Singaporeans who pride themselves as overseas-going, volunteering do-gooders, need to read this following article: "“So, You Want to Build Me a House?” – When Volunteering Fuels the Wrong Things".

It was written by Dork Silong, a native Cambodian who grew up surrounded by NGO culture, which makes this May 18, 2019 piece an eye-opener.

It sheds light on the dark side of the non-governmental organisation culture in Cambodia, and how unhealthy it has become, as it is essentially a way for some to game the system to make money easily at the expense of gullible foreigners.

Modus operandi

The ruse starts with native Cambodians starting an NGO instead of a business and then raising funds to pay themselves.

And this is doable in this day and age owing to the NGO legacy of supposedly helping Cambodians get educated and out of the poverty cycle, and making them socially mobile and financially independent.

On the contrary, NGOs started by some conniving locals who know nothing about achieving development goals but only on gaming the system, end up enriching themselves with zero accountability and results to show for.

One way this is done, Silong wrote, is to inflate the amount of funds needed by reporting that everyone in the NGO gets paid a salary when, in fact, it runs on volunteers who are tourists.

Another method is to raise funds to build a school or some building, but the eventual design resembles a house.

This is so as the NGO founder would then take over the property and land paid for using NGO funds, after the whole thing closes down in a few years' time, and make it for personal use.

Why fake NGOs works

And this works as the scheme preys on basic human proclivities.

People, especially foreigners who do not know better, naively think they are doing good just because they are volunteering.

This is compounded by the fundamental lack of follow-up tracking and impact assessments, resulting in no one in particular being held accountable for non-results, which makes it difficult to determine if there can even be positive outcomes.

Rude awakening

Silong's rude awakening came when he was offered 30 percent of money raised if he helped craft a curriculum to start an NGO.

This was so as Silong is relatively well-educated, despite coming from a poor family background, and possessed a good command of English and knowing how to start a curriculum and market it from scratch -- skills that were invaluable to fake NGO founders.

Silong, after all, had studied “Education and Curriculum Writing”.

Silong wrote:

But something that one of my friends said to me really challenged that idea. He basically said: “If you write this proposal for me I will give you 30 percent of the money.” I was shocked, and asked him: “Aren’t you helping people with this money?” and his response was: “Yes, but I am also helping myself. I will get rich from this.”

Misplaced generosity

The piece does state clearly that not all NGOs are bad -- there are plenty that do good work in furthering human rights, stopping domestic abuse and ensuring free and fair elections.

But the situation is more rotten in Siem Reap than elsewhere, owing to a culture of fast-paced touch-and-go volunteering.

Singaporean actor accused of doing good for his own good

And this was where things got a bit dicey.

Silong actually called out a Singaporean actor without naming names, who supposedly pours some $100,000 a year into sponsorship, with no idea how this money even gets spent.

Silong wrote:

One of my friends managed to get a famous Singaporean actor to sponsor his school by giving him $100,000 every year. And as soon as he got the first instalment he bought himself a Lexus and invited me round for a party.

He then wrote that such an arrangement is a win-win situation for the actor as well, as he gets to show he is doing good and big brands approach him as a result of his raised profile.

Siem Reap problem

This sort of culture has led to dishonesty being more rampant than foreigners are aware of, as locals who see others get rich via the NGO route, learn the ropes.

And the problem, Silong wrote, appears to be more centralised in Siem Reap where there are more tourists:

Many of my friends, who were my classmates at university, came from the eastern part of Siem Reap. What I have come to know is that in this area, everyone dreams of owning an NGO, because it is seen as the best way to get rich.

He also wrote that this unhealthy obsession with getting rich via NGOs permeates the larger Cambodian society, where NGO founders are seen as being more marriageable:

I can honestly tell you that in that area of east Siem Reap, all the parents are looking to marry their children to someone who owns an NGO. If you ask them why, they’ll say because it means they are a rich person. The parents won’t even know that the idea of an NGO is to help people, to them it is just code to mean someone who has money.

What's the worst that can happen?

The worst that can happen is that local Cambodians are paying the price.

Children who are attracted to NGO-funded learning end up not learning much as the curriculum is poor and there is no long-term progression, unlike in real public schools.

Children in NGO-funded classes learn mostly English and Computing, as these are what tourists are adapt at teaching.

They don't learn other subjects such as Math, and these students run the risk of never learning more as they get older, with some getting stuck learning the same thing for a few years.

You can read the full account by Silong here.

Content that keeps Mothership.sg going

??
This is Subtle Asian Traits - Singapore Edition

??
Maybe can steam fish with this and make gr8 ginger recipes.

?
What do you do when you're told that your days are numbered. And you are only in your twenties.

??
How to teach your mother to be the tech genius that she really is (so she doesn't keep pestering you with her 101 questions)

❤️?❤️
Hit (on) your friends at a human whack-a-mole here.