All programs need someone to ensure that what has been planned is being carried out efficiently and effectively. Primary responsibility for executing programs can be placed with government bodies, nongovernmental organizations, communities (defined as an administrative and political entity, or community groups such as women's groups), or private sector organizations such as businesses or unions. Sometimes a combination of these organizations will be needed to ensure that both administrative and technical expertise is brought to bear. And different kinds of organizations may be more appropriate for different kinds of models.

Criteria for choosing administrative and executing institutions
Regardless of the type of organization sought, the choice of candidates for project implementation and execution should take into account several characteristics that mostly have little to do with immediate knowledge of or experience with programs of early childhood care and development. These include administrative and organizational experience, the ability to integrate activities across sectors, social and cultural conscience and sensitivity, and technical expertise.

A good administrative and organizational record. Preference should be given to organizations that have shown an ability to plan, organize, and carry out training programs, to purchase and distribute materials efficiently, to pay people on time, to keep good accounting records, and to monitor activities.

Ability to integrate activities across sectors. An organizational ability particularly important in ECCD projects is the ability to integrate activities across sectors. Thus experience suggests that there is some advantage in assigning responsibility for ECCD programs to an organization that cuts across sectors (such as welfare agencies, church organizations, women's organizations, and community development NGOs), rather than an organization sited in a particular sector (such as health, education, or agriculture). Although the bureaucratic jealousy and competition that affect sectoral institutions may also affect cross-cutting organizations, that possibility seems less likely. Organizations able to integrate the components of an ECCD program might be the office of the president, a family welfare agency, or a rural development authority.

Social and cultural conscience and sensitivity. An organization may be very efficient in administration, but insensitive to social and cultural needs and differences. Because ECCD projects are social projects, social and cultural sensitivity is a very important characteristic to consider in choosing the executing institution. Moreover, it is probably easier to strengthen the managerial or accounting skills of an organization with a social conscience than it is to instill a social conscience and cultural sensitivity in an organization lacking them.

The notion of social and cultural sensitivity is closely related to the ability to work in a participatory manner. The introduction to this guide cites participation as a guiding principle. The guide also speaks of the need to adjust a project to local circumstances, and views scale as the sum of a variety of local initiatives and programs. These two points of view favor a decentralized approach to assigning administrative and executive authority, such as choosing municipalities or community groups.

But is a decentralized approach feasible? Experience suggests that it can be. The Colombian home day care system, for example, is administered nationally by the family welfare organization (Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar, or ICBF), but local community organizations with responsibility for up to 15 day care homes handle day-to-day administration. Experience also suggests, however, that such decentralized systems need some form of technical advice while they get organized.

A device that has been used in projects involving community organizations is to negotiate contracts with communities that clearly set out the responsibilities and contributions for both the government and the community organization. Experience has shown that this can provide some protection against a tendency in some communities for local control to be concentrated in the hands of a few powerful individuals rather than in the broader community.

Experience also has shown that local administration brings with it a sense of local ownership of a program that is important in helping to sustain efforts and to ease adjustment to changing political conditions.

Technical expertise. It would be an extra boon if an administering organization for an ECCD project also had technical expertise. But technical expertise can be purchased, so it is not the most important criterion in choosing among organizations to administer an ECCD project.

Nongovernmental organizations as executors
Much has been made in recent years of the potential for NGOs to execute ECCD and other social programs. But the range of conditions and organizational characteristics needed to ensure that NGOs can play this role effectively is not yet clear, particularly for larger-scale programs as opposed to pilot or experimental projects. Nor has there been much experience in the ECCD field with NGO administration beyond pilot programs. Nevertheless, it is worth offering several observations, more by way of discussion than by way of direct guidance.

• NGOs' effectiveness in larger programs will depend on their political position relative to the government. If NGOs are in an opposition role, it will be difficult to expect governments to seek NGO administration. But NGOs that are purely creations of government may not embody the independence, efficiency, and nearness to the community that lead to their being considered effective executors of projects.

• NGOs' effectiveness depends on their experience with the community and the authenticity of their nearness to it.

• To be effective, NGOs must have both technical and administrative expertise.

• Continuity is as important for NGOs as it is for governments.

• We should avoid the wishful thinking that involving NGOs on a large scale in administration and support for ECCD programs will provide salvation.

• Governments need to avoid seeing NGOs as instruments. Some NGOs are instruments of government and thus are not really NGOs. Those with more independence should be free to act on that independence and on their close relationships to communities-both are strengths.