Government helper and citizen advocate? A case study of the multiple roles and pressures facing a nongovernmental organization contracted by government to strengthen community health in northern India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) can potentially strengthen valuable citizen political engagement, NGOs that are increasingly oriented towards donor and government contracts may instead contribute to depoliticizing development. Amidst competing pressures, NGO experiences and agency in managing multiple roles require examination. We present a qualitative case study of an NGO implementing a government-designed intervention to strengthen Village Health, Sanitation, and Nutrition Committees (VHSNCs) in rural north India. Despite a challenging context of community scepticism and poor government services, the NGO did successfully form VHSNCs by harnessing its respected interlocutor status, preexisting relationships, and ability to "sell" the VHSNC as a mechanism for improving local well-being. While the VHSNC enabled community members to voice concerns to government officials, improvements often failed to meet community expectations. NGO staff endured community frustration on one hand and rebuffs from lower-level officials on the other, while feeling undersupported by the government contract. Consequently, although contracted to strengthen a community institution, the NGO increasingly worked alongside VHSNC members to try to strengthen the public sector. Contrary to assumptions that NGOs become "tamed" through taking government contracts, being contracted to deliver inputs for community participation was intertwined with microlevel political action, though this came at a cost to the NGO.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".