A PROJECT REPORT

ON
RATIO ANALYSIS OF KANSAI NECROLAC
Submitted in Practical fulfillment of SAMBALPUR UNIVERSITY,

6th Semester
Bachelor of Commerce (HONOURS)
ACADEMIC SESSION 2020-2021
Submitted by
JAYA TOPPO
S02518COM075

Under the guidance of:

Mr. Sourabh Jain

ROURKELA DEGREE COLLEGE, ROURKELA

Certificate

i
Certified that this project report titled “RATIO ANALYSIS OF KANSAI
NECROLAC” for the final phase of the project, is bonafide work of Jaya Toppo
(S02518COM075 ), who carried out the work under my supervision , for the
partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of the Bachelor Degree.
Certified further that to the best of my knowledge and belief , work reported herein
does not from part of any other thesis or dissertation on the basis of which a award
was confirmed on an earlier occasion on this or any other candidate.

Internal Signature External Signature

DECLARATION
ii
 I the undersigned solemnly declare that the report of the project work entitled
“RATIO ANALYSIS OF KANSAI NECROLAC”, is based my own work
carried out during the course of my study under the supervision of Sorabh Jain
I assert that the statements made and conclusions drawn are an outcome of the
project work. I further declare that to the best of my knowledge and belief that the
project report does not contain any part of any work which has been submitted for
the award of any other degree certificate in this University.

Jaya Toppo
Roll No.:
S02518COM075

(Signature of the Candidate)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
iii
I would like to express my gratitude to my teacher " Sorabh Jain "
who gave me the amazing opportunity to do this wonderful project on " RATIO
ANALYSIS OF KANSAI NECROLAC" . Secondly , I would also like to thanks
my parents and friends who helped me a lot in finalizing this project within the
limited time frame.
JAYA TOPPO.
Name of the Student

CONTENT

iv
v
Meaning of Non Government Organisations:
The sole purpose of any business organization is to earn profit. In other words,
they work for self-interest. However, there are some organizations whose basic aim
is to serve the society i.e. they work for the benefit of the society as a whole. These
are called not-for-profit organizations or nonprofit organizations.

They are formed for some idealistic purposes and provide service to its members
and the public in general. Their aim may be educational, religious, charitable or
social welfare of the people at large. They are working in variety of forms ranging
from small to large. In small forms, they are working in the shape of resident
welfare associations (RWAs), charitable dispensaries, religious societies etc.

However, in large forms they are working in the shape of hospitals, schools,
colleges and bar councils etc. The main sources of their income are subscriptions,
donations, income from investment and grants-in-aid from any governmental
agencies. The funds raised by these organisations are credited to capital fund or
general fund the balance of which goes on accumulated due to capital receipts year
after year.

Non-profits are created for many different purposes such as: cultural, economic,
politic, religious, educational, among others. These organizations are granted tax-
exempt status and all contributions made to them are tax deductible, as long as they
are properly registered.

Normally, not for profits have both paid staff and people that volunteer for the
cause of the organization. Even though they are not designed to profit from their
activities they are financially active and can grow to be big institutions, as in the
case of universities, hospitals, churches or even political parties. The funds to start
a not-for-profit organization come from their own founding members or from a
special contribution from a third party.

Definition: 

Nonprofit organizations, also called not for profit organizations, are privately held
entities that don’t provide financial benefits for their members or stakeholders. In
other words, they are privately incorporated groups with a charitable purpose of
not profiting from the activities they carry.

vi
Features:
1. Main Aim is Service:
The basic aim of non-profit organizations is to serve the society. They are
working for the benefit of the society as a whole.

2. Profit is not the Criterion:

Non-profit organizations are formed for some idealistic purposes such as religious,
charitable or providing education etc. Earning of profits can never be their aim.

3. Surplus not Distributed among its Members:

Though earning profit is not the criterion for non-profit organizations, yet there
may be excess of income over expenditure or excess of expenditure over income.
The former is known as ‘surplus’ and latter is known as ‘deficit’. Unlike other
business, surplus or deficit of non-profit organizations is not distributed among its
members. They are adjusted in the capital fund of such organizations.

4. Separate Entity:
The separate entity concept is equally applicable to non-profit organizations. Such
organizations are treated as a separate entity distinct from its members.

5. Unique Names Connoting their Working:

The names of non-profit organizations denote the nature and style of their
functioning. For example, JMD Educational Society, Shri Sai Keertan Mandli, Shri
Sunder Dev Sports Club and Shri Sanatan Dharam Ramlila Committee etc.

6. Management by Elected Persons:

These organizations are run and managed by elected members.

7. Major Funds from Contributions and Donations etc..:

Usually, non-profit organizations are not self sufficient to run their activities with
the revenue generated from their own sources, so they depend upon the
subscriptions, donations and grants received from various government
departments.

7
Objectives of Accounting for Non-Profit Organisations:
Following are some objectives for accounting in non-profit organizations:

Measurability

For optimal effectiveness, nonprofit objectives should be measurable. With

measurable objectives in place, it is easier for nonprofits and the companies
monitoring them to determine whether or not they have reached these goals. For
example, if the nonprofit sets a goal of assisting 100 families in finding
affordable housing during the next year, they can easily determine whether or not
they have reached this target instead of simply hypothesizing as to their success
level.

Beneficiaries

Nonprofits work to help others, so they should list beneficiaries in the objectives.
For example, if a nonprofit seeks to assist the elderly in maintaining their homes
and independence, they should state so clearly in their objectives, making it
immediately apparent who will reap the benefits of their efforts.

Projects

In many cases, nonprofit organizations carry out an assortment of projects when

trying to help their beneficiaries. Instead of just making a blanket statement to
sum up all of these projects, nonprofits can draw attention to each, listing some of
their most far-reaching projects specifically in their objectives. By doing so, they
can advertise their projects, making it clear how their existence benefits society.

Time

Nonprofit organizations usually have a limited amount of time to accomplish

their stated aims. They should list the time in which they will accomplish each of
their initiatives in their objectives. By stating that they will accomplish a listed
goal, “within the next year” or “during this fiscal period,” nonprofits are
providing those overseeing them with another target by which their success can
be measured.

8
Non-profit organization has no shareholders

In most countries, the decision to have a nonprofit legal structure is one that will
have taxation implications, especially where the nonprofit organization seeks
income tax exemption or charitable status.

In the United States, the Internal Revenue Code defines over twenty-five types of
organizations that are exempt from federal income taxes.

An incorporated nonprofit has many similarities with for-profit companies, except

that there are no shares or shareholders. It uses its surplus revenues to further
achieve its mission or purpose, rather than distributing its surplus income to
shareholders as profits or dividends.

In the world of nonprofits, there are many different types of organizations. The
majority of people associate a nonprofit organization with a charitable mission or
objective. Most of them tend to be either community-serving or member-serving.

Community serving  nonprofit organizations are focused on providing services to

the global or local community. They may deliver aid & development programs,
human services programs, medical & scientific research, health services,
education, etc.

Member serving nonprofits include trade unions, credit unions, cooperatives,

mutual societies, industry associations, retired serviceman’s clubs, sports clubs –
organization that benefit their members.

9
STATEMENTS OF RECEIPTS AND PAYMENTS : The ROS requires the
NPOs to submit their annual reports including the statements of receipts and payments.
This statement is important as it records the amount and form of payments made it also
addresses the way the NPOs receipts and payments are changed during the period. This is
to determine whether the NPOs have surplus or deficit due to large expenditure incurred or
shortfall in revenues. Even though it is required only 67% most of them were from charity
NPOs.

STATEMENT OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURE : Eighty four percent of

the NPOs and 32 religious NPOs prepared the statement of income and expenditure. The
statement was prepared in general and only four NPOs provided a detailed
classification of expenses into mission programs expenses and administration expenses.
The classification of these mission programs expenses since it is a requirement to have at
least 50% expenses incurred for mission programs in order to qualify for the tax exempt
status. However the amount of donation made to the NPOs in the US internal revenue
system requires to present the expenses by a functional category of fund raising
administration and program expenses in their annual reports submission. For tax
exemption eligibility the 70% the rule of mission programs expenses is applied in the US.

10
AUDITORS: Out of 100 NPOs 64 charity NPOs which furnished the financial statements
in applying for tax exemption status as a requirement of the IRD were audited by the external
auditors. Nevertheless none of these 64 charity NPOs was audited by the accounting firms
which are the largest international accountancy and professional services service firms that
handle the vast majority of audits for publicly traded companies. None of these religious
NPOs financial statements was audited by the external auditors.

DISCLOSURE: FRS 132 states that the purpose of the disclosure is to enhance about the
significance of financial instruments to the entity financial position performance and cash
flows. The disclosure should provided information to assist users of financial statements in
assessing the extent of risk related to financial instruments. However the standard does not
prescribe the format or location for disclosure of information which may be of narrative
commentary or qualified data. And entity should describe the objectives and policies of the
financial risk management. The findings in this study indicated that 16 NPOs disclosed risks
related to financial instruments. This disclosure was made by the charity NPOs partly to
acknowledgement the donors through the means of reporting.

ACCOUNTING METHODS: The accrual accounting system is required by the

standards for all profits sectors. The NPOs may apply either the cash basis or the accrual
accounting system. This study indicated that 36% of all charity NPOs had used accrual basis
of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements. The most likely explanation is
that the application of either the accrual or the cash basis may not be significant since it is not
a violation to any accepted accounting standard.

11
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION

Non-Government Organizations (NGO) have been, in theory, in existence for many

decades. Non-government organizations can vary in many different forms of association.
For the purpose of this paper, the acronym NGO will be used, which is the official name
given to non-government groups shortly after the formation of the United Nations after the
Second World War, in 1945. As clearly stated in their name “Non-Government
Organizations” are free and independent of direct control by government. Throughout the
world there are many different types of NGOs, which can make the process of defining such
an association a difficult task. There are a few basic characteristics that NGOs must abide by
in order to be considered a NGO. These characteristics are: NGOs must not be a political
party, NGOs must not be a criminal group and thirdly they must be a non-profit organization.
Although, these three characteristics could possibly be disputed, these characteristics hold
true for the majority of NGOs that have influence in the global political arena. Political party
association could be the one characteristic that could promote the most debate of the three
characteristics because a significant amount of NGOs work closely with political groups of
like-minded views, but as noted before NGOs can not be a political party within their own
organization.
Non-Government Organizations have many different missions and visions but the
majority of their goals have one common theme of “Working together in partner with the
United Nations for a more peaceful and sustainable world.” The key word in this quote

12
is sustainable, this type of theme is ideal for building the foundations of energy policy, and
more specifically policy that can bring a decrease in fossil fuel use (as well as an increase use

13
 of renewable energy). Greenpeace is a NGO that has taken energy policy to an intense new
level. This research paper will include a brief section on Greenpeace and its role as a
significant NGO in the global world of energy policy and energy renewable options.

NGOs at the International Level

There are tens of thousands of different NGOs across the world. There is a broad
range of different groups focusing on many different issues. Over the past decade there has
been a significant increase in the number of NGOs around the world (See table #1 for specific
growths). At the international level the main role of NGOs are concentrated in three major
debatable issues: Human Rights, Environmental Issues, and Development issues. Energy
policy can fall under all three categories. Under The Charter of the United Nations, Article
71 it states, “The Economic and Social Council may make suitable arrangements for
consultation with non-government organizations which are concerned with matters within its
competence.” This alone does not make NGOs a significant player in global decision-
making process but rather a significant influencer. Under this article it is clear that there are
some rights for NGOs at a consultation level. NGOs are allowed to at some degree, to voice
their opinions and knowledge of certain areas in global governance but are not allowed to
play a role in the “General Assembly” which ultimately makes the critical decisions.

NGOs represent a wide variety of issues but their greatest influence is their
democratic nature to speak for the “Public Interest.” This type of philosophy has helped
NGOs to be a great influence in global debates. Although NGOs have increased in number
and influence over the course of history they have also endured many setbacks in their
journey to reach their goal. A great deal of setbacks have been due to the difficult task of
assembling the massive varieties of different NGOs at the international level. If the NGOs
were able to join together to provide a solid foundation on global issues, they could have a
greater strength in knowledge and power, to negotiate global issues with the UN and at other
global political gatherings. Throughout the history of NGOs, they have experienced triumphs
and defeats in reaching their ultimate goal for a peaceful and sustainable world. Of course
many defeats have been due to their lack of decision-making power at all levels of
governance, but the unification of like-minded NGOs joining together as one organization
could only strengthen their battle.
14
NGOs and Private Voluntary Organizations:

In discussion of politics within countries, a distinction is often made between interest groups
and pressure groups, but it is taken for granted that both types of private groups have an
impact upon government policy-making. The term, interest group, is biased towards
consideration of groups such as companies or trade unions. Use of the term is unsatisfactory,
as it tends to imply that such groups are only concerned with economic policy, that they only
act to safeguard their own economic position and that only groups with substantial economic
resources can have an impact on politics. None of these propositions is valid. Major
economic actors are also concerned with values beyond the accumulation of wealth. At the
minimum, they also pursue security and status. At the maximum, they have a wider
responsibility towards health and safety, social welfare and environmental values. The term,
pressure group, invokes a wider range of groups. Its use is intended to cover those, such as
environmentalists and human rights groups, who are pursuing goals that do not directly
benefit themselves. It emphasizes the processes by which groups mobilize support to promote
their political values. The contrast between interest groups and pressure groups can be used to
suggest a contrast between objective goals and subjective goals and hence privilege the
pursuit of economic returns over environmental values and other abstract values.

In the United States, a similar distinction is made, with stronger, but different, normative
connotations. Mention of a lobby seems to imply the illegitimate use of wealth in a secretive
manner, while private voluntary organizations or public interest groups convey a positive
image. There is a logical problem with the distinction in that membership of a lobby is both
private and voluntary. These terms are also unsatisfactory as the latter two suggest charitable
activity and do not readily bring to mind campaigning groups nor those who are concerned
with global issues, such as Greenpeace and Amnesty International. "Public interest" appears
to cover the general good, in an objective manner, but it is an essentially-contested concept,
both with respect to what is "the public" and with respect to identifying "the common
interest". One person's view of the public interest may be seen by another person as the
assertion of unacceptable values, ideological extremism or special pleading.

The distinction between interest groups and pressure groups or between lobbies and private
voluntary organizations has no analytical value. All pressure groups or voluntary
organizations have some interests to protect, even if it is only the maintenance of their

15
reputation, increasing the number of active supporters and gaining sufficient income to

16
communicate effectively. Altruistic charities use sophisticated public relations campaigns to
raise funds and standard lobbying techniques when government taxation policy affects their
income. Equally, all interest groups and lobbies are of political importance, precisely because
their pressure influences social and political outcomes. They do not necessary operate in a
secretive manner in the corridors of power and they do at times seek to mobilize public
support. When they engage in political debate, company representatives often argue for
general abstract values that go beyond their specific concrete interests. Companies can only
challenge the public interest – or more precisely public opinion – at the risk of damaging their
public reputation, their brand values and their income. Many companies more positively
promote what is often seen as the public interest. They may donate profits to charitable
activities, identify directly with environmental values to benefit from green consumerism or
even reduce consumption of energy and raw materials to reduce costs. Trade unions usually
go much further than companies in making explicit their endorsement of a wide range of
political values. They also allocate money, personnel and other resources to campaigning,
both independently and in coalition with other pressure groups.

Whatever one might think of these terms from the discourse on politics within countries,
they are never used in global politics. Because diplomats like to claim that they are pursuing
"the national interest" of a united society, they will not admit to relations with interest groups
or pressure groups and they prefer the bland title, non-governmental organizations. The
thinking behind the concept of a public interest group has been transferred to some people's
attitudes to NGOs. There is a desire to limit access to the UN system to "proper" NGOs, but
all this means is that groups supported by the person concerned should be included and other
groups excluded. The other terms – interest group, pressure group, lobby and private
voluntary organization – could all be applied legitimately to most NGOs. However, there is
mutual connivance in most political processes at the global level to hide behind the
uncontroversial catch-all term NGOs. The only significant exception, which is discussed
below, is the tendency in global environmental politics to talk about "Major Groups". This
sounds more positive, but it is still a vague term, devoid of any direct association with
participation in policy-making.

In the logic of the language, there is no difference between a non-governmental

organization and a private voluntary organization, but NGO still carries neutral connotations
and applicability to a diverse range of political actors, whereas PVO suggests moral approval
17
 of a more limited range of groups. In practice, it is impossible to agree any general terms to
distinguish praiseworthy from unacceptable groups, either in domestic politics or in global
politics, because such a distinction is a subjective choice made on the basis of each observer's
own value preferences.

Transnational Actors

In academic study of international relations, the term "transnational" was adopted to refer to
any relationship across country boundaries, in which at least one of the actors was not a
government. It was adopted in order to deny the assumption that international relations was
the same as inter-state relations, or more precisely intergovernmental relations. It came into
currency in the 1970s as a result of economic and environmental questions being recognized
as a high priority for the global agenda. It is immediately apparent that the academic concept
of a transnational actor is quite different from the political concept of an NGO. Firstly, it
excludes all NGO activity that is confined to a single country. Secondly, it includes all the
other non-governmental actors that have been defined as being outside the world of NGOs. It
is commonplace to refer to transnational companies, transnational criminals, transnational
guerrillas and transnational terrorists. In global politics, it is rare for any reference to be made
to transnational NGOs, presumably because an NGO's involvement in global politics ipso
facto makes it transnational.

Independence from Governments

The most difficult question about the independence of NGOs is whether they come under
governmental influence. Individual governments do at times try to influence the NGO
community in a particular field, by establishing NGOs that promote their policies. This has
been recognized by quite common use of the acronym GONGO, to label a government-
organized NGO. Also, in more authoritarian societies, NGOs may find it very difficult to act
independently and they may not receive acknowledgment from other political actors even
when they are acting independently. Beyond these unusual situations, there is a widespread
prejudice that government funding leads to government control. In the field of human rights,
it would damage an NGO for such a perception to arise, so Amnesty International has strict
rules that it will not accept direct government funding for normal activities. On the other
hand, development and humanitarian relief NGOs need substantial resources, to run their
18
operational programs, so most of them readily accept official funds. While these NGOs

19
 would like the security of a guaranteed budget for their administrative overheads,
governments generally only want to support field costs for projects.

Nominally NGOs may appear to be independent, when they design their own programs,
but government influence can arise indirectly if the program is designed to make it more
likely that government grants or contracts will be forthcoming. On the other hand, confident
experienced NGOs can appeal for funding for new approaches and in so doing cause
government officials to re-assess policy. The best example of this is the way in which NGOs,
particularly the International Planned Parenthood Federation, dragged governments into
adopting population programs. There is no obvious method to identify the direction of
influence, without detailed knowledge of the relationship between an NGO and a
government. Environmental NGOs may have either type of funding relationship.
Conservation and research groups may happily obtain government funds to support their
programs: some are innovative and some are not. Beyond these situations, radical
campaigning groups may be unwilling and unable to attract government funds.

NGOs, Political Parties and Ethnic Minorities

While a political party is not regarded as an NGO and cannot gain recognition at the UN, a
small number of transnational groupings of political parties do gain consultative status with
ECOSOC. There are also several groups of parliamentarians with consultative status. No
problems have arisen with either group, because they have carefully avoided trying to involve
the UN in the "internal affairs of states". Human rights NGOs feel aggrieved that the same
principle is applied to them, even though one of the purposes of ECOSOC is "promoting
respect for, and observance of, human rights". In May 1968, ECOSOC Resolution 1296
(XLIV) specified that NGOs "should have a general international concern with this matter,
not restricted to the interests of a particular group of persons, a single nationality or the
situation in a single State". While this provision was dropped from the revised text in July
1996, it is still applied in practice. On this basis, the Indian government can block the World
Sikh Organization from gaining UN recognition. Christian Solidarity International also lost
its consultative status in October 1999 after it had allowed the guerrilla leader, John Garang,
to speak on its behalf, at the Commission on Human Rights.
20
 The recognition of minority rights is such a complex question that it is handled very
differently in different countries. In both North and South America, the minority communities
who are descendants of the inhabitants prior to the arrival of the great waves of European
settlers are given the privileged title of "indigenous peoples". The term has also been adopted
in Australia and New Zealand and a few other countries. On the other hand, governments in
various ethnically diverse countries do not wish to accord any special recognition to
minorities. The compromise is that the UN refers to indigenous people, as individuals who
have rights, and not to indigenous peoples (note the plural). This avoids recognition of any
collective identity or any claim to the right of self-determination. The restrictions deriving
from Resolution 1296 mean the organizations with consultative status are mainly global or
regional coalitions of ethnic minorities. However, special procedures have been adopted in
both the Commission on Human Rights and the Commission on Sustainable Development to
allow participation by a wider range of indigenous organizations. In addition, in July 2000,
ECOSOC established a Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, consisting of sixteen
independent experts, half of whom are nominated by indigenous organizations. Through a
variety of complex issue linkages, these NGOs can be important in environmental politics,
notably in the conservation of rainforests. While they are only present in the UN system
under the auspices of the arrangements for NGOs, indigenous people are often keen to claim
a unique status that is separate from and superior to the representatives of NGOs. As a result,
their alliance with environmentalists does not always operate smoothly.

NGOs and their Relations with Business and Commerce

A few intergovernmental economic organizations do allow an individual company to have

access under their provisions for NGOs, but this is only in cases where there are loose ad hoc
procedures and there are no formal institutional arrangements. However, as with political
parties, non-profit-making federations of companies, established for industry-wide
collaboration and to act as lobbies, are widely accepted. From the earliest days of the UN,
bodies such as the International Chamber of Commerce, the International Organization of
Employers and similar organizations for particular economic sectors have been included
among the NGOs. Until the 1990s, they were not of much significance in the UN itself, but
they have always been important in the specialized agencies. The more technical the question
under discussion, the more the policy-making process will draw on their expertise.

21
 One of the outcomes of the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, the UN Conference on Environment
and Development, was to draw companies into global environmental politics and hence more
into the work of ECOSOC. Sectoral bodies are prominent when questions such as energy or
transport are on the agenda. In addition, issue-oriented commercial grouping have been
formed. The most prominent is the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, a
successor to various lobbies that focused on the Earth Summit, to promote environmentally
friendly business. The oil companies have sound environmental credentials in some forums,
but not in others. The Oil Companies International Maritime Forum is making a useful
contribution to the reduction of oil pollution at sea, but the Global Climate Coalition opposes
reductions in oil consumption. OCIMF is registered as an NGO by the International Maritime
Organization, and the GCC is admitted as an observer to the sessions of the Conference of the
Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change.

At the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 1999, the UN Secretary-General, Kofi
Annan, explicitly called upon companies to widen their social responsibilities by entering
into a Global Compact with the UN. Companies that do so agree to endorse nine principles,
covering promotion of a set of core values in the areas of human rights, labor standards and
protection of the environment. Soon afterwards, global business organizations, several
hundred companies and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions responded
positively, but only a handful of human rights, environment and development NGOs did so.
There remains a deep suspicion among many such NGOs about the possibility of companies
implementing commitments to social responsibility.

Despite the suspicion of business, some NGOs have chosen to engage directly in
collaborative arrangements to formulate and monitor statements of business ethics. This has
been done both on an industry-wide basis and with individual companies. For example,
WWF (known as the Worldwide Fund for Nature until July 2000) took the lead in forming
the Forest Stewardship Council in 1993 and the Marine Stewardship Council in 1996. Each
Council works to promote sustainable practices, with participating companies gaining the
benefit of having their products endorsed by the NGOs as being environmentally friendly.
Similarly, various companies are having environmental and/or social audits undertaken on an
annual basis, by independent assessors.

22
NGOs and the Political Use of Violence

There has been no compromise in any political system with the idea that the use of violence
is not a normal part of the political process. In the UN, aggressive behavior by individuals is
sufficient to raise the question of suspension of an NGO's consultative status. In the
exceptional circumstances where group of guerrillas wish to claim their use of violence is
acceptable as part of the struggle against an oppressive regime, the group does not call itself
an NGO. Their supporters call them a national liberation movement, whereas their opponents
call them terrorists. Sometimes these groups gain admittance to intergovernmental
organizations, as if they were the governments of recognized states. At the UN, they have
never been classified as NGOs, but a few have been given a different status, as observers at
the General Assembly and at UN conferences. Within individual countries, there are rare
examples of the use of violence as a deliberate tactic, by groups that would normally be
referred to as NGOs. A clear example is the Animal Liberation Front in the United Kingdom.
They are simply regarded as criminals by the government and by the public, including many
who support their goals. A commitment to non-violence is the best respected of the principles
defining what is an NGO.

Different Types of Structures among NGOs

There is a great variety of ways in which NGOs are structured. The classic model is of a
membership organization, co-ordinated in a geographically-defined hierarchy. Individual
people work in local groups, which co-ordinate in provinces and then have a headquarters in
the capital city for the country as a whole. Such country-wide organizations are called
national NGOs. Frequently, the national NGOs combine in an international NGO, or INGO,
which may consist of regional groups of countries and be capped by a global body. Not all
the levels of the hierarchy need exist. Many countries are too small to have provincial
structures. Smaller specialist NGOs may simply enroll individual members at the national
level, without having any local branches. Occasionally, individuals are enrolled at the
international level. On the other hand, in large organizations, the international level often
seems relatively remote and attracts little attention, even among the NGO's own members.
The group running a local family planning clinic does not necessarily know about the work of
23
the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) at the UN World Conference on

24
Women in Beijing. Nevertheless, such global organizations with their membership measured
in millions do maintain a democratic policy-making process. While some may hold direct
elections for key posts at the national level, the responsibility to the membership at the global
level is always indirect, via some international council or assembly of national
representatives.

It should be noted that one of the ambiguities about the term, NGO, is whether it is
referring to a local, provincial, national, regional or global body. Until the early 1990s, the
matter was generally straightforward in academic, news media or political discussions. The
overwhelming majority of local and provincial NGOs never engaged in transnational
activities. Thus NGO, by itself, usually meant a national NGO and regional or global bodies
were called international NGOs. National NGOs did engage in transnational development and
humanitarian activities, but, with very few exceptions, they were not, in their own right,
participants in international diplomacy. When they wanted to exercise political influence at
the global level, they did so through the appropriate INGO. In the 1990s, there was a great
upsurge in local organizations becoming active at the global level, particularly on
environmental issues, because of the Rio Earth Summit in June 1992, and on social issues,
because of the Copenhagen Social Summit in March 1995. Since then, the term INGO has
not been used so much and NGO, by itself, has come to cover both national and international
NGOs. As an expression of the new politics, various terms then were popularized to refer to
local NGOs. Grass-roots organizations, community based organizations (CBOs), and civil
society organizations (CSOs), all came into currency. There is still an ambiguity whether
these newer terms cover organizations that only operate at the local level or also include local
branches of national organizations. Grass-roots and community organizations clearly refer
solely to the local level, but civil society has connotations of any level within a single
country. Indeed, it has become quite common to refer to global civil society.

Linguistic usage in the legal atmosphere at the UN used to be somewhat different. When
the UN was formed, any involvement of private individuals or groups in its work constituted
deviation from the norm of diplomacy being the exclusive preserve of "states". Thus, a
national organization, as mentioned in Article 71 of the UN Charter, was any NGO based in a
single country. No distinction was made between an organization that covered a large
constituency, over the whole country, and an organization based solely in a local community
or a small section of the population. The lack of any distinction did not matter, as
25
 participation by either country-wide or more limited national NGOs was so rare in the
permanent UN organs. Participation began on a small scale in the 1970s at UN conferences,
on an ad hoc basis. When the ECOSOC rules were changed in 1996, to admit "national
NGOs" to consultative status as a matter of routine, the presumption became that a national
organization was a country-wide membership organization or a federation of local groups or
an umbrella group, that is a coalition of NGOs operating in different fields. As is common at
the UN, practice has not been consistent: a few local NGOs have been admitted as "national
NGOs" to consultative status. The Rio conference also produced a term that has only been
used in environmental politics at the UN. "Major Groups" refers to a system of categorizing
NGOs from all levels, for the purposes of participating in UN policy-making processes.

Hereafter, use of NGO alone will imply that any or all levels are included, while local,
national or global will be used when the meaning must be restricted to that level. Terms such
as CBOs and Major Groups will also be used in the appropriate political context.

Changes in Terminology Covering NGOs

Level of From 1945 to Early 1990s

Organisatio Early 1990s Onwards
n
National NGO, at the Grass-roots, community based or civil society
Local UN organization, or local NGO
Not discussed
elsewhere
Provincial National NGO, at the Civil society organization
(USA - UN or local NGO
state) Not discussed
elsewhere
National National NGO, at the NGO or national NGO or civil society organization
UN
NGO, outside the
UN
Regional International NGO NGO or civil society organization
Global International NGO NGO or Major Group or civil society organization

A minority of NGOs conform to the model of a global democratic hierarchy, in which any

26
person may become a member. One variant is for the NGO to have subscribers or supporters,
providing income, receiving newsletters and responding to calls for action, but not having

27
any democratic control either over expenditure or over policy priorities for the organization.
This is common among altruistic NGOs, promoting social welfare and poverty alleviation,
and also among environmental NGOs. Another variant is for a specific status or participation
in some activity to be a prerequisite for membership. Thus trade unions are only open to
those employed in certain occupations (sometimes very broadly defined). Similarly,
professional, scientific and technical bodies are only open to people with the relevant
qualification. Such organizations may then be grouped on a functional basis rather than a
geographical basis, before they form national and/or international federations. Trade unions
do maintain democratic decision-making structures (at least in principle, if not always in
practice). However, professional, scientific and technical bodies have professional norms that
override democratic norms and members may be expelled for violating the professional
norms. A third variant is a religious organization. The major religions do all have complex
hierarchies, from the local faith community through to global spiritual authorities. None of
them claim to be democratic: authority is based on faith, a holy text, the charisma of
individuals or a hierarchical tradition. To some it will be surprising to discuss trade unions,
professional bodies and religious organizations as if they are NGOs. Indeed, the leaders of all
three will usually deny they are NGOs. Nevertheless, they are treated on the same basis as
NGOs throughout the UN system, with the exception of the special place for unions in the
International Labour Organisation's tripartite system of governance.

Coalition-Building Among NGOs

Once NGOs do decide to influence public policy, they organize, in broad coalitions,
specifically for this purpose. This means there is a large number of NGOs that bear no
resemblance to the classic model of a unified hierarchy. Coalitions may take the form of
umbrella INGOs, networks or caucuses. In the days when the main form of communication
was by mail and even transnational telephone conversations were expensive and time-
consuming to arrange, multi-national coalitions generally took the form of institutional
structures. Many international women's organizations, the International Council of Voluntary
Agencies and the World Conservation Union are examples that date from this era. They are
referred to as umbrella organizations, to signify the presence under the single umbrella of a
variety of different NGOs that do not share a common identity. In the 1960s, direct
transnational telephone dialing was established and air travel became sufficiently cheap for

28
individuals to meet occasionally. Then in the 1970s the news media gradually used satellite

29
communications, so that events in one place were shared around the world as television
images. These processes encouraged the formation of looser issue-based networks of NGOs
to exchange information, mobilize support and co-ordinate strategies. At this stage, networks
still required some degree of formal organization, with enough resources being raised to pay
the salary of a network administrator and associated costs for the paperwork. The
International Baby Foods Action Network was the prototype, followed by similar networks
on pesticides, rainforests, climate change and other questions. The advent of e-mail and the
web in the 1990s then meant that the costs of running a network dropped substantially and
individual people could afford to take part in sophisticated instantaneous global
communications. The number of networks increased dramatically and they no longer needed
any formal structure. Once a lead organization or even a lead individual establishes technical
and political communication skills, a coalition of thousands of NGOs can be formed rapidly
and their influence focused on specific targets. The International Campaign to Ban
Landmines, the Coalition for an International Criminal Court and Jubilee 2000 are the most
spectacular examples. However, the impact of technological change should not be
exaggerated. The most effective modern networks still derive their impact from being
coalitions of well-organized NGOs. Although communication costs are now minimal, it is
still essential to have sufficient resources at the center, even if they are provided by a single
member of the network, for at least one person to devote most or all of his/her time to
servicing the network.

A variant of the global network is a global caucus. This arises when a group of NGOs
come together as lobbyists at an international diplomatic event, such as a UN agenda-setting
conference or a UN forum for negotiating on the formulation or implementation of a treaty.
The caucus will be highly focused on achieving specific outcomes from the diplomatic
process. The impression is given that such a caucus is an ad hoc grouping that only exists
during the two or three weeks of the relevant diplomatic meetings. It may be accurate that the
particular combination of NGOs having the particular political purpose will never meet again.
However, a successful caucus will be well prepared and will carry forward procedural
expertise, substantive knowledge, political status and diplomatic contacts gained in one
forum through to the next forum, handling similar questions. Key organizations and key
individuals provide continuity. Women's organizations and environmentalists are among the
most successful operating in this way.

30
 When we consider something as loose and transient as a caucus, it is perhaps inappropriate
to call it an organization. Nevertheless, structured umbrella coalitions, networks and caucuses
are all handled in the same way by governments. In the UN system, all transnational actors
have to accept the label "NGO", in order to participate. They may be present under the label
of the coalition or of its constituents or through both routes. Umbrella INGOs have
consultative status and networks usually are listed, but caucuses rarely have any formal
recognition. Coalitions that focus on policy outcomes in a particular country or a particular
intergovernmental organization will tend to take the form of an umbrella organization.
Coalitions that focus on issues tend to take the form of a network or a caucus, with different
members being active in different policy forums.

In global environmental politics, there is a unique set of caucuses – the system of "Major
Groups". The term was adopted at the Earth Summit, when Agenda 21 devoted one of its four
sections to "Strengthening the Role of Major Groups". The preamble argued that "one of the
fundamental prerequisites for the achievement of sustainable development is broad public
participation in decision-making" and this must be done as a "real social partnership" with
"individuals, groups and organizations". The aim was for the UN to move beyond the
traditional reliance on the established NGOs, in two ways. Communication must reach down
to individuals at the level of local communities and particular sectors of society of importance
for the environment must be mobilized. The section devoted separate chapters to nine Major
Groups, under the following headings.

 Global action for women towards sustainable and equitable development

 Children and youth in sustainable development
 Recognising and strengthening the role of indigenous people and their communities
 Strengthening the role of non-governmental organizations: partners for sustainable
development
 Local authorities' initiatives in support of Agenda 21
 Strengthening the role of workers and their trade unions
 Strengthening the role of business and industry
 Scientific and technological community
 Strengthening the role of farmers.

The choice of these nine groups was the arbitrary and incoherent outcome of negotiations at

31
UNCED. It was influenced by the personal concerns of Maurice Strong and by the lobbying

32
of NGOs who were accredited to the conference. It is arbitrary to single out women but not
men; the young but not the elderly; indigenous people but not other minorities; unions but not
professional associations; business and industry but not commerce, finance and services;
natural scientists but not social scientists; and farmers but not fishing communities. It is
anomalous, but understandable, to emphasize one level of government, local authorities,
when they have responsibility for all the Major Groups. Above all it is incoherent to have
NGOs as one of the Major Groups, when all the other eight (including associations of local
authorities) are represented in the UN system via the ECOSOC "arrangements for
consultation with non-governmental organizations". This incoherence arises because many in
the other Major Groups did not wish to be labeled as NGOs and there had to be a category to
encompass environment and development NGOs.

In the Commission on Sustainable Development set up after the Earth Summit, special
arrangements were made to allow for participation by all the new groups that had engaged
with the UN for the first time at Rio. Any NGO that had been accredited for UNCED was
allowed to apply for Roster NGO status at sessions of the CSD and later was given a special
fast-track procedure for gaining full status with ECOSOC. Although the CSD is
constitutionally a standard subsidiary body of ECOSOC, it has developed its own procedures
for relating to NGOs. Rather than each NGO attempting to exercise its participation rights
separately, the NGOs are organized into the nine Major Groups from Agenda 21. These
categories are used both by the NGOs in their own caucusing and in the formal proceedings.
In addition, the CSD has gone beyond the normal consultative arrangements to hold various
types of formal, and informal, panels and seminars. Notably, each of the annual sessions
starts with the appropriate Major Groups making presentations in special "stakeholder
dialogues" on the different substantive agenda items for that year. In pragmatic terms, the
illogicality of having NGOs as one of the nine groups of NGOs serves a useful function, in
enabling any organization that does not fit elsewhere to be included. This Major Groups
system has only operated in the CSD and in other processes that have been derived from
UNCED.

33
 CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW

In the last decade, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have gained increased attention
among scholars and practitioners of development. They have become increasingly important
agents of the development process in the countries of the South, in all of their main areas of
work such as humanitarian relief, long-term development, policy formation and political
advocacy (Attack 1999). On the other hand, there is a current view that NGOs constitute a
viable alternative to government as channels of development assistance, particularly in
developing countries. Some of the NGOs’ functions and advantages, according to Streeten
(1997) are:

(1) They are good at reaching and mobilizing the poor and remote communities;
(2) They help empower poor people to gain control of their lives, and they work with and
strengthen local institutions;
(3) They carry out projects at lower costs and more efficiently than the government
agencies and
(4) They promote sustainable development. In this article two aspects will be discussed,
first, the relationship between NGO and empowerment as a particular virtue of NGOs,
and second, the strategy and program undertaken by NGOs that contribute to
sustainable community development.

In other words, the purpose of this paper is to shed some light on the NGOs’ program
regarding issues of empowerment and sustainable community development. In particular, the
paper seeks to highlight participation of NGOs in promoting sustainable community develop-
ment. Thus, this article will review some literature regarding the NGOs’ programs, and
highlight how these programs would affect community empowerment, and finally contribute
to sustainable community development.

NGOs are professionally-staffed organizations aiming at contributing to the reduction of

human suffering and to the development of poor countries (Streeten 1997). They do this in
various ways, e.g. by funding projects, engaging in service provision and capacity building,
contri-buting to awareness, and promoting the self-organization of various groups (Baccaro
34
2001). Meanwhile, Desai (2005) has mentioned that NGOs have an important role to play in

35
supporting women, men and households, and expected that they can meet the welfare. She
accounted some role and functions for NGOs, such as counseling and support service,
awareness raising and advocacy, legal aid and microfinance. These ser-vices help the people
to achieve their ability, skill and know ledge, and take control over their own lives and finally
become empowered. On the other hand, Stromquist (2002) has noted three major functions
for NGOs such as (1) service delivery (e.g. relief, welfare, basic skills); (2) educational
provision (e.g. basic skills and often critical analysis of social environments); and (3) public
policy advocacy.

Baccaro (2001) shows how particular NGOs can promote the organization and
“empowerment” of the poor, particularly poor women, through a combination of micro-
credit, awareness-raising, training for group members, and other social services.
Empowerment is the ability of individuals to gain control socially, politically, economically
and psychologically through (1) access to information, knowledge and skills; (2) decision
making; and (3) individual self-efficacy, community participation, and perceived control
(Rappaport 1987; Zimmerman and Rappaport 1988). In the long term, the aim of NGOs is to
promote sustainable community development through activities that promote capacity
building and selfreliance. Langran (2002), has mentioned that NGOs through capacity
building help to sustain community development. NGOs are often created in order to expand
the capacities of people (Korten 1990). Furthermore, NGOs are praised for promoting
community self-reliance and empowerment through supporting community-based groups and
relying on participatory processes (Korten 1990; Clark 1991; Friedmann 1992; Fowler 1993;
Edwards and Hulme 1994; Salamon 1994).

On the other hand, sustainable development has emerged over the past few decades as an
important paradigm for community development. However, as Bradshaw and Winn (2000)
have noted, sustainability is rooted largely in an environmental approach, particularly in the
industrialized countries. But, the goal of sustainable development is to find a balance between
three pillars - social, economic and environmental - of communities (Sneddon 2000). The Rio
Conference interpreted sustainable development as a single process with three dimensions. In
addition, the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation defined it as three distinct processes, of
“economic development, social development and environmental protection— as
interdependent and mutually reinforcing pillars” (United Nations 2002). These dimensions

36
were originally introduced with the aim of identifying areas in which social, economic and

37
environmental goals are interrelated (Holmberg and Sandbrook 1992). However, these
dimensions of sustainable development have done little to reduce the complexity of the
concept and has itself introduced a contradiction.

Hibbard and Tang (2004) in their study in Vietnam, have noted the importance of NGOs’
roles in sustainable community development. One of the roles was that NGOs balance the
social, economic and environmental factors in promoting sustainable development. Another
important role of NGO that they discovered was decentralization of the central government
which helps the local communities to acquire more power in order to make their own
decisions. But, sometimes the local communities lack specialists to do professional work and
resources that are important for the particular projects. In this situation, NGO assists local
staff with drafting sustainable development plans that are functional under the umbrella of a
central government policy. Finally, they concluded that sustainable community development
is process-oriented, and it requires extensive community participation and relies on network
to share resources, knowledge and expertise.

From the literatures, it could be summarized that NGOs play an important function in
promoting sustainable community development. Sustainable community development
emphasizes on a balance between environmental concerns and development objectives, while
simultaneously enhancing local social relationships. Sustainable communities meet the
economic needs of their residents, enhance and protect the environment, and promote more
humane local societies (Bridger and Luloff 1997). As Bridger (1997) has mentioned,
sustainable community development includes five dimensions. The first dimension
emphasises on increasing local economic diversity.

The second is self-reliance which entails the development of local markets, local production,
local processing of previously imported goods, and greater cooperation among local
economic entities. The third dimension involves a reduction in the use of energy, coupled
with the careful management and recycling of waste products. The fourth dimension focuses
on the protection and enhancement of biological diversity and careful stewardship of natural
resources. Finally, the fifth dimension is related to the commitment of the sustainable
communities to social justice.

38
Through the functions of providing microfinance, initiating capacity building and self -
reliance, NGOs could promote empowerment among community members, and eventually
community sustainable development.
Specifically, the discussions are on the functions related to provision of microfinance,
initiation of community capacity building and selfreliance. Eventually, sustainable
community development will be achieved, particularly when community is empowered. The
“bottom-up approach” in community development would likely bring about empowerment to
the community and finally sustainable community development. According to Finger (1994),
the bottom-up approach emphasizes community participation, grassroots movements and
local decision making. It argues that community participation and grassroots initiatives
promote participatory decision making and local self-reliance (Panda 2007).In bottom-up
approach, people are able to define their own problems and having ability and capacity to
solve it through organizing and participating themselves.

39
CHAPTER 3 - COMPANY PROFILE

The Akanksha Foundation is a non-profit organisation with a mission to provide children

from low-income communities with a high-quality education, enabling them to maximize
their potential and transform their lives. Akanksha works in the field of education, initiating
school reform through The School Project, and providing a supplemental education through
the Akanksha centers.

Currently, Akanksha reaches out to over 4600 children through two models: the after-school
or center model and the School Project.

Akanksha has 15 centers and 15 schools in Mumbai and Pune. The School Project is a
venture to open high-quality schools serving children from low-income communities in
Mumbai and Pune. These schools are in partnership with local municipalities, with the vision
of creating small clusters of model schools in these cities that can be used to impact the
mainstream education system.

Through the centers, a commitment is made to support each child by providing a strong
educational foundation, good time, self-esteem and values, and to help them plan how they
can earn a steady livelihood as a step towards improving their standard of living.

40
AKANKSHA TEAM

Chief Executive Officer - Vandana Goyal

Vandana is a graduate of Claremont McKenna College, with a degree in Economics. As part

of her undergraduate studies, she spent a year at the London School of Economics. The
initial years of her career were spent at Citizen Schools, a Boston-based non-profit
organization dedicated to changing the life trajectory of underprivileged urban children in the
United States. She joined Akanksha in 2006, initially serving on the team that created a
blueprint for Teach for India, later moving on to manage the Beyond School department
serving all adolescent children of Akanksha. In 2007, she became the Director of Akanksha’s
School Project, launched to create a network of high-performing schools within the
government system. She took over as CEO in January of 2010. In 2012, Vandana was
honored by the World Economic Forum as a Young Global Leader. In 2014 she successfully
completed two Executive Education courses, Global Leadership and Public Policy for the
21st Century at the Harvard Kennedy School, and Strategic Perspectives in Non Profit
Management at Harvard Business School. Vandana serves on the Board of Directors of The
Akanksha Foundation, Akanksha Canada and Thermax Social Initiatives Foundation. She
also serves on the Advisory Board of the India School Leadership Institute, KINOE ( Kids in
Need of Education) and STIR Education.

Chief Learning Officer - Matthew Corallo

Matthew holds a Master’s degree in Political Science from St. John’s University, Jamaica,
NY and has also completed the Aspiring Principal’s Program from the New York City
Leadership Academy. He comes with a rich experience of over 14 years in the field of
education, beginning his career as a Social Studies teacher to being a principal where he led
and managed all aspects of instruction and organisation for his school. Recently, Matthew has
been the Curriculum Director at Creative Communicators – New York where he developed
and implemented curriculum to maximize learning skills for students with special needs and
physical disabilities.

41
Chief Financial Officer - Sivakami Kotla

Sivakami has done her graduation in Commerce (Accountancy & Economics) from Mumbai
University and advance diploma in Business Administration from Welingkar’s Institute of
Management, Mumbai. She comes with a rich experience of 11 yrs in the manufacturing and
development sectors. She has worked with large international non-profit organisations like
Hope Worldwide and Handicap International. She has built strong finance teams, has
handled multiple stakeholders and has had responsibility for financial management of
regional projects. She has handled financial audits, reviews conducted by donor agencies and
has managed finalization of regional accounts, prepared budgets for USAID grants, Indian
government grants, institutional and corporate funding.She brings in a lot of passion,
experience and understanding of the development sector.

Director – Education – Anjali Sabnani

Anjali holds a degree from St. Xavier’s College in Mumbai and has a background in
advertising and PR, working at Adfactors Advertising for six years prior to joining Akanksha.
Anjali joined Akanksha in the year 2000 as a volunteer. In 2001, she became a teacher, and in
2004 she assumed the responsibility of Assistant Education Manager. She is currently
heading the Education Department and oversees teacher support and training for the city of
Mumbai.

Senior Director - Operations – Anandhi Yagnaraman

Anandhi has done her graduation from Chennai University and has a MA in Educational
Leadership and Management from University of London. She joined Akanksha in the year
2000 as a computer teacher. She worked with the Art for Akanksha project, and then was a
teacher until 2004. She then moved to the UK for a few years, and moved back to India,
working as the Program Coordinator and Head of the School Program for Akshara in
Bangalore. She rejoined Akanksha Pune in the year 2009 as General Manager Pune, and is
currently in charge of operations for centers and schools in Mumbai and Pune.

42
CHAPTER 4 – PROJECTS

4.1. The School Project

The mission of The School Project is to create a model for high-performing schools that
redefines what is possible for children from low-income communities, and has the potential
to drive wider systemic reform.

In India today, 96% of primary school age children are enrolled in school. The quality of
learning indicators, however, is of persistently low levels– with low standards of education,
up to 25% absenteeism amongst government school teachers, a 50% drop out rate between
grade 1 and grade 5, and 90% dropout by grade 10.

A few years after the millennium, there began a trend amongst people living in low-income
urban communities of putting their children into low-fee or ‘affordable’ private schools.
Today, approximately only 40% of the 1.1 million children living in the city of Mumbai
attend government schools. In response, The Municipal Corporations of Pune (PMC) and
Mumbai (MCGM) acknowledged the insufficient supply of English-medium schools and
have initiated setting up of new municipal schools of this kind.

Based on this organizational history and environmental context, Akanksha decided to step
back and redefine its approach to its mission of equipping all children with an education that
has the power to fundamentally transform their life trajectory.

In 2006, Anu Aga, an Akanksha board member, approached the Pune Municipal Corporation
43
(PMC) to adopt a municipal school through the Thermax Social Initiatives Foundation
(TSIF). The PMC granted permission for TSIF to run the KC Thackeray Vidya Niketan
Municipal School, serving the scholarship students across the municipal schools in Pune from
Standard 3 and above. Although Akanksha was initially an unofficial partner in this initiative,
the seeds of The School Project were sown with the opening of the first school in June 2007.

In the first year of the school opening, TSIF and Akanksha chose to administer a 3rd party
assessment called ‘ASSET’, an assessment, fairly new at the time, taken by a small pool of
elite private schools. On this baseline assessment, the children performed anywhere from 30-
70% below the mean. Eight months later, the students had bridged an achievement gap of
nearly 25 percentage points— with some students performing near the mean. These
promising initial results built confidence in the potential of schools to provide the kind of
environment that children from low-income communities needed.

In 2008, Akanksha decided that working within the government system offered more scope to
reach more children and one day be an advocate for education reform from within the system,
using the case study of the Akanksha Schools as a model of what can work in public
education. With 15 schools across both cities, this model continues to grow and thrive today.

4.2 The Model

The Akanksha School Model has been adapted from best practices of high-performing
schools in India and around the world, and Akanksha’s own experience in education,
gathered over its twenty years of serving some of the poorest urban slum communities in
Mumbai and Pune. These Six Pillars represent the guiding principles of The School Project
and the core of what Akanksha believes drives the success of its schools.
(hover your cursor over each pillar to know more)

 Excellent Educators
 Progressive Pedagogy
 Focus on Results
 Parents as Partners
 Scalable Cost

44
  More Time

Akanksha Schools

Upon sensing the increasing trend of people living in low- income urban communities
putting their children in low- fee or ‘affordable’ private schools, Akanksha decided to
step back and redefine its approach to its mission of equipping all children with an
education that has the power to fundamentally transform their life trajectory.

Akanksha has 8 schools in Mumbai and 7 schools in Pune in partnership with the
PMC and the MCGM along with other supporters.
(hover your cursor over each photograph to know more)

MUMBAI

Abhyudaya Nagar Mumbai Public

School School Leader: Chitra
Vishwanath Teacher Leader: Rachana
Sundaram

Timings: 8:30 AM – 1:30 PM

Address: Opposite Abhyudaya Nagar Market, Near Kala Chowki Police Station,
Abhyudaya Nagar, Mumbai

45
D. N. Nagar Mumbai Public

School School Leader: Sheetal

Murudkar Asst School Leader:

Zoya Khan

Timings: 7:30 AM – 12:30 PM & 12:30 PM- 6:30 PM

Address: Behind Versova Police Station, Link Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai

46