In its most innocent form, it is done so that funds earmarked for one project are used temporarily for another and later when additional funds come in, they original project will be completed. This happens most often when an NGO has definite income coming to it, but because of some problem with a project, is forced to scramble a little. The more serious form is outright fraud.
We do not approve of either of these forms. What we want is open discussion and some element of unrestricted funding that allows for discussion as to what needs to done to solve social problems with flexibility to cope with problems that pop up.
Like we mentioned in our last post, we are seeing a strong tension between unrestricted funds and honest usage and reporting. Based on what we are hearing, at least initially, there will have to be some form of restriction.