dealing with these issues.
46% of CSOs stated that they have a human resources
development plan aimed at attacking and keeping talented
associates, while 18% stated that they are developing such plan
75% of CSO stated that they manage to keep talented
associates, and 80% believe that they manage to attract quality
new people22




5.2. CSOs use research and other forms of evidence to underpin their activities
5.2.a. Number of CSOs' who use adequate argumentation and analysis for achieving advocacy goals

5.2.a. independent survey run by TACSO
49% of CSOs active in public advocacy, mainly/frequently uses
research for their advocacy actions, while 47% of them
20
Ibid 5
Ibid 5
22 Ibid 5
21
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
30
mainly/very rarely use research
 73% of CSOs believe that they have enough information at their
disposal
 52% of CSOs use official data of national statistical offices,
ministries, 25% conduct their own studies, 10% use academic
studies23
5.3. CSOs regularly network within and outside country borders and make use of coalition-building for increased impact in campaigning and advocacy
5.3.a. Share of CSOs taking part in local, national, regional and international networks

5.3.a. independent survey run by TACSO
6. Financially sustainable
CSOs
66% of CSOs indicated that they do not belong to any
international network, 20% stated that belong to one
international network, 7% stated that they belong to 2
international networks, 6% belong to more than 3 international
networks
 0% of CSOs are not active in any of international networks, 63%
are active in one international network, 16% are active in 2
international networks, and 18% are active in more than 3
international networks
 45% of CSOs indicated that they do not belong to any national
network, 29% stated that belong to one national network, 12%
stated that they belong to 2 national networks, 14% belong to
more than 3 national networks
 2% of CSOs are not active in any of national networks, 59% are
active in one national network, 16% are active in 2 national
networks, and 21% are active in more than 3 national networks
 55% of CSOs indicated that they do not belong to any local
network, 22% stated that belong to one local network, 9%
stated that they belong to 2 local networks, 12% belong to more
than 3 local networks
 4% of CSOs are not active in any of local networks, 49% are
active in one local network, 17% are active in 2 local networks,
and 27% are active in more than 3 local networks
 36% of CSOs do not find CSO networks efficient, while 61% find
them efficient
 15% of CSO stated that their contributed in terms of the
exchange of experience/knowledge from being member of a
network, 5% gained in terms of greater visibility24
6.1. Fund-raising activities are rooted in CSOs' long-term strategic plans and the core mission of the organisation
6.1.a. Percentage of CSOs that confirm that they are able to raise funds according to their strategic plans

6.1.a. independent survey run by TACSO

23
24
65% of CSOs believe that CSOs in Montenegro mainly adopt to
donors’ priorities and collect funds also for other activities not in
line with their organisational strategic plan, while 34% of CSOs
believe that CSOs in Montenegro mainly stich with their
strategic plan and collect funds for activities in line with their
strategic plan
60% of CSOs stated that they mainly stick t their strategic plans
and collects fund for activities in line with its strategic plan,
while 38% stated that they adapt to donors’ priorities and
Ibid 5
Ibid 5
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
31
collect funds also for other activities not in line with its strategic
plans25
6.2. CSO have a diversified funding base, including membership fees, corporate/individual giving and social entrepreneurship
6.2.a. Diversity in CSO sources of income

6.2.a. independent survey run by TACSO


25
26
15% of CSOs stated that they did not have any donors in the past
year, 20% had one donor, 20% had between 2-3 donors, 19%
had 4-5 donors, and 14% over 6 donors
28% of CSOs had income from membership fees, 24% had from
citizens, 44% form local self-government and/or regional
administration, 23% from other foreign private or state
resources, 22% form the EU funds, 36% form
governments/ministries/state administration bodies, 30% from
private companies operating in the country, 8% from public
companies.
68% of CSOs did not have income from membership fees, 71%
did not have from citizens, 52% form local self-government
and/or regional administration, 71% from other foreign private
or state resources, 72% form the EU funds, 59% form
governments/ministries/state administration bodies, 65% from
private companies operating in the country, 79% from public
companies.26
Ibid 5
Ibid 5
Guidelines for EU support to civil society in enlargement countries
2014-2020
19 12 2013
32