Needs Assessment Report

For optimal readability, we highly recommend downloading the document PDF, which you can do below.

Document Information:

Year: 2010
Country: Kosovo
Language: English
Document Type: Publication
Topic: CSO Framework Legislation

This document has been provided by the
International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL).

ICNL is the leading source for information on th e legal environment for civil society and public
participation. Since 1992, ICNL has served as a resource to civil society leaders, government
officials, and the donor community in over 90 countries.

Visit ICNL’s Online Library at
https://www.icnl.org/knowledge/library/index.php
for further resources and research from countries all over the world.

Disclaimers Content. The information provided herein is for general informational and educational purposes only. It is not intended and should not be
construed to constitute legal advice. The information contai ned herein may not be applicable in all situations and may not, after the date of
its presentation, even reflect the most current authority. Noth ing contained herein should be relied or acted upon without the benefit of legal
advice based upon the particular facts and circumstances pres ented, and nothing herein should be construed otherwise.
Translations. Translations by ICNL of any materials into other languages are intended solely as a convenience. Translation accuracy is not
guaranteed nor implied. If any questions arise related to the accuracy of a translation, please refer to the original language official version of
the document. Any discrepancies or differences created in the tr anslation are not binding and have no legal effect for compliance or
enforcement purposes.
Warranty and Limitation of Liability. Although ICNL uses reasonable efforts to include ac curate and up-to-date information herein, ICNL
makes no warranties or representations of any kind as to its a ccuracy, currency or completeness. You agree that access to and u se of this
document and the content thereof is at your own risk. ICNL discl aims all warranties of any kind, express or implied. Neither ICNL nor any
party involved in creating, producing or delivering this document shall be liable for any damages whatsoever arising out of access to, use of
or inability to use this document, or any e rrors or omissions in the content thereof.

This document has been provided by the
International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL).

Visit ICNL’s Online Library at
https://www.icnl.org/knowledge/library/index.php
for further resources and research from countries all over the world.

Technical Assistance for
Civil Society Organisations

This project is funded by the European Union .
TACSO Kosovo under UNSCR 1244/99 Office • Str. Fazli Grajqevci 4/a • 1000 Prishtina • tel: +377 44 153 852 • e-mail: info.ko@tacso .org
SIPU International AB Sweden • Civil Society Promotion Centre Bosnia and Herzegovina • Human Resources Development Foundation Turkey Foundation in Support of Local Democracy Poland • Partners Foundation for Local Development Romania

Technical Assistance to Civil Society Organisations
in the IPA Countries
TACSO

EuropeAid/127427/C/SER/Multi/5

KOSOVO under UNSCR 1244/99

NEEDS ASSESSMENT REPORT

Prishtina
28 February 2010

Contents
INT RODUCTION ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………… 4
1. THE CIVIL SOCIETY ENVIRONMENT ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………… 5
1.1 Legal framework – an analysis of relevant law and financial regulations ………………………. 5
Law on Freedom of Association in Non -governmental Organisation s………………………….. …. 5
Public Benefit Status ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………. 6
Economic activities and taxation ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………….. 7
Deductions against tax for donations ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. 7
Value -Added Tax ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. 8
1.2 Donors and funding opportunities ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………… 9
EU IPA and other funds ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………… 9
Other Interna tional Donors ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. … 10
Government funding ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………. 11
Corporate philanthropy ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……… 11
1.3 Government mechanisms for civil society -government cooperation and the policy
framework determining government -civil society relations. ………………………….. ………………. 12
Memorandum of Cooperation ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… 12
NGO Registration Office ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 13
Agency for Coordination of Development and European Integration ………………………….. .. 13
1.4 Government (local and national) institutional capacities for engaging civil society ………. 14
Central level ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………… 14
Local lev el ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… 16

1.5 Public perceptions and support of civil society and its various segments …………………….. 17
2. CSO ORGANISATIONAL CAPACITIES ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………… 19
2.1 Overview of the civil society community in Kosovo ………………………….. ……………………… 19
Structure of civil society ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 19
Field of operation / activities ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. . 20
2.2 Human resources and technical skills ………………………….. ………………………….. …………….. 21
2.3 Strategic strengths of CSOs in Kosovo ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………. 23
2.4 Analytical capacities ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………… 23
2.5 Relationships with other actors –networking and partnerships ………………………….. …….. 24
CSO – CSO relationships ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 24
CSO – state and government relationships ………………………….. ………………………….. ……….. 26
2.6 Materia l and financial stability and resilience ………………………….. ………………………….. …. 26
3. CIVIL SOCIETY MILESTONE ACHIEVEMENTS, IMPACTS AND CHALLENGES …………………….. 28
3.1 Milestone ach ievements and impacts in the country ………………………….. ……………………. 28
Think tank capability ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………….. 28
Emerging watchdog capability ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… 28
Women’s literacy ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………. 29
3.2 Shortfalls in CSO performance ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………. 29
Integration of Civil Society ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ….. 29
Mobilising public support ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …… 30
Effective policy dialogue ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 30
4. CONCLUSIO NS ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………….. 30
4.1 Summary of strategic issues of relevance to the project ………………………….. ……………….. 30

4.2 Needs assessment conclusions ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………… 32
Civil society environment ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …… 32
CSO organisational capacities ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. 33
4.3 Recommendations for t he regional project work plan ………………………….. ………………….. 34
4.4 Recommendations for country specific work plan ………………………….. ……………………….. 34
Civil society environment ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …… 34
CSO organisational capacities ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. 35
Annex 1 Acronyms and abbreviations used in the text ………………………….. ……………………. 37
Annex 2 Research methodology ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………… 38
Annex 3 CSO Mission and scope of activities ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 39
Annex 4 List of persons consulted ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………… 40
Annex 5 References ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………. 42

INTRODUCTION
This study is one of eight country assessments of civil society capacities conducted as a
preliminary activity within the EC -funded project Technical Assistance to Civil Society (TACSO) in
IPA Countries ( EuropeAid/127427/C/SER/Multi/5), implemented by SIPU International, during
the period August 2009 – July 2011. The aim of the study is to provide a comprehensive
assess ment of civil society in Kosovo and the environment that it works in, including its
strengths and weaknesses, and its impacts to date and the challenges it faces to its further
development. The study is based upon a combination of desk research embracing all rele vant
documentation, including legal and financial legislation applicable to civil society, previous civil
society mappings and evaluations, situation analyses, policy documents and country -specific
academic literature, and a consultative stakeholder analys is carried out by means of focus
groups, interviews and questionnaire surveys with civil society organisations (CSOs),
government actors, donor organisations and other institutional players. The study is an integral
part of the project inception and it pro vides the premise for the majority of other project
activities by serving as the basis of the development of regional as well as national work plans
to be implemented during the project’s duration.
In line with the project’s Terms of Reference and SIPU’s t echnical proposal, the study
understands civil society in the following two complementary ways:
1. All organisational structures whose members have objectives and responsibilities that
are of general interest and who also act as mediators between the public authorities
and citizens. This definition clearly emphasises the associational character of civil
society, while also accentuating its representational role. Civil society would include a
variety of organisational types, including, NGOs, mass movements, co operatives,
professional associations, cultural and religious groups, trades unions and grassroots
community groups (CBOs), etc.
2. A space for views, policies and action supportive of alternatives to those promoted by
government and the private sector. Thi s definition places the emphasis on social
inclusion, social and political pluralism and the rights of expression in developing a
participatory democracy.
The paper is composed of four sections:
• Section one provides an analysis of the civil society envir onment, including the legal
framework governing CSOs and their work, the current donor opportunities and other
sources of civil society funding, the government mechanisms for cooperation with and
support of civil society and the policy framework determinin g government -civil society
relations and public perceptions and support for civil society and its activities.
• Section two gives an overview of the main features of civil society: the types of organisation
represented and their key organisational character istics, the types of activity they carry out
and their main sectoral interests, their geographical distribution and way they are
structured within an overall civil society architecture. CSOs are assessed according to their

technical, organisational and i nstitutional capacities, including human resources and
technical skills, strategic strengths, analytical capabilities, external relations with other
actors including other CSOs, government and the community, and material and financial
stability and resilie nce.
• Section three summarises the main achievements of civil society to date, noting key
milestone achievements and broader social impacts, and also identifies shortfalls in civil
society performance in need of strengthening and further development.
• Sectio n four sums up the most important institutional and organisational capacity needs of
civil society in the country and identifies key strategic issues for the implementation of the
project. By way of conclusion, recommendations are made for both the proje ct’s regional
work plan and country -specific work plan.

1. THE CIVIL SOCIETY ENVIRONMENT
1.1 Legal framework – an analysis of relevant law and financial regulations
Following the declaration of independence on 17 February 2008, the Republic of Kosovo has
embarked on a programme of reform and renewal of much of the legislation established by
UNMIK (UN Mission in Kosovo) during its time as international overlord in the country . While a
number of regulations of relevance to CSOs have yet to be adopted, new l egal and financial
regulations governing civil society are largely in place. This revised framework is in line with
best international practice and provides, in theory at least, an enabling environment for CSO
operations. The financial framework on paper is better elaborated and more encouraging than
those in neighbouring countries, and it also contains important safeguards against money
laundering and other corrupt practices. However, lack of harmonisation between tax laws and
the NGO Law on certain point s raises concerns that rights -based CSOs might not in practice be
eligible for the full range of potential financial benefits provided for.
The new legislation also marks a considerable improvement in terms of clarity and practicality
from the previous UNM IK regulation (1999/22) which had been in force since it s hasty
conception and adoption in November 1999. However, there remain significant concerns
regarding the full implementation of the law and the proper oversight of CSOs, particularly with
regard to ensuring that the sector is free of corruption and financial malpractice.
Law on Freedom of Association in Non -governmental Organisa tion s
On February 12, 2009 the Assembly of Kosovo adopted the Law on Freedom of Association in
Non -governmental Organisation s (NGO Law) , which was drafted after wide and detailed
consultation with of civil society. This new law ap plies to two categories of CSOs: association s
and foundations. Other associational forms which might be considered to fall within civil
society, su ch as political parties, trade unions and their federations, as well as religious cent res
and communities, are subject to other laws.

Associations . The NGO Law defines an association as a not -for -profit membership organisation
established by three or more natural or legal persons, domestic or foreign (one of whom must
be a resident in Kosovo) , formed to carry out activities for public benefit or mutual interest.
Foundations . The NGO Law defines a foundation as a not -for -profit organisation without
members , established by three of more Persons (one of whom must be a resident of Kosovo)
formed to manage property and asse ts, for public benefit or mutual interest.
Responsibility for CSO registration lies with a small NGO Registration Office, situated in the
Mi nistry of Public Administration . Its restricted capacities in practice limit its role to that of
maintaining the CSO registry, 1 but the new law does impl y that the Office should play some part
in monitoring CSOs, particularly with regard to ensuring that CSOs with public benefit st atus
(see below) carry out the necessary financial reporting and continue to fulfil the status’
requirements (articles 19.3). In general, however, there is no system in place for ensuring that
CSOs do what they say they do and a lso are not exploiting the charitable conditions of the NGO
Law for unlawful personal gain. 2
An ECNL study of the legal environment governing CSOs in Kosovo (ECNL 2009) also identified a
“a substantive problem ” in the new NGO Law “ in the fact that there ar e mistaken references
and – at least in the English translation – confusion in terminology regarding the involuntary
termination of NGOs. ”
Public Benefit Status
The new NGO Law a provides for a broad range of CSOs to apply for Public Benefit Status, which
enables the qualifying CSO to take advantage of tax exemptions on earned income and tax
incentives to charitable giving offered to individuals and businesses. Pubic benefit status is
decided upon by the NGO Registration Office and is granted to organisati ons which are deemed
to focus on the implementation of one or more of the following activities: humanitarian
assistance and relief, support for persons with disabilities, charity activities, education, health,
culture, environmental conservation or protec tion, economic reconstruction and development,
the promotion of human rights, the promotion of democratic practices and civil society, or any
other activity that serves the public beneficiary. In addition, CSO activit ies are considered to be

1 Before, under UNMIK regulation 1999/22 the Office fulfilled a more extensive monitoring and arbitration role in
cases which were brought to their attention. It had developed a poor reputation for what w as perceived as its inability
to operate objectively, without prejudice and to apply rulings which were completely consistent with the law. During
the drafting of the new NGO Law, a draft provision for monitoring of civil society was taken out owing object ions by
CSOs, partly because of lack of trust in the Registration Office and its often partisan interference with CSOs
operations (ECNL 2009). 2 This lack of implementation and monitoring mechanisms considering the continuing concerns of the Kosovan
govern ment under pressure from the International Community surrounding corruption in all areas of public life and
also the possible (although highly improbable in reality) infiltration of CSOs by terrorist groups (ECNL 2009).

of public ben efit only if significant benefits are provided free of charge or at less than a fair
market value to disadvantaged individuals or groups.
Economic activities and taxation
CSOs are free to engage in economic activities as long as the income realis ed throu gh economic
activities is used solely to accomplish t he purposes specified in the CSO s’ statute. In the case of
organisations with public benefit status, CSOs are exempt from corporate income tax. Any
income generated from contracts with a non -local contr actor for the supply of goods or
services to the United Nations or any of its specialis ed agencies (including UNMIK) is also
exempt from the profit tax . All other legal entities, including CSOs without public benefit status
are liable to corporate income t ax at the rate of 20% .
Deductions against tax for donations
Donations from both legal entities (businesses) and individuals made to CSOs with public
benefit status for “charitable” purposes may be deducted against tax up to a limit of 5% gross
(pre -tax) i ncome. However, the definition of “charitable” purposes applied in the laws
regulating personal income tax and corporate income tax is not consistent with the definition of
public benefit status employed in the NGO Law. 3 In particular, “economic reconstru ction and
development, the promotion of human rights, the protection of democratic practices and civil
society” are not includ ed in the two tax laws. S o far it remains unclear whether this formal
distinction makes a significant difference in practice , but the lack of harmonisation between the
NGO and Tax Laws clearly opens the door to discriminatory provision of tax deductions to the
detriment of a broad swath of advocacy -centred rights -based organisations.
Under the aegis of the Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sports, the Government is preparing a
draft Sponsorship Law , which will impact on the opportunities available to CSOs to raise
philanthropic income. While the conditions governing charitable giving, including the 5% limit
for tax deductions, would re main broadly untouched, the proposed Law would establish special
incentives for giving to culture, youth and, in particular, sport, which would make support of
other CSO activities relatively less attractive. The process behind this new initiative is obsc ure
and is being carried out without meaningful public consultation. Thus, the nature of the
proposed measures , their relationship to the conditions of public benefit status and their
implications for philanthropy in Kosovo remain unclear (ECNL 2009).
Unde r anti -corruption legislation enacted previously by UNMIK, 4 a CSO is prohi bited from
accepting more than 1,000 EUR from a single source in a day unless it receives a written
authorisation from the Tax Authority. A CSO is also required to disclose in its annual report all

3 Charitable activities here are d efined as humanitarian, health, educational, religious, scientific, cultural,
environmental protection, and sports purposes 4 UNMIK Regulation 2004/2 on the Deterrence of Money Laundering and Related Criminal Offences, sections 4.1,
4.3, and 4.6.

monetary contributions , if contributions from a single source exceed 5,000 EUR in that financial
year .
Value -Added Tax
Under the current Law on Value -Added Tax (VAT), adopted in December 2008, CSOs must pay
VAT on goods and services recei ved, payable at the standard rate of 16%, like any other taxable
person. CSOs, in common with all profitable business, must register for VAT (upon which they
must charge VAT on services they provide) once their annual turnover reaches the VAT
threshold of 50,000 EUR.
VAT is not payable on imports or supplies funded from grants made to CSOs “in support of
humanitarian and reconstruction programs and projects in Kosovo”. Other than that CSOs
benefit from the application of a zero -rating to the export and i mport of goods, the supply of
goods and services related to international transport of goods and passengers and irrigation,
and other enumerate d goods . Imports of medicines, medical services, and medical instruments
are also VAT exempt , so too is t he prov ision of these medical goods and services within the
territory, as well as public education services.
A new VAT Law comes into force in January 2010, which is intended to bring Kosovo VAT
regulations further into line with those operating in the EU. Ther e are few changes from the
existing law which are relevant to CSOs. A further exemption is expected to be granted to the
supply of services and of goods “closely linked” to welfare and social work (including elderly
homes), and to child protection, respect ively. In both of these cases, the draft law makes
available the exemption to “competent bodies of Kosovo or other bodies ( organisation s)
recognized by the competent Authority of Kosovo as being devoted to social wellbeing (ECNL
2009). In addition, it is e xpected that the exemption to educational activities at all levels will be
extended to all bodies governed by Kosovo law, having such as their aim or by other
organisation s recognized by the competent Authority as having similar objectives . This would
pres umably include CSOs dedicated to both formal education and training activities, in line with
VAT laws in the European Union.

1.2 Donors and funding opportunities
Civil society in Kosovo is dependent on international donor organisations for finance to an
excessive degree. To a large extent, this is due to the scarcity of domestic funding
opportunities and the lack of development of potential future financial resources in Kosovo,
such as the community and business. Despite civil society’s heavy donor -depen dence,
international finance to civil society in Kosovo has been in steady decline for some time, since
the high point of international post -conflict humanitarian and reconstruction intervention was
reached in 2001. The total amount of financial resources available to civil society at the present
time is insufficient to support the activities of those CSOs currently active in Kosovo.
In the past , USAID has been by far the single biggest investor in civil society, but it has scaled
down its support somewhat to a single, admittedly major, capacity -building programme.
Almost all European bilateral donors have ceased supporting CSOs, leaving the field to the EC
which promotes civil society within the framework of Kosovo’s early steps as a single entity (de
fact o independent state) towards European integration .
EU IPA and other funds
1. IPA 2008 – Support to Civil Society in Kosovo . Action grants to CSO partnerships or
coa litions to a total of 1.7 million EUR to carry out and promote policy planning in four
areas:
Component 1 : Support to CSO engagement with environmental protection and
education; grants of 50 -150,000 EUR (total 300,000 EUR). Duration: 12 -30 months .
Component 2: Support to CSOs that promote the rights to equal treatment and to a life
free of discrimin ation; grants of 100 -200,000 EUR (Total 400,000). 12 -30 months .
Component 3: Provision of s ocial services for children with disabilities and for
abandoned and neglected children; grants of 300 – 600,000 EUR (total 600,000), 24
months
Component 4: Organisat ion of Kids festival s in Kosovo; grants of 300 – 400,000 EUR
(total 400,000 EUR), 24 months.
2. IPA 2008 Civil Society Facility Horizontal Activities – partnership actions in the IPA region
according to tender. 2009:
a. “Fight against Corruption, Organised Crim e and Trafficking .” Total 1.7 million EUR for
projects addressing the alignment of legislation and enforcement of law with the EU
acquis . Grants of 50,000 – 200,000 EUR for actions of up to 24 months.
b. “Environment, Energy Efficiency, Healt h and Safety at Work.” Total 2.5 million EUR
for implementation of a wide range of actions contributing to the above in the
framework of CSO regional networks. G rants of 100,000 – 300,000 EUR for actions of
up to 24 months.

3. IPA 2009 EC -Community Stabilisation Programme. Tender currently open for one grant
only of up to 2 million EUR for EU or IPA country NGOs and partnerships, in the field of
economic and rural development, as well as social and community development with ethnic
minorities as the main target group. Projec t to last 18 -24 months.
4. IPA Civil Society Facility. Tender currently open for action grants of between 50,000 –
500,000 EUR for partnerships of at least one EU NGO and at least 3 national CSOs from any
IPA countries, with the overall objective: to develop strong regional partnerships among
CSOs concerned with socio -economic issues from the region itself and with their EU
counterparts and public authorities as well as to improve the transparency and the
accountability of CSOs. Actions ni a wide range of po ssible fields and with various target
groups to last 30 months.
5. EIDHR 2009 -2010 . In February 2010, the ECLO launched the EIDHR 2009 -2010 Kosovo
scheme, targeting local CSOs and those that have headquarters in Albania, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Croatia, FY ROM, Montenegro, Serbia, Kosovo or Turkey. This call will
combines funds available for two years, to a total of around 1.7 millions EUR. The call aims
to assist CSO actions aiming to develop greater cohesion in working on human rights,
political pluralism and democratic political participation and representation: peaceful
conciliation of group interests, combating discrimination, and gender equality .
Other International Donors
USAID – Kosovo Civil Society Strengthening Programme : A 3 -year programme with a total
budget of US$4.5 million implemented by the Institute for Sustainable Communities (ISC)
provides support in four areas: developing the legal framework, capacity building with
individual CSOs and coalitions for a dvocacy, minority outreach, and advoca cy grants.
Programme due to end October 2011.
Three types of grant are provided.
1. National Advocacy Partner grants for tackling issues of national significance . There
are currently 7 National Advocacy Partners and the programme is now advertising
for applic ations for grants to join the National Advocacy Partner scheme.
2. Small -to -mid -size grants awarded through two Local Advocacy Grant makers for
advocacy campaigns at the regional or municipal levels (and possibly a national level
issue);
3. A flexible Special I nitiatives Fund for emerging opportunities.
SIDA (Swedish Agency for International Development) provides support to Kosovo civil society
in the areas of the Environment, education and democracy via Swedish framework
organisations operating in Kosovo with t heir local CSO partners. Framework organisations
include: Kvinna till Kvinna , works with 6 long -term partners promoting g ender research,
feminism and women’s rights. Olof Palme Centre , s upport s to CSOs working to strengthen
democratisation and support hum an rights. Civil Rights Defenders (formerly Swedish Hels ink i

Committee) openly advertise s approaches from prospective partners promoting human rights
and democratisation .
Rockefeller Brothers Fund is a private US foundation running a regional Western Balka ns
programme in which Kosovo remains a focus. A large proportion of its grants are intended to
provide institutional support (44%). The Fund identifies prospective CSO and media
organisation s as grantees in the fields of democratic practice, sustainable d evelopment, peace
and security, and environmental protection. The average grant size to Balkan organisation s is a
little under US$82,000 for an average 1.2 years. In 2009, apart from funding US NGOs and
other foreign organisation s active in Kosovo, the f und supported 5 Kosovan CSOs with grants of
between US$35,000 and 300,000, for periods of 12 -24 months, to a total of US$695,000. 5
World Bank – The World Bank Office in Pristina disburses small grants to CSOs from its Civil
Society Fund up to a maximum of US$10,000 (but usually in the range of $3,000 to $7,000) in an
annual competition for actions which aim to promote an enabling environment for good
governance, including anti -corruption measure, gov ernment monitoring and rights -based
advocacy .
Government f unding
Government financing of CSOs, either at the central or local levels remains a relative rarity and
total funds available to CSOs are probably relatively unimportant. There are no institutional
mechanisms for facilitating government support to CSOs, s uch as grant schemes or open
tenders for service provision. Line ministries include CSOs in specific, one -off projects and very
occasionally outsource limited services or activities to CSOs. Within central government, this
last has been practiced most by the Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sports , while it is becoming
more common within municipalities. By and large, public administrations do not publicise
details concerning any financial support they may provide CSOs ; this is an area wher e
government is c onspicuously non -transparent.
Corporate philanthropy
Corporate giving to civil society remains insignificant. The economy, though growing, is still
relatively cash -poor and the continuing influence of traditional culture, which in the past
determined that social support was provided through the extended family, militates against the
idea of giving to the wider community. The concept of corporate social responsibil ity,
therefore, is not widely recognised. In addition, very few potential givers are aware of the tax
benefits of supporting public benefit organisations. Those that do make private donations

5 CSOs in Kosovo supported by Rockefeller Brothers Fund in 2009 were: KDI – US$ 55,000 for 2 year s; Dokufest
$US 35,000 for 1 year; Centre for Civil Society Devel opment – US$ 25,000 for 1 year ; BIRN – US$ 300,000 for 1
year ; Forum for Civic Initiatives – US$ 280, 000 for 2 years .

(businesses and individuals) tend to support humanitarian aid (hand -outs to the vulnerable in
the community), health services and social welfare.

1.3 Gover nment mechanisms for civil society -government cooperation and the
policy framework determining government -civil society relations.
The Government of Kosovo has so far established neither institutional mechanisms nor a policy
framework for developing relat ions with civil society in order to facilitate the inclusion of CSOs
in the policy and legislative process, as well as promote the development of the civil sector.
Although there are no restrictions in law on CSOs participating in the decision -making proc ess,
there is no comprehensive legal provision defining and regulating government -civil society
cooperation and the institutional forms this might take. A small number of laws and
regulations encourage CSOs to participate in specific and narrowly defined fields of public life,
but do not establish the responsibility of the government to cooperate with civil society. 6
Memorandum of Cooperation
In 2007, after a summer -long process of unprecedented consultation and negotiation between
government and civil so ciety, the latter represented by CiviKos, a network of over 130 CSOs,
and facilitated by KFOS (Kosovo Foundation for Open Society), an agreement was reached
which established the rights of civil society to work in partnership with government, gave
politic al support and credibility to this idea, and most importantly set out an agenda for
establishing institutional mechanisms to support government -civil society interaction, as well as
civil society development itself. A Memorandum of Cooperation between th e Government of
Kosovo and Representatives of CiviKos was signed on November 9 th 2007. The Memorandum
addressed itself broadly to four issues: the general position of civil society, the responsibilities
of government towards civil society, the responsibi lities of CSOs to implementing their
organisational missions, and cooperation between government and civil society. Specific
points , amongst other s, included the injunction on the Government
• To establish effective partnership with civil society to enable its participation in policy
development and to promote effective dialogue on issues of concern for both parties.
• To support c ivil soc iety project s by means of properly developed and transparently
managed grant schemes, which are to be open to scrutiny.

6 E.g. Article 44.4 of the Rules of the Kosovan Assembly state: “A committee may invite other persons or
representatives of institutions and of civil society to attend the meetings of committee.” The Law on Social and
Family Services dea ls with the “Role of the non -Government Sector” (Article 8), in which – amongst others –
“voluntary organisation s and associations, faith based organisation s, self -help groups” are “encouraged” to provide
social services “on their own initiative or, under contract, on behalf of the municipal Directorate” or the central
government.

• To s et up a joint government -civil society committee or other mechanism that will be
responsible for develop ing a government s trategy for cooperation with civil society .
• To establish a committee for monitoring government performance in cooperating with an d
supporting civil society.
The Memorandum was signed by an outgoing administration on the eve of parliamentary
elections, but, more importantly, only a short time before the momentous and ongoing pol itical
and institutional change brought about by Kosovo’ s declaration of independence in February
2008. Consequently, and in the absence of sustained pressure from CiviKos (which appears to
have subsided into inertia), the Memorandum has fallen from the Government’s agenda and no
steps have been taken to implem ent it.
NGO Registration Office
The NGO Registration Office is the only state body established solely to work in cooperation
with CSOs. It maintains a limited mandate – confined mainly to registration – and has a low
level of capacities, including staff n umbers, civil society knowledge and technical skills. Not
only does the Office consistently show its inability to process CSO registrations and
documentation within the prescribed 60 day period, its central location has made it all but
inaccessible to a l arge number of CSOs representing the minority Serb community living in
numerous isolated enclaves around the country and in the northern area s north or the Ibar
river (USAID 2009).
It is sometimes suggested that the Registration Office could be expanded to carry out a
coordination role between government and civil society. However, over its ten years in
operation it has failed conspicuously to establish productive relations with CSOs , or to fulfil a ny
kind of liaison role between government and civil socie ty. 7 It has often been perceived by CSOs
as providing the Govern ment with a means of exerting illegitimate control over civil society by
interfering arbitrarily in the activities of CSOs considered by government as politically
undesirable . In 2008, the Re gistration Office attempted to inspect the fin ancial documents of
several CSOs that were critical of government policies, even though the authority to audit
NGOs’ financial documents is reserved for the Kosovo tax authorities (USAID 2009) . Because of
this kind of interference, the development of a coordination role for the Registration Office
would be met with resistance from certain quarters of civil society.
Agency for Coordination of Development and European Integration
The importance of civil society to the establishment of democratic governance and as a means
of ensuring that citizens’ interests are represented in the policy and reform process of Kosovo’s
path towards European integration is highlighted in the current EC Multi -annual Indicative

7 When it was originally established by UNMIK its wider coordination role was implicit in its name, the “NGO Liaison
and Registration Unit”

Planning Docu ment (MIPD) for Kosovo, 2009 -20 11 ,8 continuing the approach set out in the
previous MIPD for 2007 -2009. Despite this, the government body charged with managing
Kosovo’s activities towards achieving integration and for coordinating the EU support to
Kosovo, the Agency for Coordination of Development and European Integration, 9 has so far
mad e no formal provision for cooperating with civil society and has consulted CSOs on only the
rare occasion. The Agency had intended to adopt a MoU with civil society establishing
conditions of cooperation (as above), but this initiative was held up indefinitely at the Legal
Services Department.
CSOs are dissatisfied by the lack of substantive cooperation between civil society and the EC
Liaison Office (ECLO) in Kosov o, complaining that EC consultations on strategic documents, such
as the 2009 Progress Report, or the 2009 Enlargement Strategy and programming documents,
such as the MIPD , have been unstructured and carried out in a cursory manner . Having said
this, Koso van CSOs recognise both that the ECLO is comm itted to serious consultation with civil
society in the design, preparation and implementation of key strategies and documents and
that CSOs themselves are as yet insufficiently proactive in pushing to contribut e to the EC
partnership and also remain poorly equipped to represent and advocate community interests
(KCSF 2009).

1.4 Government (local and national) institutional capacities for engaging civil
society
Central level
Communication between government and C SOs remains weak and , in the absence of
institutional mechanisms and regulated procedure s, much depends on individual s and their
personal connections. Ad hoc cooperation takes place between governmen t and CSOs relatively
regularly within line ministries an d government institutions, as a result of initiatives from either
party, but in most cases this cooperatio n is superficial and of a purely formal nature a nd is not
developed into longer -lasting processes which enable CSOs to contribute to decision making i n
any meaningful way. Although line ministries are seen to routinely consult with relevant CSOs in

8 “Civil society (…) plays a major rol e in transition societies. Ensuring that those groups’ concerns are taken into
account in the European development agenda and enhancing their policy dialogue with the administration and
Kosovo’s institutions will be mainstreamed within the EC assistance pr ogrammes.” Specifically, the MIPD goes on :
concerning the MIPD’s political criteria (sector 1), it will be essential to achieve the “ mainstreaming [of] civil society
issues in all programmes and complementing support from other EC assistance instruments (i.e. EIDHR) with a clear
message that solid social dialogue constitutes a condition for an effective partnership and good governance” and that
“[i]ncreased participation by civil society representatives in policy formulation and social consultation” are n ecessary.
Concerning the establishment of European Standards (sector 2), the MIPD identifies a need for “ improved sector
analysis and strengthened civil society organisations in the area of agriculture and rural development.” 9 The Agency is a cross -sect or body situated in the Prime Minister ’s O ffice. It was announced in December 2009 that
in due course the Agency will be transformed or replaced by a full Ministry for European Integration.

the development of sector strategies, the above perception that this is carried out in a cursory
manner (often to fulfil conditions of support from internati onal donors) holds true.
A particular weakness is the poor understanding of the concept of public participation and its
facilitation by civil society, within government circles and the civil service. Consequently,
government officials consistently cooper ate with a very restricted range of known and trusted
civil society leaders and recognised CSOs, rather than engage in the more unpredictable and
politically challenging process of communicating with wider civil society.
Within the Office of the Prime Mi nister the advisory Office of Good Governance is accessible to
civil society representation and plays a role in coordinating cross -sector cooperation between
government and civil society on issues relating to human rig hts, minority issues and gender.
This includes consultation with CSOs in drafting the national Strategy for Human Rights and the
Strategy for Integration of Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian Communities (see below).
Other attempts at the central government level to institutionalise a substantive rol e for civic
participation in policy dialogue appear to run up against insurmountable obstacles when
attempting to convert good intentions into practical activity. In 2008, the Min istry of
Environment signed a MoU with environmental CSOs with the goal of i nitiating practical
cooperation on policy, but the document appears to amount to little more than a wish -list of
joint activities , none of which have so far been acted upon.
In a different way, an Independent Media Commission, involving CSO participation , was
established in August 2006 and continues to function. To date, both the chair and vice -chair of
the Commission have been civil society representatives. 10
In 2009, the Economic and Social Committee, a multi -stakeholder policy advisory body, was
ev entually launc hed after a number of years of formal existence only on paper. In this case, the
law provides only for representation of employers and employees, thus excluding the majority
of relevant CSOs from the forum.
In December 2009 the government too k steps to reactivate and reorganise the Council for
Persons with Disabilities, a cross -sector policy -making body that includes significant CSO
representation. Originally established in 2006 , it lack s the necessary support from government
to function effe ctively.
However, civil society can claim to have enjoyed greater access to government in recent times,
in particular since the 2008 Declaration of Independence established almost complete domestic
autonomy in areas of social policy, and has made importan t contributions to the drafting of the
following legislation and government policy documents:

10 Chairs have been Isuf Berisha (August 2006 – August 2007) and Arg jentina Grazhdani (March 2008 – March 2010),
assisted by vice -chairs Milena Deric (ethnic minority representative) and Daut Demaku

• The Kosovo Human Rights Strategy (2007), drafted by the Prime Minister’s Office for Good
Governance. This sets out priorities and an action plan till 2011, but un fortunately fails to
fully address the government’s legal obligations in the field of human rights (OSCE 2008) ;
• The Law on Access to Official documents was developed in close cooperation with civil
society ;
• Women’s CSOs were involved in drafting the Nation al Action Plan for the Achievement of
Gender Equality (2004), building upon international legal tools for the advancement of
women’s human rights and upon connections with trans -national advocacy networks;
• The Strategy for the Integration of Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian Communities in the Republic
of Kosovo 2009 – 2015 (December 2008) included RAE CSOs in its consultative stage and
KFOS was involved at the drafting stage.
• The Action Plan for People with Disabilities 2009 -2011 (April 2009) was the result of a
consultative and inclusive process with the participation of many CSOs .
Local level
The Law on Local Self -Government not only recognises the right of citizens “to participate in the
activities of the municipality,” it also prescribes a number of mechanism s through which
citizens and their organisations may participate in the policy -making process at the local level.
Apart from an obligation to hold public information and consultation meetings on the local
budget and municipal planning at least twice a year , the Law states that the municipality “shall
establish consultative committees within sectors,” at which CSO representatives will be invited.
The purpose of these committees is to enable civic participation in the decision -making process
by means of submi tting proposals, conducting research and providing opinions. However, in
reality, civil society participation remains low and committees are reported in places to either
not exist or be non -functional (ECNL 2009).
Although municipal authorities are clearl y less than enthusiastic to promote wider participation
in consultative committees, the ECNL Assessment of the Legal Environment of Civil Society in
Kosovo (2009) concludes that the evidence suggests that lack of in put into local -level policy
mak ing is “mo re often than not *…+ due to the inaction of *CSOs+ rather than resistance from
the municipalities.” Rather than it being an issue of resources, it appears to be one of lack of
awareness and organisational capacity on the part of grassroots civil society.

1.5 Public perceptions and support of civil society and its various segments
According to the results of a survey published in the Kosovo Human Development Report for
2008 (UNDP 2008) , which is dedicated to Civil Society, there is widespread recognition of civil
society and CSOs in Kosovo and for many the term is associated with the values of human
rights, voluntarism and service provision. 11 While public approval of CSOs has grown to some
extent in recent years, th e full survey confirms the view of other commentators that , in general ,
civil society is not he ld in high regard by the public. I n particular, there is a perceived gulf
between civil society and the public with regard to communication, interests, and expectations,
which contributes to low levels of public support for and participation in civil society.
Almost half of thos e surveyed see civil society as totally unrepresentative of pubic interests,
while only 3% believed that civil society repre sents their personal interests and opinions “a lot.”
An interesting further point is that large professional Kosovan NGOs are consistently viewed as
more representative of public interests than community -based grassroots organisations. 12
A commonly held view is that CSOs ar e driven purely by the agenda s of fo reign donors and are
thus not only out of touch with the people, but are also promoters of foreign interests which
are often at variance with those in the community. Consequently, civil society continues to
“face an uphill struggle to legitimise itself wit h the Kosovar public (ATRC 2009). Particular
resentment of CSOs is engendered by the fact that successful professional CSOs – which by dint
of their very success tend to obscure the greater number of more -or -less voluntary
organisations – pay very high sa laries, considerably in excess of the average wage. Although
CSOs are to some extent forced to offer over -inflated pay through the need to compete for
skilled employees with the large number of international organisations operating in Kosovo,
many interpr et this as a mark of civil society’s inherent elitism and the staff privileges which it
strives above all to preserve.
In keepin g with this jaundiced view, Kosovo’s National Human Development Report ( NHDR )
survey records that only 5% of Kosovars consider CSOs to be accountable, with 23% conceding
that some CSOs are accountable. Lack of perceived accountability to beneficiaries and the
community was also a notable finding, as only 6% of those surveyed believed that CSOs answer
to the public or the communit y, while a majority (53%) would like CSOs to do so .
Voluntary participation in CSOs, and also other for ms of community support for civil society is
low (although 19% of respondents in the UNDP survey said that they had participated in some

11 Somewhat in contradiction to this the survey found that very few people associated “democracy” and “support for
vulnerable groups” with civil society. 12 It should be pointed out that a number of well -established CSO service providers, such as Handikos (people with
disability) and Mother Theresa (Health), have branch offices in every or nearly every one of Kosovo’s 31
municipal ities. As they are a daily presence in the lives of many citizens in their neighbourhoods and as they
frequently have greater resources for carrying out activities than local CSOs do, it easy to see why national CSOs are
compared so favourably with local organisations on t he criterion of representation.

sort of civic ac tivity) . Low levels of public support for CSOs are confirmed by the survey finding
that only 10% of the population is a member of a CSO. In general, CSOs in Kosovo are
supported by very weak or non -existent constituencies, owing to their general failure t o build
community relations, communicate with stakeholders and use the Media 13 and networks to
promote their organisations and activities.
Fewer than one third of Kosovars think that CSOs are open to public participation, and a low
number (20%) of those sur veyed indicated that they would be willing to work voluntarily in a
CSO.
Within Kosovo’s various ethnic minority communities broadly speaking public perceptions of
civil society are in keeping with those of the Kosovan Albanian majority. Within the Serbia n
enclaves and the predominantly Serbian northern region, which remain to all extents and
purposes cut off from the majority community and the Kosovan state institutions, and excluded
from broader civil society in Kosovo, community approval of CSOs is mark edly lower and civic
participation and voluntarism weaker than in other parts. The 2008 USAID NGO Sustainability
Index (USAID 2009) asserted that here [CSO] activists are perceived as collaborators of foreign
government s or even as traitors. Although this oversimplifies attitudes to a particularly complex
area of civic activity cut through with competing political influences, it illustrates the more
general point that Kosovan Serbs, owing to their social and political marginalisation within
embattled commu nities, are more sceptical towards civil society, less socially trusting and less
likely to volunteer or otherwise participate in civil society.

13 Relations with the Media and the attitudes of media outlets towards CSOs are complex. CSOs from outside the
capital, Pristina, struggle to gain coverage in the national Media, owing to limited human reso urces in the Media and
its orientation to Pristina. Editorial policies are often highly politicised, leading to selective exclusion of certain
organisations or types of activity from reports.
Local broadcast media dedicates significant space to coverin g CSO activities and events, and poor coverage of civil
society is more directly attributable to poor PR capacities on the part of CSOs.

2. CSO ORGANISATIONAL CAPACITIES
2.1 Overview of the civil society community in Kosovo
Structure of civil society
Officially there are just under 5,000 CS Os registered in Kosovo, but it is estimated that fewer
than 10% of these are truly active. 14 There are also around 300 international NGOs that have
registered their branches in Kosovo. The reduction of inter national funding for CSOs over
recent years has resulted in the closure of many inef ficient and poorly managed NGOs and a
concomitant consolidation of the sector . Overall, civil society remains weak and under –
developed. Despite the considerable amount of t raining and technical support that has been
provided to CSOs, organisational capacities remain limited (ATRC 2008) .
The average CSO is a small organisation, with limited staff numbers and skills, supported by a
single donor and carrying out short -term pro ject activities. Consequently, many CSOs are
unable to both maintain a regular programme of work and achieve organisational resilience and
sustainability. A significant number of CSOs are more -or -less sleeping organisations which re –
awaken if the opportuni ty to obtain scarce donor funding for projects presents itself.
Unsurprisingly, t he sector’s impact is cons equently perceived as being low.
In a recent strategy paper for civil society in Kosovo, the Advocacy Training & Resource Centre
noted that civil so ciety “is still unable to exert any influence over public policy” (ATRC 2009).
The paper goes on to note that the sector “is still struggling to become a representative and
vocal sector as is one the requirement of modern and democratic countries.”
A consp icuous feature of the civil society in Kosovo , originating in its almost total dependence
on f oreign donors and their short -term priorities, is the lack of real linkages to those whom it
represents. CSOs invariably have small and largely inactive membersh ips, do not communicate
effectively with community stakeholders and are otherwise poorly supported by their
constituencies .
An additional result of excessive reliance on the donor community is poor c ooperation between
CSOs and intense competition for resou rces, as well as an absence of shared goals, or a notion
of a civil society “community” or “movement.”
Civil society is represented across the whole country, including the Serb -dominated north and
Serbian enclaves, but the greater majority of organisations , including the most active and well
developed are concentrated in the capital Pristina and other major towns, such as Peja, Prizren
and Mitrovica. At the centr e, mainly in Pristina, an identifiable elite of compact, but
sophisticated professional NGOs ha s emerged which include a number of promin ent think

14 Current estimates of the number of active CSOs range from 300 – 500.

tanks, watchdogs and advocacy organisations that are oriented toward influencing the Kosovo
government and the international community, including the EC Liaison Office .
Reflecting the social and geo -poli tical divisions of Kosovo along ethnic lines, CSOs are
predominantly ethnically exclusive. In general, CSOs representing minority communities are
less developed and their restricted access to donors and government means they wield less
influence with both municipal and central authorities (Sterland 2006). The continuing political
impasse between the minority Kosovan Serb community and majority Kosovan Albanian
community, as well as their geographical separation, makes meaningful civil society work across
ethnic lines almost impossible (ATRC 2009). 15
Resources for strengthening civil society and supporting CSO development are scant. For some
time the Advocacy and Training Res ource Centre, in Pristina has been the only dedicated CSO
support organisation in K osovo, providing training, consultancy and access to small grants. In
addition, a commercial consultancy firm, MD A (Management Development Associates), whose
main clients are public sector companies, also provides a range of advanced trainings in
managemen t and development practice at more commercial rates.
Field of operation / activities
Service provision, composed primarily of education , information campaigns and skills training
courses, probably comprise the mainstay of CSO activity. Provision of socia l services and also
humanitarian help is carried out in all municipalities by CSOs, in many cases by the b ranch
offices of large Pristina -based CSOs. 16 Many organisations also carry out advocacy activities
alongside their project activities. Current donor priorities of support to policy dialogue,
government monitoring, watchdog activities and the fight against corruption are spawning both
new organisations in this field and the increasing uptake of these activities by established CSOs.
Despite this, there i s also the sense that many organisations claim an interest and also
proficiency in these activities purely as a means of securing financial resources. USAID’s
evaluation of its Kosovo Civil Society Programme (Mitchell et al 2008) observed: “Advocacy and
an ti-corruption *…+ seem to be popular terms in the CSO vocabulary, but in many cases

15 Inter -community work is carried out by interna tional NGOs operating in Kosovo, particularly areas of return or in
and around the Serb enclaves to attempt some kind of reintegration. Local CSOs representing minorities are
employed to facilitate contacts with the local community. Inter -community acti vities are usually only possible at a
remove at some neutral location.
CBM (Community Building Mitrovica), which grew out of a Dutch project after the 1998 -9 conflict, is possibly the only
functioning multi -ethnic CSO (with equal numbers of K -Albanian and K-Serbian staff) with a mandate for pe ace
building and reconciliation between the K -Serbian and K -Albanian communities. A very limited number of K -Albanian
CSOs have been active in this field. E.g. Syri i Vizionit from Peja. 16 Most notably Handikos and M other Theresa Society, both of which are survivors from the pre -war parallel system
of CSO -run social services established by the Kosovo -Albanian community during the years of repression under
Milosevic.

organisation s do not display clear awareness of what these terms mean or what types of CSO
activities they may refer to.”
A CSO capacity assessment carried out by ATRC in 2 008, shows that Kosovo CSOs focus on a
wide range of field of activities. Somewhat confusingly, “transparency” (whose meaning in this
context remains unexplained) is listed as an activity and this is observed to be the single most
common CSO activity in Ko sovo. The report goes on to suggest that “transparency” be treated
as a cross -cutting activity (or possible issue?) which impacts on many other civil society fields,
such as women, youth, people with disability and environment. Apart from these themes,
community development is observed to be the most common area of CSO activity. 17
Earlier reports have remarked on the very high number of women’s and youth groups operating
in Kosovo, reflecting the young age of the population on the one hand and the larg e investment
made by donors over the last ten years into promoting gender equality and women’s rights. 18

2.2 Human resources and technical skills
In light of the high unemployment and low pay in the public sector in Kosovo, work in civil
society is an at tractive option for many, particularly those with high educational qualifications.
Civil society, particularly in the big towns, is blessed with sufficient numbers of suitably
qualified potential staff. However, financial constraints and the need to pay competitive
salaries limit the ability of all CSOs in Kosovo to retain permanent full -time staff. If a CSO has
the resources to employ staff, it is most likely to have between three and five employees at any
one time. In most cases, staff members are eng aged on a part -time basis and on short -term
contracts for the duration of specific projects. Only a very few CSOs h ave more than 10 full –
time employees. At the community level, the “one -person show,” or CSO dependent on a
single committed activist (and usually founder member) for routine administrative activities, is
a common occurrence.
Although voluntarism is weak generally, youth groups, in particular and women’s CSOs, to a
lesser extent, have some success in recruiting volunteers.
Most of Kosovan CSO s still lag behind in applying best principles of management, both in
human resources and financial management. For example, few organisations have clear
procedures in place for the recruitment of new staff and tend to operate instead according to
standar ds required by individual donors. CSOs also face difficulties in financial management;
many still operate with cash accounts which are not properly maintained and there is limited
knowledge of the tax laws and government policies that affect their operatio ns.

17 See Annex 3 for ATRC’s findings on CSO mission an d scope of work. 18 In 2006, Sterland estimated that together youth and women’s groups accounted for between 40% – 50% of all
CSOs in Kosovo.

A high rate of staff turnover, an inevitable consequence of over -dependence on project
funding, impedes the development of professional skills and also makes planned organisational
development extremely difficult. Staff turnover with a consequent loss of individual capacity to
the organisation may also provide the answer to the question as to why so little has been
achieved by CSO capacity building programmes over the last decade. There is general
agreement that CSOs have received a surfeit of technica l trainings in subjects such as project
development, financial management, strategic planning, advocacy, and monitoring and
evaluation.
ATRC (2008) notes that even now, the average CSO staff member attends two training sessions
every year. While CSOs are calling out for training on topics which have largely been
overlooked, such as social responsibility, CSO coordination and networking and governance,
they are still falling short in the execution of the basic technical skills. The evident and repeated
failures of capacity building efforts to date indicate that assistance in these areas is sill
necessary (for smaller, less developed organisations), but that more of the same will not work
and will not be acceptable. In place of the individual skills traini ng which is provided as a stand
alone event and to which an organisation usually sends one or two participants, a more
individually tailored and planned approach to capacity building must take place within and with
whole organisations. Training should be backed up with further consultancy or carried out as
process facilitation, but most importantly each session should be oriented to identifiable
changes of practice and objectives to be achieved within a wider plan of organisational change
to be managed by the CSO itself.
Specific shortfalls in CSO capacity noted in the literature and confirmed by consultations
undertaken for this study include:
• Strategic planning (including understanding of organisational mission and vision) ;
• Fundraising skills, including the development of alternatives to foreign donor finance and
understanding EC application procedures;
• Constituency building and community needs analysis ;
• Partnerships and networking;
• Human resource management;
• CSO law and financial regulations relevant to the sector;
• Advocacy ;
• Policy dialogue ;
• Public relations and managing relations with the Media .

2.3 Strategic strengths of CSOs in Kosovo
With very few exceptions, CSOs in Kosovo do not engage in strategic planning. Clearly, the
orientation of the sect or towards scarce short -term project funding militates against long -term
objective -oriented planning. Regardless of their stated organisational objectives included in
their Statutes, the majority of CSOs either has no effective mission or routinely carries out
activities beyond their mission, as a result of impromptu positioning around changing donor
priorities.
Two earlier capacity assessments of civil society in Kosovo (KCSF 2005 & Sterland 2006)
highlighted that many CSOs lack both a social vision of wh at they are trying to achieve in the
long term which, combined with poor coope ration with, and understanding of primary
stakeholders, renders the very idea of organisational strategic planning, let alone its practice,
redundant.
In the vast majority of CSO s the governing body, which should provide a leadership role in
determining and overseeing strategic direction, does not function and exists only on paper.
Even when assemblies and boards of directors 19 do meet, they tend to perform the role of
rubber stam ping decisions taken by the executive director and staff members. A further
consequence of weak organisational governance, prevalent in the sector, is low levels of
organisational t ransparency and accountability , undermining the public trust civil society and
reducing constituency support for civil society activities and undermining the legitimacy in the
community of CSOs.

2.4 Analytical capacities
Analytical capacities of civil society sector in Kosovo remain weak. To a certain extent this is a
corollar y of the lack of CSO specialisation (and mission creep) and low levels of strategic
planning. Most of all, it goes hand -in-hand with CSOs’ limited communication with their
constituencies: few organisations undertake research to identify community needs or to
provide the basis for programme and project identification and development.
Shortfalls in analysis, and lack of experience in using both academic and participatory research
techniques (such as PRA or PAR), inevitably impact negatively on CSOs’ efforts t o conduct
advocacy and engage government institutions in policy dialogue.
In Pristina, a number of capable think -tanks and other CSO advocates working mainly in the
field of good governance and democratisation have emerged. These organisations have

19 Associations are required by law to have an assembly of members, which must meet at least two times a year.
Funct ions such as monitoring of staff performance, financial management or strategic leadership may be delegated to
an elected board of directors, which may meet as often as required. Foundations have no members and are
governed by a board of directors.

manage d to create a credible public profile, and are quite active in providing government
institutions with policy proposals, and publishing research and policy briefs for wider
consumption.

2.5 Relationships with other actors –networking and partnerships
CSO – CSO relationships
Kosovan civil society is fragme nted, uncoordinated, and deficient in leadership. Lack of
cooperation and solidarity between CSOs and even the sense of a shared sectoral identity
gained through recognition of mutual values and a shared understanding of the broader role
civil society plays within the institutional socio -political context seriously undermine the
potential of civil society in Kosovo to contribute to the processes of development and
democratic change.
Apart from the CiviKos Platform, no attempts have b een made to establish networks or other
forms of cooperation with the aim of representing the inter ests of the whole sector. Aside
from the training organisation ATRC, there is no recognised CSO dedicated to promoting civil
soc iety development and acting as an interlocutor with government and national institutions.
Over the years , many attempts have been made, mainly at the behest of international donors
and international NGO s, to form sub -sector and issue -based coalitions, as well as locally based
networks at the community or municipal levels. In the greater majority of cases, these have
proved short -lived and ineffective in harnessing collective capacities , owing to poor or
contested leadership and an inability to identify co mmon interests and establish shared
objectives.
Exceptions to the rule have been the Kosovo Women’s Network (KWN), a vehicle for advocacy
for women’s rights and gender equality established in 2000 and the Kosovo Youth Network
KYN) , founded by IRC and UN DP in 2001 and the. The KWN , which includes over 80
organisations from the whole of Kosovo , including those representing Serbian women, has
proved itself as one of the very few effective forms of wider CSO coordination. KWN’s r ecent
work includes policy r esearch with UNDP to assist the government prepare a Law on Protection
against Domestic Violence and the National Strategy and Action Plan against Domestic Violence
(KWN 2009) , but has led many high -profile campaigns promoting women’s rights over issues
su ch as electoral reform, the establishment of institutional mechanisms for gender equality,
greater political participation by women and the inclusion of women’s interests in the Kosovo
status negotiations in 2006 -2007.
The KYN now represents over 130 youth organisations and has established itself as the civil
society representative with a central role in the continuing process of defining youth policy in
Kosovo. From 2005 to 2007, along with the Ministry of Culture, Sport and Youth, other
government instit utions and a phalanx of international agencies (includi ng OSCE, GTZ, UNICEF,
UNDP, UNFP A, the World Bank and others) in drafting the Kosovo Youth Action Plan. It

subsequently was a major contributor to the drafting of a Law on Empowerment (dealing
broadly with youth voluntarism) and the designing of a National Youth Action Council, both of
whose implementation has unfortunately been stalled within government machinery for nearly
two years now.
GTZ and OSCE respectively invested heavily in forming youth coun cils and NG O forums in many
municipalities in the early 2000s. As with the greater majorit y of other networks in Kosovo,
these are more or less inactive , except for the Youth Network in the western regional centre of
Peja, which established local ownership early on under the tutelage of major NGO Syri i Vizionit
and continues today to coordinate the town’s many youth groups and centres.
More effective CSO cooperation has been established th rough short -lived, single -issue
advocacy or monitoring campaigns, in cluding:
• “Reform 2004”, a broad citizen coalition of more than 250 CSOs (the largest citizen’s
initiative to date), which advoca ted for open electoral lists and the reconfiguring of
electoral boundaries in place of one -district, closed -list proportional re presentation . Owing
to the unresponsiveness and unaccountability of Kosovo’s international administration
(UNMIK) , the coalition was unsuccessful in its aims. 20
• A Pensioners Coalition which succeeded in providing input into the draft law on pension
reform.
• A 15 -member anti -corruption coalition, under the leadership of COHU,
• The coalition “Civil Society For a C lean Par liament” brought together 15 NGOs during the
campaign period for the November 2007 parliamentary elections , to apply pressure for
parliament to rid itself of corruption, and elements linked to organise d crime. S ince the se
election s the coalition has been more or less inactive.
• “Democracy in Action” was established to monitor the conduct of the February 2007 local
elections , but was recently rea ctivated to monitor the November 2009 local elections .
Unsurprisingly, CSOs representing ethnic minority communities, particularly those of the Serb
community, are least likely to enter into networks and coalitions with organisations from the
majority Kos ovo -Albanian community. More interesting is the observation that CSOs from the
ethnic minorities are also reluctant to form partnerships and coalitions within their own
community and across enclaves and even with professional CSOs from the Republic of Ser bia.
On a more optimistic note, ATRC (2009) has observed that there is a growing trend in Kosovo
for CSOs to cooperate with each other, both in the form of individual bi -lateral partnerships and
in broader -based coalitions, particularly for the implementa tion of advocacy and watchdog
projects.

20 The advocated reforms were in fact implemented at a much later date.

CSO – state and government relationships
This area is described in detail in sections 1.3 and 1.4

2.6 Material and financial stability and resilience
Except for a very small number of better developed and more pro fessionally run CSOs (most of
which have benefited from hard -won institutional funding from international donors), the vast
majority of CSO s in Kosovo face serious difficulties in financing their everyday activities and
achieving longer -term sustainability . Poor technical capacities, inferior fundraising skills, lack of
or ganisational specialisation with vaguely conceived missions, weak community support and
inadequate strategic thinking all militate against CSOs exploring effectively ways to diversify
the ir funding sources and increase their income. According to the preliminary results of the
CIVICUS Civil Society Index survey, 21 around 50% of Kosovan CSOs are financed solely from
foreign donors which provide 69 % of the total civil society revenues.
As outlined above in section 1.2, at the current time , alternatives to international funding
sources are as yet u nder -developed and their potential for expansion in order to increase civil
society’s funding base limited. Now that the administration of Kosovo is completely in local
hands (under close oversight from the EU ’s International Civilian Office ), Government must
(and will eventually ) take on greater responsibility for supporting civil society and providing
finance through grant assistance and service contracts. However, not only is the idea of
partnership with civil society a relatively new concept to government and the political classes,
the G overnment ’s budget continues to be inadequate for fulfilling its existing obligations .
Continued funding from the international community is made conditional of tight fiscal control
which allows for little or no expansion at the current time (IMF 2009) . Therefore, a greatly
expanded role for government in supporting civil society cannot be expected in the near fut ure
at least.
Similarly, philanthropy will begin to play an increasingly important role , as the economy grows,
although here too, this will be slow to develop at first as businesses and individuals become
accustomed to new ideas of corporate social respons ibility. Kosovo’s larger and more mature
CSO service providers, such as Mother Theresa Society also show the way forward for many
community -based organisations, by consistently providing services to the grassroots on the
basis of subscriptions from their large membership, volunteer labour and individual
contributions from the community.
A recent CSO capacity assessment asserts that there is “ very limited potential, in the short – to
mid -term, for [CSOs] to become financially sustainable outside internationa l donor support ”

21 The CSI Index survey and report is being carried out by the KCSF – Kosovo Civil Society Foundation.

(ATRC 2008 ). More encouragingly, however, USAID’s 2008 Kosovo NGO Sustainability Index
however perceives the beginning of a trend among CSOs to improved fundraising practice and
diversification of sources. According to the report, financ ial viability of the sector improved
significantly (author’s emphasis) during 2008, as CSOs became increasingly aware of the
importance of fundraising. Fewer CSOs than in the past are dependent on a single donor and
increasing numbers of CSOs are seeking f unding from international donors that do not have a
physical presence in Kosovo.
Consultations for this study highlighted two continuing challenges to improved fundraising
practice, especially from international sources. Of general relevance is difficulty faced by very
many CSOs in gaining a sufficiently good mastery of the English language for approaching
foreign donors , while a more specific challenge is that of understanding the complicated EC
application procedures and also accessing resources to fulfi l the EC’s requirements for co –
funding.

3. CIVIL SOCIETY MILESTONE ACHIEVEMENTS, IMPACTS AND CHALLENGES
3.1 Milestone achievements and impacts in the country
Think tank capability
Aided by generous support from foreign donors, a number of sophisticated r esearch and policy
think tanks emerged soon after the 1998 -1999 conflict, contributing to dialogue on democratic
reform, the development of a market economy and future political and administrative options
for Kosovo (which was then a de facto full internat ional protectorate). There have been
fluctuations in the fortunes of some of the early think tanks, with some early opinion -makers
falling by the wayside. However, new organisations have continued to appear in the last few
years, often fulfilling a remit tuned to the new and changing international political and
development realities concerning Kosovo’s declared independence and the inclusion of the
country in the process of European integration in its own right (rather than as a part of Serbia
under UNSCR 1244). 22
Emerging watchdog capability
The last two or three years have seen the proliferation of watchdog organisations dedicated to
fighting Kosovo’s endemic corruption and to holding democratically elected representatives to
account. In the main, these o rganisations are operating at the municipal level, even if in many
cases they are based in Pristina. While owing much to the original stimulation and the
continuing support of the international community (in particular , USAID which has championed
watchdog and advocacy campaigning since 2001 when it started the implementation of its
KNAP programme) , the watchdog organisations which are currently active are locally driven in
their commitment to the values of democracy and probity in public life. 23

22 Examples of current think tanks operating in Kosovo: ECK – European Centre Kosovo (Euro pean integration and
sister organisation to European Centre in Tirana, Albanian); Foreign Policy Club; Forum 2015 (think tank coalition,
formed originally by KFOS and Riinvest – special focus Kosovo’s Euro -Atlantic aspirations. Also general policy); GAP
– Institute for Advanced Studies (Political, social and economic policy); IKS – Kosovo Stability Initiative (governance,
economic development, environment and Kosovo’s image problem); IPOL – Balkan Policy Institute (governance,
European integration, economi c development); KIPRED – Kosovo Institute for Policy Research and Development
(democracy, governance, civil society); Riinvest Institute (economic development – the oldest think tank, formed
before the armed conflict). 23 Current watchdog CSOs include: KDI – Kosovo Democratic Institute: the largest Kosovo watchdog and original
protégé of USAID. KDI i s the Kosovo representativ e of Transparency International and w orks at both the national and
municipal level. FOL Movement: Formed in 2008 as a youth initiative t o provide a check and critical voice on
government during the first year of Independence. It has grown into an organisationally well developed watchdog and
advocate for citizens rights, mainly at the central level. INPO – Initiative for Progress, working in and around the
municipality of Ferizaj; COHU – Organisation for Democracy, Anti -Corruption and Dignity ; KCIC – Kosovo Centre for
International Cooperation: despite its name, is dedicated mainly to advocacy activities in the municipality of Gnjilan.
BIR N – Balkan Investigative Reporting Network – a major alternative media outlet throughout the Balkans, which
grew out of IWPR (International War and Peace Reporting), which in Kosovo is the most publicly recognised
watchdog owing to its weekly national TV s how covering all things political.

Women’s lit eracy
International funding of adult education projects and literacy centres run by local CSOs in the
first years after the 1998 -1999 conflict are assessed to have had a major impact in raising the
levels of literacy among rural women and their children. Historically, gender inequality owing
to a traditionally patriarchal society , an d general under -development had resulted in
disproportionate levels of female illiteracy in Kosovo. Incomplete inclusion of rural children,
especially girls, in the parallel s ystem of education established the Kosovo Albanian community
during the years of ethically -based repression under the Milosevic regime after 1989
exacerbated the situation. During this time, feminist organisations (such as Motrat Qiriazi,
Elena, Legjenda and Norma) providing literacy education to women in the mo st traditional
areas of Kosovo, were among the forerunners of a domestic (Kosovo Albanian) civil society in
Kosovo in the 1990s. In 2004, USAID was supporting 25 literacy centres in 10 municipalitie s,
while UNICEF supported 130 centres in 19 municipalities in cooperation with the Ministry for
Education, Science and Technology.

3.2 Shortfalls in CSO performance
Integration of Civil Society
CSOs in Kosovo have so far failed to develop a sense of solid arity based upon the recognition of
common values and a shared understanding of civil society. Apart from CiviKos Platform, civil
society has so far not managed to mobilise itself within a sector -wide network; there is no
single CSO recognised as a leade r or representative of the sector and indeed it is not clear
whether any organisation aspires to take on this responsibility. Consequently, civil society is
fragmented and uncoordinated. This is a serious capacity shortfall, as it weakens any and all
CSO e fforts to advocate, negotiate or cooperate in any other way with government and donors
alike.
In addition, few moves have been made by CSOs to build solidarity within an ethnically inclusive
framework which embraces Kosovo -Albanian and Kosovo -Serbian organ isations. Regardless of
the seemingly intransigent hegemony of the politics of division within both communities, the
social and economic development of Kosovo will be dependent on some form of
accommodation and integration of the country’s different ethni c interests. Civil society has a
vital role to play in negotiating and facilitating this process, including addressing itself to issues
of establishing confidence and security through inter -community dialogue, greater economic
cooperation and integration, as well as eventual reconciliation.

Mobilising public support
Civil society in Kosovo is poorly supported by the public and few CSOs have established strong
membership bases or identifiable constituencies. There is a general failure within CSOs to
commun icate with community stakeholders, build grassroots relations and encourage
community participation in their work, especially in the identification and planning of activities
and programmes. This is a serious impediment to efforts to influence government, at either
local or central level, via advocacy and policy dialogue, as well as a missed opportunity for
developing organisational sustainability.
Greater efforts should also be made in building supportive relations with the business sector,
whose importan ce as a key stakeholder in social and economic policy is generally overlooked by
CSOs.
Effective policy dialogue
Despite the growing orientation of the sector towards engaging the Government in policy
dialogue, particularly since the Declaration of Indepen dence in February 2008 simplified the
issue of where and with whom to direct such efforts, civil society is unable to exert significant
influence over public policy. On the one hand this is a result of the continuing lack of
preparedness of government to e nter into substantive dialogue with civil society and cooperate
with CSOs, but on the other, it is the inevitable outcome the sector’s lack of integration, poor
public support and low levels of organisational, analytical and technical expertise.

4. CONCLU SIONS
4.1 Summary of strategic issues of relevance to the project
• The d eclaration of independence by Kosovo in February 2008 heralded the taking on by the
Kosovan authorities of full responsibility for governance and marked the downgrad ing of
UNMIK’s role in the direct administration of Kosovo’s affairs and their monitoring .24 This act
has been accompanied by an ongoing flurry of legislation and policy making by the central
authorities, as well as a commitment to implement a plan for decentralisation of pow ers to
the municipalities within a revised territorial framework designed to provide Serbian
communities with a degree of autonomy and greater safeguards to their basic human
rights. 25 These events represent a unique opportunity for civil society to play a role in

24 Although UNMIK remains in Kosovo, as the UNSC and UN general assembly have not officially recognised Kosovo
as an independent country (and UNSCR 1244 officially remains in force), in practice the EU in the guise of th e its
International Civilian Office and European Union Special Representative has taken over the role of international
guarantor with a much reduced supervisory mandate. 25 This is “ The Comprehensive Proposal for a Status Settlement for Kosovo,” presented b y the Secretary -General of
the United Nations to the UN Security Council members on 26 March 2007. It was drafted by a team headed by

determining the parameters and quality of governance and social policy in Kosovo,
particularly at the central level. The project should therefore pay particular attention to the
capacity building and assistance of CSO networks and coalitions whic h address themselves
to carrying out advocacy and policy dialogue at the central level on priority issues.
• Any future cooperation between the Kosovo Government and civil society will be weakened
(or complicated) by the absence of an overall institutional structure and policy framework
for mediating relations between the two parties. A provisional, but official, agreement has
been reached on developing the necessary structures and promoting a government strategy
to assist civil society’s development by th e signing of the Memorandum of Cooperation
between the Government and CiviKos. The project should promote the Memorandum with
both civil society and government circles to ensure that it is re -established as a policy
priority and it should explore ways of facilitating a rejuvenation of CiviKos or similar CSO
coalition or movement in favour of leading civil society representation on this issue.
• Political and social divisions between Kosovo Albanian and Kosovo Serb communities –
including the de facto lack of freedom of movement for Serbs within Kosovo 26- determine
that Kosovo -wide and ethically inclusive civil society activity is virtually absent and
extremel y difficult to promote. This presents the project which a major challenge , as it is
designed on the pre mise that increasing the frequency and quality of intra -sector
cooperation (CSO -CSO cooperation) through dialogue, networks and other forms of
partnership, is key to achieving the objective of strengthening civil society’s overall
capacities. Activity in this area is particularly problematic in the fields of social policy and
service provision which in the Serb communities continue to be administ ered directly from
the Serbian G overnment in Belgrade, rather than the Kosovan Govern ment in Pristina.
These inc lude education, pensions and welfare payments, and health. However, a number
of other social policy concerns and areas of civil society activity appear less politically
determined and are , in principle , more accessible to a cross -community, multi -ethnic
approach to capacity buildin g and networking. These include disability, women’s and
gender rights, youth empowerment and ec onomic development activities. The project
should focus efforts to integrate civil society capacity building at the country level on t hese
and any other issues which are identified as being less politically contentious.

President Martti Ahtisaari, Special Envoy of the Secretary -General, after the effective failure of over a year’s
negotiati ons between the Kosovo Albanian Government and the Government of the Republic of Serbia. In particular it
sets out extensive provisions for non majority communities including new arrangements for local self -government, the
protection of religious and cultu ral heritage and democratic representation. 26 Lack of freedom of movement for Kosovo Serbs is contingent on locally specific perceptions of security (of lack of
it) and political pressures felt within the Kosovo Serb locality and also the majority communit y in the immediate
surroundings. A further factor influences cross -community initiatives is the degree of security or insecurity felt by
Kosovo Albanians wishing to enter Kosovo areas and enclaves.

• There is clear need for organisational capacity building of all types of CSO across the
country. While service provision continues to be a primary focus for many CSOs, policy
dialogue has taken on increased importance in newly independent Kosovo and is a priority
for most donors, including the EC. In order to ensure coherent and more efficient use of
limited project resources (including time and personnel, as well as mo ney), TACSO in Kosovo
should target its organisational capacity inputs at CSOs engaging in policy dialogue in
partnership or coalition with other CSOs at the local level.

4.2 Needs assessment conclusions
Civil society environment
• Recently revised legal and financial regulations governing civil society are in line with
international best practice . Lack of harmonisation of tax laws with CSO legislation opens the
door to discriminatory provision of tax deductions to the detriment of a broad swath of
advoca cy -oriented rights -based organisations.
• Civil society remains overly dependent on international donors for financial resources,
which have been in decline since 2001. Domestic sources of CSO finance of all kinds are
poorly developed. Overall, the total fi nancial resources available to civil society are
insufficient to sustain the programmes of the CSOs currently active in Kosovo.
• The Government of Kosovo has so far established neither institutional mechanisms nor a
strategy for developing relations with ci vil society in order to enable participation of CSOs in
policy dialogue and the legislative process, or to support the development of the civil
sector. A Memorandum of Cooperation, establishing the basis for a future architecture for
cooperation and state support of CSOs, was signed between the last government and a
short -lived CSO network, CiviKos.
• Communication between government and CSOs at all levels remains weak. There is little
understanding of the concept of public participation and its facilitatio n by civil society in
government circles . Superficial cooperation between CSOs and government does take place
on a relatively regular basis, but it is usually unplanned and is mediated through personal
connections, rather than a transparent and accountabl e institutional process.
• The Law on Local Self -Government prescribes a number of mechanisms through which CSOs
may participate in local -level policy making. Mechanisms for public participation often
remain inactive or have not been established owing to in action on the part of CSOs as well
as the reluctance of local government.
• CSOs are dissatisfied by the lack of substantive cooperation between civil society and the EC
Liaison Office on EC policy and programming in Kosovo. The government Agency for
Coordi nation of Development and European Integration has also established no formal
provision for cooperation with civil society and consults CSOs infrequently.

• Civil society is poorly supported by the general public, almost 50% of which view civil society
as un representative of public interests. In addition, CSOs are often perceived as existing
only to pro mote the financial interests of a narrow middle class elite and as being
unaccountable to the people and closed to wider community participation.
CSO organisa tional capacities
• Civil society in Kosovo is weak and under -developed. CSOs have received considerable
training and technical support, but continue to lack organisational strength and resilience.
The average CSO is financially unstable, supported by a sin gle donor and carrying out short –
term project activities.
• At the centre, a number of prominent professional think tanks, watchdog organisations and
rights -based advocates have emerged. Generally, however, CSOs in Kosovo are unable to
exert significant inf luence over policy.
• Reflecting social and geo -political divisions in Kosovo along ethnic line s, CSOs are
predominantly ethnically exclusive. CSOs representing minority communities, especially the
Serb community, are less developed and wield less influence . The impasse between Kosovo
Albanian and Kosovo Serb communities makes meaningful civil society work across ethnic
lines extremely challenging.
• Very few CSOs have permanent professional staff, owing to the general limitations on
funding. Dependence on sh ort -term project funding leads to a high rate of staff turnover in
many CSOs, weakening organisational development and longer -term planning.
• Strategic direction is particularly weak among Kosovan CSOs. Lack of social vision and
donor -oriented missions are common CSO characteristics. Financial insecurity militates
against long -term programme planning. Functioning governance structures are the
exception, and low levels of organisational transparency and accountability undermine
public trust in CSOs.
• Kosovan civil society is fragmented, uncoordinated and deficie nt in leadership. CSO
networks generally prove short -lived and ineffective in harnessing collective capacities,
owing to poor leadership, inter -CSO competition and lack of shared vision.
• CSOs are poorly oriented towards their direct stakeholders and are rarely supported by
strong constituencies. Communication with stakeholders is of a low order, as too is needs
analysis and social research for project identification.
• While considerable numbers of CSOs e ngage in advocacy, research, analysis and
campaigning skills are in short supply. At the grassroots, CSOs often have an incomplete
understanding of what advocacy is.

4.3 Recommendations for the regional project work plan
• Establish a regional pool of expe rts to provide capacity building for CSOs and civil society in
areas of common need (within the project countries) identified by the project needs
assessments. This pool would be available to CSOs in all project countries.
• Organi se regional dialogue event s at which CSOs from all project countries would meet,
discus s common problems and concerns, share experiences and best practice, learn from
each other, create partnerships and plan future joined activities and projects.
• Organise study visits within the pr oject region for the exchange of best practice, especially
concerning the CSOs cooperation with the government .
• Involve existing regional CSOs networks in project activities and further build their
capacities to be able to undertake and provide sustainabi lity of the regional aspects of the
project when it ends.
• Provide a balance of national and local level focus in the region, with bigger emphasis on
local level participatory democracy development
• Strengthen capacities of selected leading professional CSO s and individuals from all IPA
countries on policy development and research activities
• Strengthen capacities of selected CSOs from all IPA countries for wa tch dog /monitoring of
governmen t on national level through join t regional activities
• Initiate a r egional dialogue regarding elements of a unified platform for CSO activities within
the framework of the EU Accession Process.
• Strengthen regional networks for CSO development.

4.4 Recommendations for country specific work plan
Civil society environment
• In cooperation with the NGO Registration Office, supply CSOs with up -to -date and
comprehensible information on the legal and financial framework governing civil society,
including an explanation of public benefit status, its advantages and responsibilitie s and
how to apply for it. Information should be provided in pending legislation, such as the Law
of Sponsorships and amendments to the Law on VAT.
• The project, through its Advisory Group, and also the TA, should coordinate with the donor
community – incl uding international donors, government and locally managed funds – and
advocate for greater consultation with CSOs when setting objectives and designing.
• Facilitate and support the establishment (or re -animation) and capacity building of a
national CSO coa lition, network or forum whose aim would be to mediate the various CSO

interests and voices, represent civil society in public and with the government and donor
organisations, as well as develop strategy for the further development of the strategy.
• Establi sh partnership with central government and facilitate a “space” for regular
communication between government and civil society. In addition, and through the above
communication, provide support for and promote the implementation of the measures
predicted in the Memorandum of Cooperation; in particular, a joint government -civil society
committee responsible for developing a government strategy for support to civil society
development and government support to civil society activities through transparent gra nt
schemes with clear objective -based application criteria.
• Develop an online database of CSOs active in Kosovo, building on existing directories and
databases, incorporating sufficient information fields for the database to be used as a
networking and a r esearch tool.
• Establish working relations with the Agency for Development Coordination and European
Integration and facilitate regular communication and consultation on government policy
with regard to European integration between CSOs and the Agency, as w ell as with the
ECLO.
CSO organisational capacities
• With a focus on CSOs working at the local (municipal) level, especially those with a mission
to act as a catalyst of change by undertaking advocacy activities or seeking to raise public
participation an d representation in local -level policy making, the TACSO project should offer
a range of tailored capacity building activities to enhance CSO performance and strengthen
organisational development and sustainability. In order to ensure coherent and rationa l use
of project resources and to maximise project effect, capacity building should concentrate on
CSOs working on selected issues or in fields of activity identified by communities and the TA
office as priorities.
• Identify viable locally based CSO advoca cy networks and supply capacity building according
to need. Areas to be covered might include: establishing network objectives and developing
a programme of activities, research and analytical capacities, advocacy and campaigning,
constituency building and mobilising community support.
• Supply CSOs with training on civil society, its meaning, roles and responsibilities. This
should include consideration of development and theories of social change, and civil
society’s importance as an agent of change.
• Provi de consultancy support to CSOs to assist them to communicate better with direct
stakeholders and to respond more effectively to community interests. Assist CSOs to
develop their membership base and to facilitate community participation in the
identificatio n and planning of CSO activities.
• Assist CSOs to undertake public relations activities to promote themselves and their services
in the Media and to the general public, drawing attention to civil society activities, its

values, its role in democratic govern ance at both the national and local levels, and
highlighting achievements and best practice.
• Design and supply training courses on policy research and policy dialogue tailored to the
needs of CSOs working at the local level. Training should include unders tanding of t he legal
provisions and institut ional arrangements allowed for public partici pation, as well as
approaches to establishing partnerships and cooperation with local administrations.
• Supply CSOs with comprehensive practical training on fundraising and approaches to
diversifying donor sources. This should be combined with facilitation of mid -term business
planning, based upon programme design within an organisational strategic framework. In
addition, assistance should be provided, where appropriate , with proposal writing and
mastering donor applications.

Annex 1 Acronyms and abbreviations used in the text
CCSD Centre for Civil Society Development
COHU Organisation for Democracy , Anti -Corruption and Dignity
CRP Civil Rights Programme
CSO Civil Society Organisation
EC European Commission
ECLO European Commission Liaison Office in Kosovo
ECNL European Centre for Non -for -profit Law
ECK European Centre Kosovo
EU European Union
GAP Institute for Advanced Studies
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft fϋr Technische Zusammernarbeit
ICO International Civilian Office
IKS Kosovo Stability Initiative
IPOL Balkan Policy Institute
ISC Institute for Sustainable Communities
KDI Kosovo Democratic Institute
KFOS Kosovo Foundation fo r Open Society
KIPRED Kosovo Institute for Policy Research and Development
KNAP Kosovo NGO Advocacy Programme
KWN Kosovo Women’s Network
KYN Kosovo Youth Network
MDA Man agement Development Associates)
MIPD Multi -annual Indicative Planning Docu ment
NG O Non -Governmental Organisation
OSCE Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe
RAE Roma, Ashkali and Egyptians
SIDA Swedish Agency for International Development
SIPU Swedish Institute for Public Administration
TACSO Technical Assistance t o Civil Society Organisations
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
UNMIK United Nations Mission to Kosovo
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
USAID United S tates Agency for International

Annex 2 Research met hodology
The Needs Assessment exercise was implemented through a methodology which combined
desk research and face -to -face consultation with CSO representatives and other stakeholders
by means of focus groups backed up by individual interviews.
Desk resea rch was used to provide an analysis of the context in which civil society operates
based on information collected from a variety of sources, including previous civil society
mappings and assessments, evaluations of major civil society -run development progr ammes,
situation analyses, policy documents, and country -specific academic literature.
Four focus groups, using a semi -structured format whose format was developed in advance,
were organised, at which a total of 27 stakeholder representatives participated . The first focus
group discussion s covered the following four sets of stakeholders: NGOs operating at the
national level; local CSOs and representatives of municipal authorities; representatives of
central government; and international NGOs and donor or ganisations.
8 interviews were also conducted with individuals from all of the above stakeholder groups.

Annex 3 CSO Mission and scope of activities

Source. ATRC (2008)

Annex 4 List of persons consulted

Focus groups
Focus Group session with NGO s operating at the local level:
Shaqir Mala – Head of the Collegium of EU Integration Officials in Kosovo
Municipalities
Samir Hoxha – EU Integration Office – Prizren Municipality
Shpend Voca – Kosovo Nansen Dialogue
Isa Gacaferr i – Balkan Investigative Research Network
Enver Kqiku – Kosovo Center for International Cooperation
Liridon Selmani – Kosovo Democratic Institute
Dren Puka – Kosovo Youth Council
Blerina Hoxha – Regional Environmental Center
Ilirijana Kacaniku – Kosovo Fou ndation for Open Society
Taulant Hoxha – Kosovar Civil Society Foundation

Focus Group session with active NGOs
Kosovo Stability Initiative – Anjeza Hoxhallari
Kosovar Civil Society Foundation – Besnike Koqani
Comunity Devlopment Fund – Bekim Kllokoqi
Developing Together – Driton Tafallari
Forum 2015 – Ardian Arifaj
Fol 08 – Ramadan Ilazi dani
Regional Environment Center – Firdeze Bekteshi
Youth Initiative for Human Rights – Besart Lumi
EC Ma Ndryshe – Valon Xhabali
Kosovo Democratic Institute – Ramadan Klisurica

Individuals interviewed
Bajram Kosum i, Director of the Department for Registration and Liaison with NGOs, Ministry of
Public Administration, Contact : Bajram.E.Kosumi@ks -gov.net
Elmaz e (Eli) Gashi, Executive Director, East West Management Institute; 25.09.2009, Prishtina.
Contact: elmaze.gashi@gmail.com
Bari Zenelaj, Executive Director, Academy for T raining and Technical Assistance; 23. 09.2009 ,
Prizren. Contact: bari@atta -ks.org
Armend Bekaj, Program Manager, Instit ute for Sustainable Communities; 29.09.2009 , Prishtina.
Contact: Armend.bekaj@gmail.com
Aliriza Arenliu, Executive Director, Foundation Toge ther and Dokufest Film Festival;
20.09.2009 , Prishtina. Contact: aliriza@dokufest.com
Feride Rushiti, Executive Direc tor, Kosova Rehabilitation Cent re for T orture Victims;
28.09.2009 , Prishtina. Contact: krct_org@yahoo.com
Mytaher Haskuka, Program Manager, UNDP Kosova; 01.10.2009 , Prishtina. Contact:
mytaher.haskuka@u ndp.org
Edis Agani, Program Coordinator, European Co mmission Local Office to Kosova; 01.10.2009 ,
Prishtina. Contact: edis.agani@ec.europa.eu
Fortuna Haxhikadrija, External consultant, Ministry of Economy an d Finance; 29.09.2009 ,
Prishtina. Contact : fortuna.haxhikadrija@gmail.com

Annex 5 References
Addarii, F. & Rattenbury, B. (2009) Connecting Europeans: Understanding and Empowering Civil
Society in t he Western Balkans, EUCLID Network, available at: www.euclidnetwork.eu

ATRC (2008) Third Sector Development in Kosovo: challenges a nd opportunities, available at
www .euclidnetwork.eu

ATRC (2009) Kosovo Country Strategy Paper; EUCLID, November 2009, available at

Balkan Civil Society Development Network (2009) The Successes and Failures of EU Pre –
accession Policy in the Balkans: Support to Civil Society, available at: www.balkancsd.net

ECNL (2009) Assessment Report of the Legal Environment of Civil Society in Kosovo, April 2009 ,
available at: www.ecnl.org

IMF (2009) Republic of Kosovo – IMF Staff Visit Concluding Statement, available at
< https://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2009/062409.htm>

KCSF (2005) Mapping and Analyses of Civil Society in Kosovo, Pris tina

KCSF (2009) (2009) Country briefing paper, Conference “Strengthening the triangle CSOs –
National Governments -European Commission: Reinforcing the Europe -wide Civil Society
and Building Partnership,” 19 -20 October 2009, Zadar

KWN (2009) More Than Words on Pape r: The Response of Justice Providers on Domestic
Violence in Kosovo; Pristina: UNDP

McGann J. (2009) European think tanks: regional and trans -Atlantic trends, Think Tanks and
Civil Societies Program

Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of Kosovo and CiviKos Platform,
November 2007, available at

Mitchell, L., Fremming, J. & Malazogu, L. (2008) Kosovo Civil Society Program, Final E valuation
report, USAID available at: www. usaid .gov/ kosovo

OSCE (2008) Human Rights, Ethnic Relations and Democracy i n Kosovo, Summer 2007 –
Summe r 2008: background report; OSCE Mission in Kosovo

OSCE (2008) Civil Society and the Legislative P rocess in Kosovo

Republic of Kosovo (2009) Law on Freedom of Association in Non -governmental Organisation s,
Official Gazette, 12 February2009, available at < https://www.gazetazyrtare.com/e - gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&lang=en&id=333 >

Republic of Kosovo (20 08) Law on Corporate Income Tax , Official Gazette, Law No. 03/L -113 , 18
December 2008, available at https://www.gazetazyrtare.com/e –
gov/index.php?option=com_conten t&task=view&id=297

Republic of Kosovo (2008) Law on Personal Income Tax, Official Gazette, LAW No. 03/L -115,
available at < https://www.gazetazyrtare.com /e - gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=299 >

Republic of Kosovo (2009) Law on Value -Added Tax, Official Gazette, LAW No. 03/L -114,
available online at https://www.gazetazyrtare.com/e –
gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=298

Sterland B. (2006) Civil Society Capacity Building in Post -Conflict Societies: The Experience of
Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo, Praxis paper no.9, Oxford: INTRAC, available at
https://www.intrac.org/resources.php?type=&format=1&action =

UNDP (2009 ) Civil Society and Development, Kosovo Huma n Development Report 2008,
Pris tina, available at www.ks.undp.org

UNMIK (2004) Regulation no. 2004/2 on the Deterrence of Money Laundering and Related
Criminal Offences

USAID (2009) Kosovo – 2008 USAID Sustainability Index for Central and South Eastern Europe
and Eurasia, 12 edition, June 2008

Web resources
Agency for Coordination of Development & European Integration https://www.acdei=ks.org/
New Kosovo Report https://ww w.newkosovareport.com
Kosovo Women’s Network https://www.womensnetwork.org/
Rockefeller Brothers Fund https://www.rbf.org
USAID Kosovo https://www.usaid.gov/kosovo/eng/