PAPUA SUPPORT FOUNDATION
ANNUAL REPORT 2011
Hapin Foundation was established on February 23rd
The foundation Hulp Aan Papua’s In Nood is registered with the Chamber of Commerce under no.
41113659. In English texts we translate the name of the foundation into Papua Support Foundation.
The tax-collector’s office acknowledges Hapin as an institution for the general good (in Dutch: ANBI) with
fiscal number 8040.33.730.
From July 1 2001 until July 1 2011 Hapin was certified with the Central Fundraising Bureau (Dutch: CBF)
under registration number 123-01. In 2012 Hapin will receive the so called CBF certificate for small
Photographs: Fokke van Saane
Koen de Jager (photo Financial Report)
Hapin’s board consists of the following members:
Chairwoman: Ms. W.W.F. (Wytske) Inggamer
Secretary: Ms. M.M. (Maaike) te Rietmole
Treasurer: Mr. R.E. (Rob) van de Lustgraaf
Member: Mr. A.N. (At) Ipenburg
Member: Mr. G. (Geart) Benedictus
Member: Mr. S.D. (David) Itaar
Staff Papua Support Foundation
Managing director, Programme & Communication manager Ms. S. (Sophie) Schreurs
Programme & Financial manager: Mr. R. (Reinier) de Lang
Stichting Hulp aan Papua’s in Nood (Hapin)
(Papua Support Foundation)
3531 WR UTRECHT
Worldwide we are at the root of great challenges in financial, economic, environmental, social and cultural fields. Papua
also undergoes such challenges and is experiencing its own version of the Arab Spring: the cry for freedom,
sovereignty, dignity, equality and justice. It is indeed called Papua Spring.
The country, rich in natural resources, is being exploited for strong international demand of products such as timber,
gold, copper and palm oil. Its original population hardly benefits from these resources. Instead, Papuans are considered
and treated as second class citizens in their own country. Despite the call for dialogue and the rejection of violence and
oppression, human rights are still violated.
These and other developments have contributed to the evolution of HAPIN in the last 40 years from a lobby
organization, supporting boarding houses and study grants, to a project-based foundation that focuses on education,
economic development at village level, protection of land rights and the strengthening of civil society. All this based on
the demands from Papua.
In February 2010 Hapin’s sister organization Pt. Hapin was founded in Papua in cooperation with Hapin’s field staff.
Through trial and error Pt. Hapin is taking shape. With the departure of former managing director Jeroen Overweel a
wealth of knowledge on development in Papua was lost. For the remaining staff (Sophie Schreurs and Reinier de Lang),
the Board of Hapin as well as for our sister organization Pt. Hapin this implied extra time and adaptation.
Elections in Indonesia have always affected Hapin’s networks in Papua. Besides the fact that incumbent directors make
way for new people, many activities stop during campaigning time. Pt. Hapin will do its utmost to establish and
strengthen its network in Papua, whilst developing its own operational strength.
Hapin is a small but relevant and committed actor in Papua. The creation of Pt. Hapin and its cooperation with Hapin NL
is an excellent opportunity to assist Papua, the country and its people, to live up to its potential: a promising country in
which people can make their own choices in freedom and lead a fulfilling life.
W (Wytske) W.F. Inggamer (chair HAPIN – Papua Support Foundation)
1. HAPIN & PAPUA........................................................................................................................4
1.1 ‘Papua Spring’ .....................................................................................................................4
1.2 Mission Statement................................................................................................................5
1.3 Hapin at a glance .................................................................................................................5
2. THE PROCESS OF A PROGRAMME-BASED APPROACH .....................................................................6
3. RESULTS OF THE PROGRAMMES .................................................................................................8
3.1 Capacity Building .................................................................................................................9
3.1.1 Access to education ......................................................................................................10
3.1.2 Vocational education .....................................................................................................11
3.1.3 Non formal education .................................................................................................... 12
3.2 Strengthening Civil Society.................................................................................................. 13
3.3 Land rights........................................................................................................................ 14
3.4 Small business support ....................................................................................................... 15
3.5 Sister act .......................................................................................................................... 15
4. ACTIVITIES IN THE NETHERLANDS ........................................................................................... 19
5. ORGANIZATION...................................................................................................................... 21
5.1 Staff................................................................................................................................. 21
5.2 Housing ............................................................................................................................ 22
5.3 External networks .............................................................................................................. 22
5.4 Fundraising ....................................................................................................................... 23
5.5 Governance....................................................................................................................... 23
FINANCIAL REPORT 2011 ............................................................................................................ 27
ANNEXES .................................................................................................................................. 43
1. HAPIN & PAPUA
1.1 ‘Papua Spring’
In 2011 Papua had its own version of an Arab spring. Different groups within Papua showed determination to pursue
their interests. Students rallied to express their frustration over the impasse of development in Papua. A 5.000 strong
Papua National Congress took place where people expressed their disappointment in the Otsus (Special Autonomy Law
for Papua). In Nabire there was another rally where the participants lobbied for dialogue between Papua and Jakarta
under international supervision. Employees of the mining company Freeport McMoran went on a three month strike for
higher wages. And finally the Papua Market Woman united against their marginalized position on the central market
area in Jayapura.
Sadly, together with the ‘Papua spring’, human rights violations continued in Papua. The non-violent rally during the
Papua National Congress based on their counterparts in Egypt and Syria was monitored closely by armed police and
soldiers. As the gathering began to disperse, the military began firing from their assault weapons and launched
themselves on the crowd, arresting and beating some 300 people. Five Papuans were killed by the security forces.
Forkorus Yaboisembut, who announced himself to have been elected to be the ‘President’ of the ‘Democratic Republic
of West Papua’, was arrested along with his ’Prime Minister’ Edison Waromi. They and three others faced charges of
treason and were sentenced to three years in prison.
Father Neles Tebay, lecturer at theological academy Fajar Timur and prominent advocate for peaceful dialogue, rejected
the use of all kinds of repression in dealing with the problems and stressed, as Hapin does, the importance of dialogue.
He urges president Yudhoyono to select a dialogue team with people whose personal integrity is recognized
nationally. The dialogue team could work with many parties in Papua and Jakarta to facilitate meetings with
stakeholders and produce strategic solutions to various issues.
An on-going problem in Papua with devastating consequences is the deprivation of natural resources. International
demand for wood, paper and other forestry products is met by illegal logging, one of the driving forces behind the
deprivation of natural resources in Papua. Another popular product on the international market is palm oil. The Merauke
Integrated Food and Energy Estate (MIFEE) project will still be implemented. Indonesia will give out vast contracts of
land in Merauke regency (1.6 million hectares, 38% the size of The Netherlands) to companies for large scale bio fuel
and food production. BP, a British multinational oil and gas company, discovered a large field of natural gas in the
Bintuni Bay which resulted in the building of a large processing facility which allegedly led to the logging of 3.200 ha to
make space for this enterprise.
These kind of plans disrespect customary land rights and because international companies were allocated contracts for
Papua’s natural resources, the indigenous people hardly profit from this. BP works together with the Indonesian
government and the people of Papua and claims to be committed to contributing to sustainable development in Papua.
Whether this is effective remains to be seen. Not every company has such a model of corporate social responsibility
with social programmes for the Papua community and often only focus on economic gain.
The ‘Papua spring’ did not totally come out of the blue. The deprivation of the natural resources, the economic and
social marginalized position of the Papuans and the impasse of development in Papua were just some of the triggers
behind the ‘Papua spring’.
1. BPS Provinsi Papua Barat : Berita Resmi Statistik, 6 february 2012.
2. Human Rights Report: Bureau of Democracy,Human Rights and Labor, Indonesia, 24 May 2012.
3. ICG Report : Hope and Hard Reality in Papua, August 2011.
4. Asian Human Rights Commission: Human Rights in Papua, 2010/2011, November 2011.
5. Theo van den Broek: Current situation in Papua Pasca Papuan People Congress, November 2011.
1.2 Mission Statement
Hapin invests in a sustainable future for Papua through rendering support to local initiatives which attribute to a
strengthening of the rights and the welfare of the indigenous peoples of Papua.
Hapin envisions a strengthened position as a stakeholder in the development of Papua. Hapin anticipates on new
complex developments in Papuan society. We are optimistic about Papuan talents, skills and their future prospects.
Hapin considers the ever continuing democratization as a window of opportunity for furthering the representation of
poor Papuans and thereby improvement of their general well-being.
1.3 Hapin at a glance
In its 40 years existence Hapin went through a number of phases. The ‘Papua Support Foundation’, in Dutch ‘Stichting
Hulp aan Papua’s in Nood’ (Hapin), was founded in 1972 in response to the Indonesian interpretation of the New York
Agreement and implementation of the 'Act of Free Choice', the referendum for self-determination in 1969, which
resulted in Papua becoming an integral part of the Republic of Indonesia. The subsequent plight and disadvantaged
position of the Papuans in what was from 1969 until 1973 to be called the Indonesian province of Irian Barat (West
Irian) and the scant attention paid to it by the Dutch and international community motivated many Dutchmen to raise
funds to address this situation.
Initially, Hapin provided information and engaged in lobby activities towards the Dutch and international community.
From the start, financial support was given to orphanages and schools in Papua. Later on Hapin started to supply
scholarships to Papuan students. In the course of the eighties structural financial support for small scale projects in the
field of youth and health care, start-up subsidies for small businesses and informal education gradually became more
The administrative and financial span of control resulting from increasing development efforts and the perceived need
for accountability towards donors instigated a modernization of Hapin, both in the Netherlands and in Papua. A more
professional approach meant a separation of implementation and supervision in general, and an executive organization
based on a few ‘hired hands’ supplemented with volunteers, again, both in the Netherlands and in Papua. Instrumental
to this whole process was the cooperation with Oxfam-Novib in the Netherlands regarding the Small Projects Fund (from
Indicative to the level of accountability of Hapin was the compliance to the rules of the Dutch Central Bureau for
Fundraising (CBF) at a very early stage. In 2001 it received the CBF seal of approval. Hapin decided in 2011 to apply for
a CBF certificate for small NGO’s. This certificate is relatively new and in comparison to the CBF seal inexpensive.
Since 2002 Hapin’s policy focuses on the following objectives:
• Poverty alleviation: poverty reduction, empowerment and access to local markets and basic services.
• Education and capacity building: e.g. study grants.
• Gender: equal rights and opportunities for (men and) women.
• Political dialogue, reconciliation and cooperation in Papua.
• Information and education in the Netherlands.
• Development of organizational professionalism of Hapin and individual skills of representatives in the
Netherland en Papua.
Programme based approach
Democratization and reform give Hapin, as NGO, enough room to play its part in bringing government and civil society
closer together, in accordance with a revised project policy as of 2008. In formulating the new policy, we took the
opportunity to narrow down the focus in Papua to the following four policy themes:
1. Capacity building and informal education.
2. Customary land rights protection.
3. Small business support.
4. Civil society strengthening.
In 2010 Hapin decided to gradually shift its responsibilities to Papua. Sister organization Pt. Hapin (Pt. = Perkumpulan
terbatas, Limited Association) was established on 23 February 2010, exactly 38 years after Hapin Foundation was
established in the Netherlands. Pt. Hapin is a new initiative in Papua itself by and for Papuans, but closely linked to
Hapin Netherlands (Hapin NL). Pt. Hapin can be regarded as a project and is indeed so in administrative terms. The
development of Pt. Hapin directly contributes to capacity building in Papua and indirectly to the other primary goals
Hapin NL wants to achieve in Papua.
2. THE PROCESS OF A PROGRAMME-BASED APPROACH
Overall, Hapin has evolved from an organization financing projects ranging from orphanages to small businesses to a
programme-based approach that focuses on capacity building, civil society, entrepreneurship and land rights. Within
this policy framework Hapin supports Papuan initiatives. Hapin’s working method has always been demand driven.
Sister organization Pt. Hapin will further improve downward accountability in this respect. Our policy indicates what we
want and what we can support, but this does not mean that we always will. We do our utmost to identify good
initiatives, but still they have to comply to certain basic standards of quality.
Pt. Hapin has representatives, partners and contacts all over Papua and also engages in project identification trips. Pt.
Hapin has an office staff of three persons in Jayapura. Pt. Hapin uses a project proposal format that is adjusted to the
Papuan situation. The proposal forms can be used, or they function as checklists for proposals in other formats.
Important to note is that these forms force the applicants to think structurally about the expected results and the added
value of their efforts. When needed, Pt. Hapin assists in project design and writing the proposal, in any way possible.
Qualifications and sustainability
The proposal, of course, has to comply with minimum quality standards and Hapin terms for support. Hapin uses 5
1. Sustainability: The activities have a sustainable character: achieving results that can be furthered
2. Transparent: Clear results have to be formulated.
3. Gender: Gender equality.
4. Track record.
5. Local initiative.
Following approval of the proposal, a contract will be signed stating the rights and duties of each contracting partner.
During implementation, there is contact by mail, phone or field visits. It is important for us that there is an atmosphere
of partnership: both partners strive to attain the same goals. For reporting purposes, a format has been developed that
is directly linked to the proposal format. When a follow up is desired, the usual project cycle will be followed: the
evaluation of the previous phase is the basis for new project design.
What is most needed in Papua?
The policy priorities are based on contextual analysis. What is most needed in Papua? However, we steer clear from
what we believe are government responsibilities: formal education and health. We also follow a civil society and rights
based approach. Change should arise from society itself and we modestly contribute to strengthening it. Other
stakeholders are funding Papuan initiatives. With the question of attribution in mind we endeavor to make realistic
claims on the impact on Papuan society. Hapin is a small player. We do try to have all the questions answered before
approval, in order to make sure that the grantees’ work will have its own direct impact on the beneficiaries.
3. RESULTS OF THE PROGRAMMES
Programme spending in 2011
PROJ No PROJECT NAME PLACE IMPLEMENTATION
IDR € IDR €
JAY 11-7 Human resources dev Jayapura LBH 27.000.000 2.275 17.750.000 1.460
JAY 11-8 Girls sports education Padang Bulan Girls soccer school 50.000.000 4.213 50.000.000 4.092
MAN 11-1 Advocacy training HR workers Manokwari LP3BH (Legal Aid) 129.080.000 10.876 125.060.000 10.154
BAL 11-1 Computer education by solarcell Muliama Muliama school 172.595.000 14.543 210.317.870 17.104
IND 11-1 Study Grants Programme Indonesia PT Hapin 160.500.000 13.524 160.500.000 12.969
539.175.000 45.431 563.627.870 45.779
MER 11-7 People's legal training Merauke LBH Papua 201.600.000 16.987 152.876.900 12.421
201.600.000 16.987 152.876.900 12.421
- - - -
JAY 11-5 Cocoa plan rehab ext. District Yapsi Fork-Kisdp 105.000.000 8.847 4.875.886 384
Small Business support 105.000.000 8.847 4.875.886 384
TOTAL 845.775.000 71.265 721.380.656 58.584
Strengthening civil Society
Explanation of the expenditures
The original budget (€ 71.265) was reduced to € 58.584 due to interim evaluations of the projects. As a result, the
expenditures diverge from the budget considerably in some cases. More projects were accepted in Jayapura because
of the location of the office of Pt. Hapin in the major city of Papua. With more people to attend to and easier
accessibility for these people to speak in person with representatives of Pt. Hapin are reasons for the increase of
projects in the Jayapura area. Fewer projects were funded in comparison to previous years. The establishment of Pt.
Hapin took more time than we expected and consumed the majority of our time and attention. Therefore less attention
was paid to expanding our network within Papua and searching for new projects. More on this subject can be read in
Since 2002 Hapin’s policy focuses on the objective of gender equality. Equal rights and
opportunities for (men and) women is one of our aspirations.
3.1 Capacity Building
In May 2011 Gordon Brown (former Minister of Finance and former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom) launched an
interim report for the G8 and G20 meetings. He outlined that there is still much to be achieved in order to realize the
Millennium goals in the field of education in 2015. He also emphasized the usefulness to invest in education:
“Improved learning achievement levels could increase long-run economic growth by 2% per capita above
trend levels. The growth premium cuts the period over which income doubles from 47 years to 33 years. The
investments required to unlock the growth premium (around 2.8% of GDP) would pay for themselves after 22
years. Viewed over the lifetime of a young person coming through education, entering the labour market, and
progressing through their working life, every $1 spent on education would generate $10-$15 through the
education growth premium”.1
From the analysis of Papuan development not only Gordon Brown but also Hapin concludes that good education in all
its forms is crucial. In development terms it is called capacity building. Formal education is a responsibility of the
government. Therefore we do not finance any form of formal education.
Education for All: beating poverty, unlocking prosperity. P.14. http://www.gordonandsarahbrown.com
3.1.1 Access to education
What we aspire is to help people gain access to education. Hapin runs a Study Grants Programme that enables greater
access to higher education.
There has been significant progress in Indonesia towards achieving universal primary education. Primary school
enrolment rates reached 97 per cent in 2009. One of the key challenges, however, is enabling children to move from
primary to secondary education - nearly a quarter of children do not make this transition. There are also notable
differences between social groups - almost half of the children from poor families do not enroll in junior secondary
schools, contributing to the high drop-out rates after primary level education.
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Papua Papua Barat National
Since 2000, poverty declined from 46 percent to 37 percent but Papua remains Indonesia’s poorest region.2
worry that the region’s underperforming education system is also holding back development. Good education is of the
utmost importance to the development of Papua. To participate fully in civil society and to give direction to one’s
future and that of Papua in general demands a variety of capacities and competences. This applies to participation in
economic life, the ability to articulate individual rights and interests and to exercise public, political and executive
functions. The possibilities to develop the necessary competences are restricted in Papua and, if present, beyond the
reach of the Papuan community. So the potential of the Papuan community is not used or underused.
Hapin invests in furthering these capacities and competences, which is an important part of its mission. The Study
Grants Programme is one of Hapin’s main activities to support this mission. The programme contributes to the creation
of Papuan leadership and professionalism by granting higher education scholarships to promising students, who
otherwise could not afford the study. Grants are given to Papuans studying in Papua or other parts of
Indonesia. Gender balance is policy, in practice more female than male students are supported. The
studies should contribute to Papuan society, for example Geology, Forestry, Agricultural Science, Dentistry,
Pharmacy, Computer Science, Physics, Nursing and Medicine.
Hapin started its Study Grants Programme in 1989 and over the years Hapin invested in approximately 2,000
students. The programme has shifted from a quantity point of view to one that is focused on quality improvements
and broadening our network by working with other foundations in the Netherlands and in Indonesia. Our sister
Source: Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS), various publications.
organization Pt. Hapin is at the centre of our Study Grants Programme by managing the programme and being the
contact person to all students financed by Hapin in Indonesia.
In 2011 Hapin started to accept new applications from Papuan students in Indonesia but in a modest way. Not more
than 40 students were granted a scholarship. Because of the limited number of students Pt. Hapin can focus more on
these students and a more personal contact can develop between the staff of Pt. Hapin and the students. In accepting
new students we try to accept students who are at the early stages of their academic career. By monitoring these
students from their first year a good track record can be developed.
3.1.2 Vocational education
Hapin likes to support initiatives that improve educational practices and methods. There is consensus on the fact that
vocational education should be stimulated. Indonesia modernizes its school system and didactical methods, but in
remote districts many teachers still teach as they have been doing for years.
Hapin has the ambition to use this track record in the future. The
establishment of an alumni association still prevails in which knowledge is
shared and distributed. Our ideal vision is an organization where freshly
graduated students can ask advice and guidance from former students
who already have jobs in various areas. In 2010 however we realized that
the establishment of an own alumni organization proved to be too
What we did not realize then was that the physical representation of Hapin
in Papua could make a difference. Pt. Hapin tries to collaborate with
already existing students/alumni organizations in which our students can
be adopted. Regularly meetings and workshops will be organized for and
by (former) students.
Tetianus Murib, Graduated in forestry
In the Baliem Valley Hapin supports an interesting project of a private school, called Muliama in Asologaima (Baliem
Valley). In 1994 director Willem Wetipo persuaded students from surrounding villages to go to his school. Here he
used a new form of teaching not common in Indonesia where the individual wellbeing and mental growth is an
important condition for the intellectual development of the child. Children are being taught in their own tribe language
instead of Indonesian which is often incomprehensible for the children. His school, although not far from the Baliem
Valley capital Wamena, has no electricity. Still, for the pupils it is important that they receive computer education, as
without it, they will lag behind in their educational and working career. The Baliem Valley has perfect conditions for
solar energy. Instead of using expensive and polluting generators, director Willem Wetipo asked a contribution from
Hapin for the purchase of solar panels and batteries that can enable the computer education.
Willem Wetipo and his students
3.1.3 Non formal education
Hapin supports non formal education directly organized by civil society. This can range from a special human rights
course for candidate lawyers to on the spot agricultural training. The latter example shows that capacity building is
often part of projects in other fields. Learning is not restricted to the time spent in school. It begins at birth and
continues all your life.
In 2010, 28 lawyers passed their bar exam and became official (human rights) lawyers in Indonesia. A Hapin funded
project implemented by the NGO ‘Institute for Research, Recognition and Development of Legal Aid’ (LP3BH) provided
them with in depth and practical information on human rights litigation work.
LP3BH is headed by the well known Papuan lawyer Yan Christian Warinussy. Because of the success a follow up project
that will strengthen the advocacy capacity of human rights workers in Papua was approved in 2011. It offers those
who passed the bar exam a one year internship with a human rights organization. This internship is also a requirement
of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights.
Alice Ance taking her oath.
3.2 Strengthening Civil Society
Due to Indonesia’s democratization process, strengthening civil society has greater relevance and impact. Hapin
supports NGO’s who work directly at creating awareness amongst civilians about their rights vis-à-vis government and
by organizing people around a certain issue.
We believe that cultural expressions are part and parcel of increased self-confidence, which is the basis of civil society.
Being a new state with many different peoples within its borders, nationalism has been very important to Indonesia. In
Papua this has led to governmental fear of separatism and resulted in oppression of Papuan cultural expressions. With
the Special Autonomy Law (Otsus), there is acknowledgement of Papua’s own identity. However, because the positive
political and societal developments have come to a standstill, it remains important that Papuan cultural expressions
are being supported. These can be expressions of (modern) art, but also the influence of the Papuan culture on project
designs. Links can be forged with mass media, such as radio and television.
In the life of society in Papua, many people do not understand the law and their human rights. This fact raises many
legal issues and cases of injustice. Lack of understanding about the correct legal processes are not only experienced
by the poor and marginalized, but also by the middle class. In the processing of cases there are sometimes problems
due to factors outside the legal procedure. There are several reasons that people do not have access to justice:
- Weakness of understanding the legal process;
- not having bargaining power;
- reluctance to go to law enforcement authorities;
- not having access because of economical reasons.
In 2011 Hapin supported LBH Papua's (Lembaga Bantuan Hukum - Legal Aid Institute Papua) desire to educate the
people of Papua to understand the procedures for proper management of legal procedures.
The people chosen from the villages and small NGO's were very enthusiastic about this kind of education having taken
place in Merauke. They see now that actual law and regulations can be actualized in the places they live in and
amongst themselves. Most important is that they realize that things can work to their benefit, especially once you
know the rules!
3.3 Land rights
“[T]he so-called paradox of Papua […] is [that it is] the wealthiest of Provinces but [it] has the highest levels
of poverty in the country. Papua has huge reserves of natural resources in the mining and oil and gas sectors
and continues to contain some 85% forest cover, including large reserves of commercially valuable lowland
rainforest. The speed with which forest is being converted and the scale of plans for further conversion for
industries such as oil palm and bio-fuels is of global concern because of the importance of forest to climate
change mitigations but also because of the disenfranchisement of ethnic Papuans from their traditional
landscapes and lifestyles”.3
Rights are long and costly. This makes it hard to support these activities even for funding agencies much larger than
Hapin. For their livelihood, many Papuans depend on their direct natural environment. A persistent problem is that
customary (adat) land rights are not or hardly recognized by law. The increased activities of plantation companies and
extractive industries make protection of adat land rights more important than ever. For quite some time NGO’s engage
in participatory community land mapping, but further support and policy development in this field is needed. For
instance, good maps are being made, but further steps towards recognition by local governments fail.
In the past Hapin supported Mnukwar Media Centre. Mnukwar uses film as a means for lobby, extension and
information work. The idea is that the people themselves learn to film their living conditions, including land rights
matters. Mnukwar has a good track record. They produced widely distributed films on environmental degradation in
Papua, with the help of international EIA and Indonesian Telapak Foundations. Film titles are: The Tears of Mother
Destiny ...My Land,5
Gaharu Business - Blessing or Disaster6
and Defenders of the Tribal Boundaries7
Mnukwar would like to expand their work to the Vogelkop area and requested supported from Hapin. The Project
application however was too ambitious and according to our opinion not realistic. We have asked them to rewrite the
application. Until now we have not received a new application, which is the reason why we were not able to support
land rights projects in 2011. Therefore the result of our work concerning the protection of customary land rights has
been disappointing. After becoming engaged with the land rights issue and NGO’s involved, we learned that usually the
processes with the aim of securing land
USAID/Indonesia, Papua Assessment, Final Report, 2009. p. X.
3.4 Small business support
“Waiting at the periphery of development, like spectators, are the subsistence farmers of Papua – […] waiting
to understand, to join, to contribute, to play their part in Papua’s development. They are waiting to turn their
energies into cash that will fuel their local economies”.8
Related to the protection of the means of production and the wish for more vocational training is the fact that the
people should be able to make more money from the wealth of their natural environment. Instead of the environment
just being the subsistence for livelihood, small steps could be taken to monetize its wealth. In fact, it is all about the
development of indigenous entrepreneurship, including marketing skills. However, using the already existing
knowledge and capacity of the people in economic activities is a pre-condition. Many projects fail because techniques
and methods introduced were totally new to the beneficiaries. Often, in the non-participatory phase of project design
no effort was made to build upon existing economic potential of the communities.
Generating an income is very important for self-determination at the family and
community level. It provides money for schooling, medicine and allows the
people more freedom of choice. Consequently, Hapin supports small scale
economic development. In Jayapura we support a project that rehabilitates
existing people’s small scale cocoa plantations. However a lot of discussion was
needed with the implementing organization about their plans. As is often the
case in Papua, expectations towards donors regarding funds to be received are
high, with budgets linked to plans that are not feasible or sustainable. In this
case, after discussions, the budget was brought down to one-fifth of the original.
3.5 Sister act
The sister organization in Papua, Pt. Hapin (Pt. = Perkumpulan terbatas, Limited Association) was established on
2010. The organization started with managing director Jaap van der Werf and project manager Derek
Windessy. Eventually Cynthia Warwe joined the team. Jaap van der Werf is an old contact of Hapin and has been
treasurer of the Hapin funds in Papua already more than five years. Jaap van der Werf first travelled to Papua as a
missionary, fell in love with the country and never left. Derek Windessy is an alumnus of the Hapin Study Grants
Programme. He graduated in Theology but worked with numerous NGO’s within Papua that focused on human rights
and health issues. Cyntia Warwe studied in Makassar and has done volunteer work for different NGO’s in Jayapura with
a main focus on legal assistance. At Pt. Hapin she is responsible for the financial administration. Moreover she is
lobbying for the rights of Papuan market women to have their own market area (Mama Mama Papua).
UNDP: A Multistakeholder Synthesis of the Development Situation in Papua, 2005, p. 39.
Derek, Cyntia & Jaap at the front of their new office
Preliminary discussions about the actual legal status of Hapin's activities in Papua took place in 2005, when the then
active programme officer expressed concern on how to answer questions of Hapin's responsibility for social security
and welfare towards the people that were locally employed. Finally a "Limited Association" was created by notary act
which allows Pt. Hapin to receive domestic and foreign financial aid. They have a clear mission statement to do certain
activities under Indonesian law, in the name of that association, with local registration and recognition. This particular
legal shape, although relatively new, is now being favored by many former foundations, while they can operate more
freely, without being encumbered by too many rules and regulations.
The main reason for the creation of this Limited Association Pt. Hapin is in the starting up of a new initiative in Papua
itself with and for Papuans, to grow, expand and develop with activities that come from within their own society,
according to their needs. It is Hapin NL’s effort to shift responsibility to Papua. It also provides the opportunity to
better organize the so called ‘downward accountability’. Papuans will be members of a Papuan organization, exerting
direct influence on both Hapin’s and Pt. Hapin’s policies.
Members of the Board of Pt. Hapin
In 2011 Pt. Hapin gathered a group or well-known Papuans with high credentials and many years of experience for the
Board members and Executives:
Drs. Theofilus Bonay. SH, MM, Retired Chairman DPRD Kota Jayapura (2009)
Dr. Benny Giay. MBA, Head of Studies, Church & Society, Walter Post Theological College
Dr. Ignasius Ngari. MBA, Lecturer at Fajar Timur Theological College
Drs. Yusak E. Reba.
SH, Lecturer at Faculty of Law, Uncen, Coordinator Program
Institute for Civil Strengthening Papua
Drs. Phile T.R.R. Bonay. S.Psi, Hapin advisor Jayapura district, study coordinator
Jaap M. van der Werf.
Dutch born Indonesian national, long time Jayapura resident, formerly manager at
Irian Jaya Joint Development Foundation.
In developing Pt. Hapin, the Advisory Board and Executives have to find ways and means to create and build up their
own financial base, so as to be self–supporting. By doing so, Pt Hapin will develop its own identity and by growing will
gain self-confidence. In the process Pt. Hapin will be advised and supported by Hapin NL, on equal footing and with
mutual benefit. Pt Hapin also expands the possibilities of fundraising, domestically and internationally.
Relation between Pt. Hapin and Hapin NL
For Hapin NL, Pt. Hapin can be regarded as a project and is indeed so in administrative terms. The development of Pt.
Hapin directly contributes to capacity building in Papua and indirectly to the other primary goals Hapin NL wants to
achieve in Papua. However, Pt. Hapin and Hapin NL have a special relationship that goes beyond that of just a donor-
recipient one. This is why the conditions of financial support from Hapin NL to Pt. Hapin are described in a
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU).
Setting up a local organization is a process of trial and error and is a longer process than we had taken into account.
2011 was a learning process for us. The transfer of responsibilities to Papua was too soon and went too fast. The staff
in Papua had problems keeping up with the tasks of setting up an organization from scratch and the assumption of
Hapin NL that they would be able to fundraise without the years of experience the staff in the Netherlands had. On top
of that the Board of Members in Papua proved to be qualified but inactive. They gave no guidance or support to the Pt.
Another contributing factor to the delayed development of Pt. Hapin was the departure of managing director and
founding father of Pt. Hapin, Jeroen Overweel. Jeroen started devoting his working life to Papua already in 1993 when
he lived in Merauke and worked for a small local development organization. He is the author of a study on social-
economic change in the Marind society. In short with him a pool of knowledge on development aid in Papua and the
Netherlands left. Pt. Hapin lost its ‘guru’. Because of budget costs in the Netherlands his position was not filled by a
new managing director but taken over by the remaining staff, Sophie Schreurs and Reinier de Lang. It took some time
for the staff, both in the Netherlands and in Papua, to adjust.
During the 2011 elections in Merauke a new district leader was installed in office. With the installation of the new
district leader all policies and staff members of former friendly government departments were replaced and adjusted to
new policies and people in charge. One of the consequences was the undoing of a network of cooperation and
understanding that had been established and was active for a decade by our partner in Merauke, Almamater
Foundation. Despite many months of working very hard on establishing new relationships, the outcome was not strong
enough to keep the foundation from floundering.
Hapin has suffered from elections in the past as well. Many activities, other than campaigning for elections, come to a
standstill and more importantly the elections have an effect on our network within Papua. Often our local
representatives are elected in the local parliament or in the case of Merauke working relationships with local officials
and therefore agreements are offset. Resulting in serious cracks in our network and the diminishing numbers of
project applications, Pt. Hapin had to focus a lot of its energy on re-establishing the network in Papua.
Pt. Hapin is considered a sister organization which will be able to be self-reliant and raise its own funds in the future.
Hapin NL will always assist Pt. Hapin when possible but in essence they have to write their own project applications
and proposals for Hapin NL and other Dutch, international or local NGO’s. What became clear was that the staff in
Papua needs more guidance in writing proposals. Hapin NL has to set up a workshop for them on the process, planning
and analyzing of a proposal. Given this Pt. Hapin needs more time to develop herself and get acquainted with the lingo
of development aid.
As a new organization in the field of development aid Pt. Hapin needs more time to mature than we initially expected.
The setbacks in 2011 resulted in a fragmented organization that needed more support from Hapin NL. Pt. Hapin will
shift its attention to networking and acquiring knowledge. The transferring of responsibilities will be put on hold in
order for Pt. Hapin to strengthen itself into a solid foundation in which they will be able to expand and be self-reliant in
every sense of the word and focus on grant proposal writing.
4. ACTIVITIES IN THE NETHERLANDS
Like other small organizations in the Netherlands Hapin’s private donors diminished in comparison to 2011 with 65%.
However the number of new donors more than doubled in comparison to the previous years but not enough to
compensate the loss of private donors. Another intriguing fact is that the donations of private persons was stable even
though the number of private persons diminished with 65%.
Our presence at the large multicultural festival
Amsterdam Roots Open Air is a returning annual event.
On this event visitors can listen to music, taste food with
flavors from around the world and search for indigenous
art and jewellery (in our case woodcarvings and bark
paintings). Thanks to the efforts and enthusiasm of our
volunteers this year a total sum of € 650, - was collected.
We already have some returning people coming to our
stand who always stop by for a chat about Papua en its
Volunteers: Elen Bless & Theresia Maturbongs
Our newsletter, which is published three times a year, is run by volunteers as well. During the years a good symbiosis
has been established by our editor, Marl Pluijmen, and the staff of Hapin. Through our newsletter we keep our private
donors and institutional donors updated on our activities, projects and funded students. In the future we would like to
create an electronic newsletter in order to reach new regular donors and to offer an alternative to our printed
Information to the Dutch public
In January 2010, Viktor Kaisiëpo, an important Papua
lobbyist, passed away. His memoires were collected and
published in an autobiography, ‘Een perspectief voor
Papoea. Het verhaal van mijn leven en mijn strijd’ (A
Perspective for Papua: The Story of my Struggle). Hapin’s
donation, in cooperation with Pro Papua, enabled inclusion of
many pictures and better quality printing.
The book was launched on February 11th
2011, with great success. The book can be purchased at KITLV publishers.
Because of the success and the demand, the book has been translated to Indonesian (Satu Perspektif untuk Papua:
Cerita kehidupan dan perjuanganku) and was published in July 2012 in Jakarta.
A book by Charles Farhadian, ‘The testimony Project Papua: A collection of Personal Histories in West Papua’ was
translated into Dutch with help of Hapin board member At Ipenburg. The book can be purchased through the website
of Hapin. The main objective of Hapin’s webshop is to spread knowledge and information to the Dutch public on topics
of Papua. Hapin is not aspiring to have a web shop that can generate a profitable income.
A recurrent annual event that Hapin supports is the ‘Papua Solidariteitsdagen’ (Papua Solidarity Days). Every year a
new topic is treated and different guests from Indonesia attend this event as lecturers. In 2011 the topic was ‘human
rights’ and the lecturers were:
Dr. Ibrahim Peyon Cultural anthropologist and teacher at the Cendrawasih University, Jayapura.
Ds. Dora Balubun Managing director of the Protestant Church in Papua .
Dr. Soei Liong Liem Contributor of numerous articles published by LIPI, the Indonesian Institute of Science.
Hapin tries to profile itself more on the internet. A lot of students in the Student Grant Programme use social media,
Facebook in particular. In the past Hapin has tried to set up an Alumni Association but it proved to be too ambitious.
Facebook will serve as an alternative means to solve this problem. On Facebook we have an Alumni Fan page on which
the students can contact us and ask us questions directly, which can be answered either by us or by other
students/people within that group.
With Twitter we try to inform the public with news published by Indonesian newspapers or other sources. We also use
Twitter to inform the public on Papua events or interesting exhibitions in the Netherlands. Documentaries or other
films by our counterparts in Papua, for example filming studio Mnukwar, are published through YouTube or other
online video hosting websites such as Dailymotion. In short, Hapin uses social media, such as Facebook and Twitter,
as an alternative means of information distribution. Facebook is also a tool to keep in contact with (former) students of
Hapin and a means to monitor them after they graduate.
The organization has to adapt itself to sudden new realities in 2011. As well in the staffing as in housing we faced
major changes. We also have to take some financial setbacks into consideration.
Managing Director Jeroen Overweel left Hapin after 6.5 years. Jeroen has been involved with Papua many years and
was important for the change of strategy within Hapin. He played an important role in the establishment of our sister
organization Pt. Hapin. On the 1st
of July Jeroen started with a new job at the Burma Centre Netherlands (BCN).
The Board of Hapin decided not to replace Jeroen as managing director. Due to decreasing income, a necessary cut in
expenses and the planned shift of project management to Pt. Hapin the remaining staff, Sophie Schreurs and Reinier
de Lang, were asked to accompany the change of strategy and the continuation of Hapin NL. The task and duties of a
managing director are equally divided over Hapin’s remaining staff members. In theory Sophie Schreurs is acting
Managing Director but in practice this task is divided over both Sophie Schreurs and Reinier de Lang.
With the decision not to replace the position of the managing director the role and position of Hapin’s board of
members will change. In the next years it will become noticeable whether Hapin will still be a professional organization
(with one or two employees) or will grow into a volunteer’s organization with a more manifest position of the board.
The functions of the remaining staff members were renamed:
Sophie Schreurs: Programme and Communication Manager, (acting) Managing Director.
Reinier de Lang : Programme and Financial Manager.
Both are working part time, 3 resp. 2 days a week and have permanent contracts.
At the end of 2011 the figure was 1.4 FTE (in 2010: 1.6 FTE).
Hapin works with several volunteers on a regular and irregular basis. We have been working with two volunteers from
Vrijwilligerswerk Utrecht. Sadly both of them encountered health problems which forced them to leave Hapin during
2011. We are very grateful for their work and effort they put into Hapin. Two other volunteers, one for the financial
administration, the other for fundraising and organizational development, came from our donor network. Unfortunately
one of them had a grave accident which made it impossible for her to do administrative work. We hope that she will
recover soon. Our fundraising volunteer aspired to work on contractual basis for Hapin. Sadly we were not able to
meet his request due to financial setbacks.
A lot of people support Hapin on an irregular basis. The chief editor of our Newsletter, Marl Pluijmen, is already 6 years
involved as editor and webmaster. Hapin can also rely on a pool of volunteers that can staff the market stands during
festivals and other gatherings.
Information and Technology
While thinking and planning to move to another office we realized that this was the opportunity to create the
conditions for an ‘office free’ Hapin. Our computer equipment was old and had to be replaced. Thanks to our
accreditation as ANBI institution we had access to the donation programme of Techsoup. The Dutch branch of
Techsoup is a cooperation of SOCIAL ware VZW (Belgium), Stichting GeefGratis en TechSoup Global.
TechSoup Global was established in 2002 in the United States. With TechSoup, non-profit organizations like Hapin
have the possibility to acquire well-known software and hardware against a very low prize. Thanks to Hapin’s
participation in this programme Microsoft donated € 6.000 to Hapin. The second step was to use only work stations at
the office. That makes it easy to work from home and, when necessary, an ‘office free’ Hapin will be possible!
Our landlord PACE closed its office in May 2011. We were allowed to stay in the office while the owner was thinking
about a user’s contract with Hapin. In July the owner of the office and now new landlord of Hapin, presented a contract
for 23 months, until August 2013. In the meantime we had been looking for cheaper alternatives. In addition to the
necessity of cost reduction, the office in St. Jacobsstraat lost its charm after the forced moving of PACE, which made
the office too big for us.
Eventually we succeeded in finding a small office in a big office building in Lombok, near the Laan van Nieuw Guinea.
We signed a contract until the end of 2012 with very good secondary conditions (e.g. once a month free usage of
meeting rooms). Recent news however informed us that the owner/landlord of this location has financial problems.
Thus, it might happen that we are again forced to look for a new office location in 2013.
5.3 External networks
In the Netherlands some small Papua support organizations have been forced to end their activities because the
members of the board are of age and retired. One of them, Stichting Nieuw Guinea (New Guinea Foundation),
contacted us because they wanted to transfer their activities and, in due course, their assets to Hapin. The
chairperson, Harry de Graaf, is one of the two honorary citizens of Texel Island. He is a former Netherlands New
Guinea veteran, who set up the foundation to raise funds for study grants for Papuans. Stichting Nieuw Guinea will
continue to exist as a separate entity to facilitate the Texel fundraising which is still done by Harry. Stichting Nieuw
Guinea considers Hapin as its heir.
Contacts with another foundation Papoea Jeugd Naar School (PJNS – Papua Youth to School) were intensified. PJNS
celebrated its 25th
anniversary in 2011. They are based especially in Merauke and surroundings. Their main aim is to
support school children. We hope to cooperate with them more in the next years.
Occasionally we participate in the Samenwerkende Organisaties West Papua (SOWP – Cooperating Organizations West
Papua). SOWP is a cooperation of different Dutch based foundations that support projects in (West) Papua. Their main
goal is to exchange information and knowledge in the field of project management in Papua.
In 2011, Hapin continued its membership to the Indonesia Council, a group of Dutch NGO’s who are active in
Indonesia. Hapin’s membership is free. The meetings of the Council are organized by the Lobby Bureau for
Development Cooperation (BBO). BBO advises civil society organisations on the use of lobbying and advocacy as
strategic instruments to influence policy makers and politicians.
BBO maintains good contacts with Dutch politicians and officials in the field of Foreign Affairs and scientists, thus
providing the members of the Council with up to date information on Dutch governmental policy and lobby
opportunities. Special meetings provide members with in depth information on certain topics. In December the issue
discussed was on the environment and plantations in Indonesia. Finally, the Council members exchanged information
on their respective activities.
In 2008 Hapin became member of an informal group consisting of young, small, but professional organizations that
lobby for extra funding from the Directoraat-generaal Internationale Samenwerking (DGIS – Dutch Directorate General
for International Cooperation). This group also organized capacity building courses for its members. On 25 February
2010 the group was formally established as NieuwIS (short for – In Dutch – ‘New International Cooperation’). NieuwIS
is an association and will represent the group for lobby purposes, will collectively bargain for courses and will exchange
information. For Hapin, NieuwIS is particularly useful for its special information meetings, for instance on fundraising.
At the end of 2011 Hapin NL was recipient of a sizeable amount of money from a last will of a donor that will enable
Hapin NL to keep on functioning with paid staff until at least 2012. The main challenge was to find an alternative for
the Oxfam Novib funding, which, together with the contributions from individual donators, formed the main source of
income for Hapin. So far we have not yet succeeded due to the following reasons:
• Less involvement of Dutch NGO’s with Papua.
• Hapin is a grant maker, while usually funding is for rounded off projects.
• No willingness to fund a Dutch organization for project funds in Papua as there is a preference for funding
Papuan organizations directly.
• Less money available due to the financial crisis.
• Limited fundraising capacity within Hapin.
• Limited resources for fundraising.
Still, at the start of 2011 we formulated plans for fundraising and implemented them as follows:
• Private donors. Our donor administration has been thoroughly updated. Two volunteers combed through our
database, actualized it and as a result made an old co-existing database redundant. Campaigns for attracting
new individual donors have been set on hold as of 2010 on cost and capacity grounds. Therefore in 2011 no
capacity and resources have been allocated for such an initiative.
• A lot of work has been put into finalizing the new three language website. And of course links have been made
to the new social media. This is a way of reaching a new and partly younger target group. Also travel
information has been put on the website, because people travelling to Papua are an important target group.
Actions like these are relatively low cost.
• General one-off donations. The bigger ones of these are last will donations from present Hapin donors. In 2011
Hapin has repeated information about last wills in its newsletter that is being published three times a year
• In 2010 the co funding of Oxfam Novib has ended. Hapin does not expect to find a one-on-one replacement for
Oxfam Novib. This is a result of changing development aid funding through official channels (through the
Directoraat-generaal Internationale Samenwerking). But in the meantime there are still prospects for project
co-financing with those NGO’s still active in Papua: Mensen met een Missie, Hivos, IUCN and ICCO.
• Hapin had started submitting proposals for co-funding to specific social charities. Overall first experiences point
at a general cut back of activities of old established endowment charities because of shortage of funds. Reason
for this appears to be the still existing credit crunch. This situation did not change in 2011. However,
submissions to social charities for the Student Grants Programme were started in 2010 and developed in 2011,
but with little result.
• Direct funding of Pt. Hapin. In 2011 PCN (Protestant Church of the Netherlands) has approved a contribution of
€ 20.000,- for small scale projects executed by Pt. Hapin
In 2008, Hapin NL adjusted its governance structure according to the (so-called) Code Wijffels. The governance of
Hapin NL consists of the following elements:
- The explicit responsibility of the Board is to monitor and supervise the organization.
- The managing director (Jeroen Overweel until July 1st
2011) was the only member of the directorate. Since
2011 Sophie Schreurs is operating as acting director.
Listed below are the members of the board, their function in the board and their societal occupation. The board
members act on a strictly voluntary basis. Unfortunately, Wim Westerbaan (Board Member since 2007) resigned in
November 2011 for personal reasons. He was appreciated highly because of his knowledge of Bahasa Indonesia and
his involvement with Hapin’s Study Grants Programme.
According to Hapin’s Statutes:
1. Hapin needs at least 5 board members.
2. Board Members can be reappointed immediately.
3. Nomination period is 4 years
At the end of 2011 Mr. Cius Sawor was asked to become member of the Board of Hapin. To our knowledge he will
accede in 2012.
Name Function Board
2006 Communication Advisor Delft Technical University,
Volunteer Hospice de Vier Vogels Rotterdam,
Volunteer Vrijwilligers Terminale Zorg (VTZ) Rotterdam
Treasurer 2007 Partner AEF Consultancy
Treasurer A Propos Foundation
2007 Senior Policy Advisor Zorgbelang Overijssel
2006 Preacher, Webmaster http://remonstranten.org
Chair IARF Netherlands (International Association for Religious
Chair LDI Foundation (Library Development Indonesia), Chair
D66 working group ‘Religie en Levensbeschouwing’
Member 2007 Senator, Veterinary consultant,
2 commissariats, chair of several organizations (nature
conservation, branch association)
Member 2007 Director Welfare Institution
Resignation plan of the Board
Name In function
Inggamer, Wytske 2006 2010 2014
Ipenburg, At 2006 2010 2014
Benedictus, Geart 2007 2011 2015
Itaar, David 2007 2012 2016
Lustgraaf, Rob v.d. 2007 2012 2016
Rietmole, Maaike te 2007 2012 2016
Income from fundraising 196.000
Other income 800
Total income 196.800
Structural help 102.007
Total expenses on objectives 147.459
Costs of Fundraising 35.754
Management & Administration(M&A) 10.301
Total expenses 193.514
% costs fundraising 18,24%
% income assigned to objectives 74,93%
% expenditures assigned to objectives 76,20%
costs M&A in % total expenses 5,32%
Non - current assets
tangible fixed assets(1) 13.779 8.282
receivables and accrued income(2) 29.546 15.074
Cash and bank balances(3) 126.875 257.509
TOTAL ASSETS 170.200 280.865
Reserves and funds
continuity reserve(4) 60.000 60.000
earmarked reserve(5) 0 12.980
(other)general reserve(6) 58.668 57.545
earmarked funds(7) 0 755
investment contribution(8) 6.534 0
Accruels and deferred income(9) 44.998 149.585
TOTAL LIABILITIES 170.200 280.865
(after appropriation of result)
STATEMENTOF INCOME ANDEXPENDITURE 2011
realization budget difference realization
Income from own fundraising(10) 187.227 246.000 58.773- 163.731
Income from institutional donors(11) - - - 68.359
other benefits(12) 3.603 25.000 21.397- 7.284
Total income 190.830 271.000 80.170- 239.374
realization budget difference realization
Expenses to objectives
Small scale projects in Papua(13) 77.564 205.000 127.436- 231.449
Education Projects in PNG(14) - - - 17.346
Boarding houses(15) 29.859 25.000 4.859 32.981
Study grants(16) 27.637 40.000 12.363- 40.889
Subtotal expenditure in Papua 135.060 164.750 29.690- 322.665
Advocacy(17) 37.907 39.375 1.468- 49.578
172.967 204.125 31.158- 372.243
Costs of own fundraising(18) 22.767 50.625 27.858- 27.105
Management & Administration
Costs of Management & Administration(19) 6.953 16.250 9.297- 17.391
Total expenditure 202.687 271.000 68.313- 416.739
Result 11.857- - 11.857- 177.365-
Appropriation of result(summary)
Addition to/withdrawal from(+/-)
continuity reserve -
earmarked reserve 12.980
(other)general reserve 1.123-
DESTINATION Realization Budget Realization
Grants Advocacy 2011 2011 2010
Expenses A B C D E F
Subsidies and Contributions 14.985 15.953 6.778 8.186 0 0 45.902 88.500 199.748
Publicity and Communications 0 0 0 8.861 8.861 0 17.721 20.000 19.429
Personnel Costs Netherlands 40.670 9.038 13.557 13.557 9.038 4.519 90.377 128.000 128.233
Personnel Costs Papua 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23.652
Rental Costs 5.934 1.319 1.978 1.978 1.319 659 13.187 15.000 15.910
Office Costs 13.264 2.947 4.421 4.421 2.947 1.474 29.475 15.000 24.386
Depreciation and Rent 2.711 603 904 904 603 301 6.026 4.500 5.380
Total 77.564 29.859 27.637 37.907 22.767 6.953 202.687 271.000 416.738
Distributionof expenditures 2011
The allocation of expenditures is based on the same principle as last year: personnel costs spent on the objectives.
The costs are allocated to the expenditures according to the statement below:
ALLOCATION WORKED HOURS
Projects Papua A 45%
Boarding houses B 10%
Study Grants C 15%
Advocacy D 15%
(own) Fundraising E 10%
Management & Administration F 5%
Salaries incl. holiday pay 61.968 92.282
Social insurance 10.549 14.921
Other personnel expenditures:
(including cost allowances for volunteers)
Pension insurance 7.216 9.720
Health insurance 3.933 4.823
Local travel costs 4.317 3.758
Other personel expenses 2.393 2.729
Total personnel costs 90.375 128.233
Salaries of staff and allowances for volunteers
Hapin has developed its own salary scales traced back to the salary scales of Oxfam Novib. The average amount of staff
members for 2011 is 1.4 full time equivalents (fte). Expenditures on personnel costs in 2010 were € 90.375 (2010: €
In 2011 we have been working on regular base of four days a week with one volunteer who received a cost allowance for
travel costs. Other volunteers who were involved with Hapin at (for example) Roots Festival Amsterdam also received a
cost allowance for travel costs
In total we have paid on travel costs for volunteers: € 1.184
The salary of managing director Jeroen Overweel in 2011 was € 29.999 until 1 July 2011 (2010: € 55.225). His pension
insurance in 2011 was € 4.000. Jeroen had a contract of 32 hours, 4 days a week.
The salary of the acting managing director, Sophie Schreurs, was in 2011 € 23.515. She has a part-time contract of 3
days, 24 hours a week.
Donations from private persons and other 187.227
Donations from institutional donors and other -
Expenses on fundraising 22.767-
Expenses on advocacy 37.907-
Expenses on projects(structural assistance) 135.060-
Expenses management and administration 6.953-
Cash flowfrom objectives 15.460-
Interest and other revenues 3.603
Cash flowfrom operational activitities 11.857-
Mutations in receivables and accrued income 14.472-
Mutations in accruels and deferred income 104.587-
Mutation in reserves/funds 755-
Investments in tangible fixed assets 11.335-
Depreciation on tangible fixed asset 5.838
Cash flow from investment activities 5.497-
Cash flowfrom financing activities
Investment contribution 6.534
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents 130.634-
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 257.509
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period 126.875
General accounting principles for the preparation of the financial statements
For the preparation and presentation of the financial statements, Hapin uses the Guidelines for annual reporting of the
Dutch Accounting Standards Board, especially Guideline 650 “Fundraising organizations”.
Valuation of assets and liabilities and the determination of results take place under the historical cost convention. Unless
presented otherwise, the relevant principle for the specific balance sheet item, assets and liabilities are presented at
nominal value. Income and expenses are accounted on accrual basis. Expenses are determined taking the mentioned
valuation principle into account. Profit is only included when realized on balance sheet date. Losses originating before the
end of the financial year are taken into account when ascertained before preparation of the financial statements.
Principles of valuation of assets and liabilities
Non- current assets (tangible fixed assets)
Tangible fixed assets are presented at cost minus accumulated depreciation and, if applicable, minus impairments in
value. Depreciation is based on the estimated useful life and calculated as a fixed percentage of cost. Depreciation is
provided from the date an asset comes into use.
The following fixed percentages of cost are used for depreciation:
• Computers: 20% a year;
• Software: 20% a year;
• Office equipment: 20% a year.
Receivables are included at face value, minus any provision for doubtful accounts. These provisions are determined by
individual assessment of the receivables.
Cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents are valued at nominal value. All cash and cash equivalents are available for expenditure by
Reserves and Funds
Foundation Hapin is obliged to use reserves and funds in accordance with the objective(s) they are related to.
Debts and financial liabilities are valued at nominal value. Payable projects and study grants are accounted for in the year
of reporting. It is an obligation to project partners and students for the next year.
Principles for the determination of the result
Grants are included in the statement of income and expenditure in the year in which the subsidized expenses are realized.
Receivables, debts and liabilities in foreign currencies are converted at the exchange rate at December 31.
Transactions in foreign currencies are converted at the average monthly exchange rate. The conversion is based on the EU
A positive or negative result is, after allocation to earmarked reserves, earmarked funds and continuity reserves, destined
for the general reserves. The allocated reserve for continuity is restricted to a maximum for covering half a year of salary
and organization costs.
(all amounts in euro)
1 2011 2010
balance as at 1 January 8.282 13.662
desinvestments 413- -
depreciation 5.838 5.380
balance as at 31 December 13.779 8.282
Non - current assets(intangible fixed assets)
Notes to the BALANCE SHEETas at 31 December 2011: ASSETS
We invested in 2011 in a complete new ICT system. Thanks to a donation of Microsoft we could install
the newest software. That makes it possible to work everywhere we want. It will make it possible to
reduce office costs in the nearby future. (See also annex 1 Depreciation Sheet)
2 Prepayments and accrued income 31-12-2011 31-12-2010
debtors 165 644
interest 2.107 3.472
inheritances 20.000 -
deposit rent St Jacobsstraat - 2.500
deposit TNT POST 500 440
other prepayments 930 6.990
subsidy receivables - -
other receivables 5.844 1.028
balance as at 31 December 29.546 15.074
- At the end of 2011 we were informed about an inheritance in favor of HAPIN of € 20.000.
- On the first of November 2011 we left the office in St Jacobsstraat. The deposit was refunded.
- Other receivables consist of a credit from Zwitserleven, the company where the pensions of Hapin’s
staff are assured. (€ 4.904) and of promised donations of private persons that were received in
2011 (€ 940).
3 Cash and bank balances 31-12-2011 31-12-2010
Rabobank 4440.72.470 11.758 45.686
Rabobank 3870.19.901 312 2.381
Rabobank 3628.888.069 111.000 200.000
ING Bank 243000 652 3.697
ING Bank Rentemeerrekening 109 -
Mandiribank 3.043 5.745
balance as at 31 December 126.875 257.509
All bank balances are available for expenditure by Hapin.
The balance of Mandiribank in Indonesian Rupiah is 37.159.039
It is converted at the exchange rate of December 2011: 1 EURO equals 12.211 Indonesian Rupiah
Notes to the BALANCE SHEETas at 31 December 2011: LIABILITIES
(all amounts in euro)
Reserves and funds 31-12-2011 31-12-2010
continuity reserve 60.000 60.000
earmarked reserve - 12.980
(other)general reserve 58.668 57.545
earmarked funds - 755
Reserves 2011 2010
4 Continuity reserve
balance as at 1 January 2011 60.000 75.000
withdrawal from general reserve - 15.000-
balance as at 31 December 60.000 60.000
The continuity reserve is on the same level as in 2010. For Hapin the norm for this reserve
has been: 50% of the personnel and the fixed organization costs. In 2011 we realized cost reduction
and cost flexibility. That makes it possible to keep this reserve on the same level.
5 Earmarked reserve 2011 2010
balance as at 1 January 2011 12.980 10.177
withdrawal from earmarked reserve 12.980- 11.453
Papua New Guinea - 8.650-
balance as at 31 December - 12.980
The earmarked reserve was meant for financing the investment costs of our sister organization
Pt. Hapin: renovation of their new office, equipment for the office and so on.
6 General reserve(other reserve) 2011 2010
balance as at 1 January 2011 57.545 159.035
withdrawal from earmarked fund - 132.035
withdrawal from continuity reserve - 15.000
withdrawal from earmarked reserve 12.980 8.650
surplus - -
addition to earmarked fund - 68.359-
addition to earmarked reserve - 11.453-
addition to continuity reserve - -
deficit 11.857- 177.363-
balance as at 31 December 58.668 57.545
The general reserve is free. The main reason that we keep this reserve is the obligations we
have to our students. We feel obliged to guarantee them a four year study grant. A substantial
part of this reserve (€ 40.000) is meant to be able keeping our promises to the students.
Notes to the BALANCE SHEETas at 31 December 2011: LIABILITIES
(all amounts in euro)
7 Earmarked Funds 2011 2010
balance as at 1 January 2011 755 64.431
Oxfam Novib contribution 2010 68.359
expenditures in 2010
project expenditures 117.676-
expenditures on personnell costs 11.359-
other expenditures 3.000-
repayment to Oxfam Novib in 2011 755-
balance as at 31 December - 755
8 Investment contribution 2011 2010
investment contribution Microsoft 6.534 0
The investment contribution is a donation of Microsoft to Hapin. That donation was € 6.759.
Every year it will decrease by the depreciation of the software Microsoft donated.
9 Accruels and deferred income 31-12-2011 31-12-2010
creditors 2.725 18.541
social securities(payroll tax) 1.043 2.900
salaries - 2.646
holiday pay 1.946 4.000
studygrants 5.000 12.000
projects 26.744 98.802
audit fee 7.000 4.500
other 540 6.196
balance as at 31 December 44.998 149.585
The financial commitment for projects and study grants is always on annual basis.
The commitment for study grants is less than in 2010 due to the fact that Hapin financed many students in 2010
that were finishing their studies. In their last year our students have more financial obligations (for example
exam fees). That’s why Hapin doubles their yearly study grant. In 2011 most of our students were starting.
With respect to the project support, Hapin is financing especially Pt. Hapin, our sister organization in Papua,
which is responsible for monitoring and evaluating projects financed by Hapin and other donors. In 2010 we were
committed not only to Pt. Hapin, but also to projects approved in 2009 which were not paid out in that year.
Off balance rights and obligations
Since November 1 2011 Hapin rented an office of 25m2 in an office building at Niasstraat in the suburb Lombok
in Utrecht. We have a full service contract for one year, until 31 December 2012. The yearly costs are € 10.876.
A year contract in office renting is quite remarkable. Especially in our unsecure situation in the period of
transition it seemed better to opt for a year contract.
Pt. Hapin and Hapin NL signed a Memorandum of Understanding from which a four year obligation arose for
Hapin. This obligation amounts to € 57.000.
10 Income own fundraising 2011 2010
donations from private persons 142.630 153.002
earmarked donations - -
other donations 9.929 -
legacies 25.908 6.664
other income 8.761 4.065
Subtotal income own fundraising 187.227 163.731
Notes to the Statement of Income and Expenditure
Due to legacies of € 25.908 and gifts from Lions Club Joure and the Gloag Foundation (€ 9.929) our income from
own fundraising was substantially higher than in 2010. The continuation of decreasing income from private
donors is a great concern to us. The main explanation is the ageing of our donors and the problems we
experience to attract new donors.
11 Income from institutional donors 2011 2010
Oxfam Novib 0 68.359
Subtotal income from institutional donors 0 68.359
12 Other benefits 2.011 2010
interest 2.277 4.177
Other benefits 1.326 3.107
Subtotal income from other contributions 3.603 7.284
Total income 190.830 239.374
13 Small Scale Projects in Papua 2011 2010
contributions 14.985 138.233
publicity and communications - -
personnel costs 40.670 74.945
rental costs 5.934 6.364
office expenditure 13.264 9.755
depreciation and rent 2.711 2.152
Notes to the Statement of Income and Expenditure
In 2011 we experienced a cut back in project proposals that are worth subsidizing. At the same time some
projects approved in 2009 and 2010 and planned for implementation seemed, after evaluation of Pt. Hapin, not
sustainable. Part of the reservation of € 98.802 in 2010, € 12.770, was not used.
14 Eduation Projects in Papua NewGuinea 2011 2010
contributions 0 8.650
publicity and communications 0 -
personnel costs 0 6.412
rental costs 0 796
office expenditure 0 1.219
depreciation and rent 0 269
We stopped our contributions to education projects in Papua New Guinea because we want to concentrate on
(West) Papua. Furthermore in practice it is difficult to monitor the spending.
15 Boarding Houses 2011 2010
contributions 15.953 15.591
publicity and communications - -
personnel costs 9.038 12.823
rental costs 1.319 1.591
office expenditure 2.947 2.439
depreciation and rent 603 538
16 Study Grants 2011 2010
contributions 6.778 23.498
publicity and communications - -
personnel costs 13.557 12.823
rental costs 1.978 1.591
office expenditure 4.421 2.439
depreciation and rent 904 538
Notes to the Statement of Income and Expenditure
17 Advocacy 2011 2010
contributions 8.186 13.777
publicity and communications 8.861 9.714
personnel costs 13.557 19.235
rental costs 1.978 2.387
office expenditure 4.421 3.658
depreciation and rent 904 807
The objective advocacy (Dutch: voorlichting en bewustmaking) is related to the ways Hapin wants to give notice
to past, present and future of Papua and the Papuan people. It has a hybrid character – a so called mixed
activity. For example our newsletter, HapiNieuws, has to do with advocacy and with fundraising. Therefore you
will find the expenses on the newsletter in the cost group advocacy and in the cost group fundraising. See below.
18 Own Fundraising 2011 2010
publicity and communications 8.861 9.714
personnel costs 9.038 12.823
rental costs 1.319 1.591
office expenditure 2.947 2.439
depreciation and rent 603 538
19 Management and Administration 2011 2010
personnel costs 4.519 12.823
rental costs 659 1.591
office expenditure 1.474 2.439
depreciation and rent 301 538
total expenditures 202.687 416.740
The cost group Management and Administration consists of expenditures on control and administration.
Sometimes they are also called overhead costs. The amount is much lower than in 2010. As a part of total
expenditures it decreased from 4.17% in 2010 to 3.43% in 2011.
RATIOS 2011 2010
Income Own fundraising A 187.227 163.731
Total Income B 190.830 239.374
Total Expenditure C 202.687 416.739
Expenses Own Fundraising D 22.767 27.105
Management &Administration E 6.953 17.391
Objectives F 172.967 372.243
Ratio's D/A 12,16% 16,55%
E/C 3,43% 4,17%
F/B 90,64% 155,51%
F/C 85,34% 89,32%
Objectives Projects Papua 77.564 231.449
Projects Papua NewGuinea 0 17.346
Project Boarding houses 29.859 32.981
Project Study Grants 27.637 40.889
Advocacy 37.907 49.578
D/A Costs of own fundraising in relation to income fromown fundraising
E/C Costs of management &administration in relation to total expenditure
F/B Expenditure on objectives in relation to total income
F/C Expenditure on objectives in relation to total expenditure
This statement is contrary to last year’s four ratios, three are advised by Central Buro of Fundraising (Centraal Bureau
Fondsenwerving - CBF) and one is advised by Association of Fundraising Institutions (Vereniging Fondsenwervende
Instellingen - VFI).
According to CBF the “costs of own fundraising” have a limitation to 25% in relation to the income from own fundraising.
The costs of management and administration give an indication of the so called overhead costs of our foundation. The
before last ratio indicates the part of the income raised by Hapin is actually spent on our objectives/themes.
The last ratio is a new one. It gives an indication of the expenditures on objectives related to the total expenditures. It
makes clear that our objective related expenditures are in conformity with our mission as stated in our Statutes.
Explanation of differences between realization and budget 2011
In 2011 the result was negative (€ 11.857). There were different factors that account for this. On the one hand we did as
much in cost reduction as was possible at the time. For example: reduction of the personnel costs with € 37.856
compared with 2010. Office costs are higher than budgeted because of our moving to another office. The reduction in
rental costs is slight. The cheaper rent we have to pay will be noticeable next year.
Because of Pt. Hapin’s work on monitoring and evaluation of projects in (West) Papua we paid less in project financing
than expected. At the same time we expected to receive more project proposals from Pt. Hapin. Personnel and
organizational problems made the expectations fail.
The total decrease of expenditures in 2011 was € 68.313.
On the other side, the budgeting of income from other donors was far too optimistic. We hoped for a continuation of a
donation from ASML Foundation (€ 20.000), but our project proposal was beyond their possibilities.
Also the fundraising from institutional donors such as ICCO and Oxfam Novib failed. Therefore, in 2011, we missed on the
income side € 80.170.
The next years we will keep our organization costs as low as possible. We started in 2011 with a high grade of cost
flexibility. It will be a challenge for Hapin to maintain a professional organization in the Netherlands as well as in
Until the first of July 2011 Hapin employed three staff members. After the departure of the managing director Jeroen
Overweel Hapin’s staff consisted of two members. Because of cost reduction and the shift of work to Papua we decided to
distribute the tasks of the managing director between the two remaining staff members. The average amount of staff
members for 2011 was budgeted as 1.6 full time equivalents (fte). The realization, because of reasons mentioned above,
was below this goal, namely 1.4 fte. The forecast for 2012 will be lower: 1 fte.
Board members are not salaried.
No loans, guarantees or other financial products are given to board members and/or staff members.
In this annual report we have added annexes to give more detailed information about the development of
investing and depreciation (Annex 1: Depreciation sheet), the planned/approved project list 2011(Annex 2:
Project List 2011), Income and Expenditures of PT Hapin (Annex 3: Financial Report PT Hapin 2011) and an
overview of results over the last five years (Annex 4: Overview of results 2007-2011).
Hapin PROJECT LIST 2011
In this overview we present the planned/approved and realized projects in Indonesian Rupiah as well as in Euro.
We planned for 2011: 685.257.000 Indonesian Rupiah (€ 57.742).
We realized in 2011: 560.880.656 Indonesian Rupiah (€ 45.674).
HAPIN PROJECT LIST 2011
PROJ No PROJECT NAME CATEGORY PLACE IMPLEMENTATION
IDR euro's IDR euro's
JAY 11 5 Cocoa plan rehab ext. Strengthening civil economy District Yapsi Fork-Kisdp 105.000.000 8.847 4.875.886 397
JAY 11 7 Human resources dev Capacity building NGO Jayapura LBH 27.000.000 2.275 17.750.000 1.445
JAY 11 8 Girls sports education
Papuan girls football
50.000.000 4.213 50.000.000 4.072
182.000.000 15.335 72.625.886 5.914
MAN 11 1 Advocacy training HR workers Capacity building advocacy
LP3BH (Legal Aid)
129.080.000 10.876 125.060.000 10.184
BAL 11 1 Computer education by solarcell Education and sust. energy
Valley) Muliama school 172.595.000
14.543 210.317.870 17.127
172.595.000 14.543 210.317.870 17.127
MER 11 7 People's legal training Strengthening civil society Merauke LBH Papua 201.600.000 16.987 152.876.900 12.449
201.600.000 16.987 152.876.900 12.449
TOTAL 685.275.000 57.741 560.880.656 45.674
Total projects Manokwari
Total Projects Baliem Valley
Total Projects Merauke
Total Projects Jayapura
FINANCIALREPORT Pt. HAPIN 2011
According to the administration of Hapin and Pt. Hapin
EUR IDR IDR EUR
1A. Pt Hapin financing 40.418 479.667.169 492.636.372 40.117
1B. Programme financing 57.741 685.275.000 560.880.656 45.674
2. Protestant Churches Netherlands 10.000 118.678.000 120.440.000 9.808
3. Bank Interest - - 1.358.233 111
4. Central Government - - - -
5. Provincial Government - - - -
6. Local Government - - - -
7. Alumni - - - -
8. Indonesian Sponsor - - - -
9. Foreign Sponsor - - - -
10. Others - - 257.000 21
Total INCOME 108.159 1.283.620.169 1.175.572.261 95.731
1. Personnel Costs 26.128 310.080.000 244.102.147 19.878
2. Monitoring and Evaluation 2.039 24.200.000 9.655.000 786
3. Office 2.127 25.243.600 14.665.740 1.194
4. Depreciation Costs 2.664 31.612.500 36.989.839 3.012
5. Operational Costs Office 1.230 14.600.000 21.430.351 1.745
6. General Costs 893 10.600.000 12.946.070 1.054
7. Project Costs 57.741 685.275.000 560.880.656 45.674
Total Costs 92.822 1.101.611.100 900.669.803 73.344
Planning 2011 REALIZATION 2011
We used different exchange rates in this figure. When making the budget for next year we use the exchange
rate of December.
During the realization year we use the average exchange of the year in which the expenditures take place.
Exchange rate in December 2010: 1 Euro is 11.868 Indonesian Rupiah.
The average exchange rate of 2011 was 1 Euro is 12.280 Indonesian Rupiah.
Overview of results 2007 – 2011
This overview summarizes the development in costs and benefits the last five years
Income 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007
Income from fundraising 187.227 171.015 528.510 204.380 227.672
Other income(subsidies) 3.603 68.359 205.999 153.949 118.602
Total income 190.830 239.374 734.509 358.329 346.274
Expenses 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007
Advocacy 37.907 49.577 65.477 41.460 64.179
Projects(Structural help) 135.060 322.664 352.342 392.639 366.684
Total expenses on objectives 172.967 372.241 417.819 434.099 430.863
Costs of Fundraising 22.767 27.105 35.782 39.288 59.777
Management & Administration(M&A) 6.953 17.391 28.342 28.283 35.417
Total expenses 202.687 416.737 481.943 501.670 526.057
Result -11.857 -177.363 252.566 -143.341 -179.783
Totals 190.830 239.374 734.509 358.329 346.274
Ratio’s 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007
% costs fundraising 12,16% 15,85% 6,77% 19,22% 26,26%
% income assigned to objectives 90,64% 155,51% 56,88% 121,15% 124,43%
costs M&A in % total expenses 3,43% 4,17% 5,88% 5,64% 6,73%
% expenditures asigned to objectives 85,34% 89,32% 86,69% 86,53% 81,90%
OVERVIEW of RESULTS 2007 - 2011