International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs) have emerged as important actors in two important, interconnected realms. First, at the national level, INGO's have taken on significant roles in promoting the social, economic, and political development of the particular countries in which they are operating. Their enlarged efforts provide disaster relief, deliver on-going social services, build local capacities for self-help, promote self-governance, and enhance the political and policy influence of marginalized populations (Fisher, 1993; Clark, 1991; Edwards and Hulme, 1996). Second, at the international level, INGOs have been increasingly important in creating a kind of international civil society, animating informal but powerful normative egimes, and influencing the practices and policies of international institutions (Boli, 1999; Fox and Brown, 1998; Khagram, Riker and Sikkink, 2000; Florini, 2000).
Increased prominence and greater influence expose INGOs to closer scrutiny and sharper demands for accountability. Donors demand that the INGOs be ccountable for the integrity, efficiency, and impact of programs that they have funded. Beneficiaries press INGOs to live up to their rhetoric about fostering locally-determined development rather than impose their own priorities. Staffs expect INGOs to ive up to the high purposes that drew their commitment to the enterprise. Partners whom INGO's have recruited in their efforts to achieve their national and international goals (such as other NGOs, community-based organizations, government agencies, usinesses) expect the INGOs to live up to promises they made in forging their partnerships. Even those who are the targets of INGOs demand a kind of accountability from them; they want to know to whom the INGOs are accountable and for whom the INGOs speak so that they can gauge the force and legitimacy of the claims that these organizations are making against them. In short, many different stakeholders call INGOs to account for their activities (e.g., Edwards, 2000).