Outline. Humanitarian Accountability involves. Humanitarian Accountability and Quality Management. The responsible use of power

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Outline. Humanitarian Accountability involves. Humanitarian Accountability and Quality Management. The responsible use of power"

Wilfred May
6 years ago
Views:

6 July 2010 Härnösand, Sweden Humanitarian Accountability and Quality Management Outline 1. Accountability to beneficiaries 2. Humanitarian Quality and Accountability Initiatives 3.

1 6 July 2010 Härnösand, Sweden Humanitarian Accountability and Quality Management Outline 1. Accountability to beneficiaries 2. Humanitarian Quality and Accountability Initiatives 3. Humanitarian Accountability Partnership International (HAP) and the HAP Standard in Humanitarian Accountability and Quality Management 1)What do you think happened next? 2) Why do you think this situation occurred? 3) What are the parallels with your work? 4) What are the parallels with the humanitarian world (and NGOs)? The Bus Service Humanitarian Accountability involves taking account of. giving account to.. being held to account by.. affected populations. The responsible use of power

2 Accountability as defined by HAP "Accountability is the means by which power is used responsibly" (HAP) Accountability is about the right to a say and the duty to respond An accountable organisation manages the quality of its products and services, and strives to continuously improve these for the benefit of its customers, clients or beneficiaries. Humanitarian Quality and Accountability Initiatives Tracking the emergence of the quality and accountability initiatives SCHR 1971 Voluntary alliance, now of 9 of the largest organisations Began peer review in 2003 Code of Conduct (1994): Principle 9 we will hold ourselves accountable to those we seek to assist and from those we accept resources People in Aid 1995 Improving human resource management in the sector, including staff consultation and capacity building and training Today has about 100 members ALNAP Sector-wide active learning membership network to improve Q&A by sharing lessons, identifying common problems and building consensus Sphere Project Humanitarian Charter, guidance notes in 4 sectors Today 16 member board and a learning programme More recent initiatives One World Trust Global accountability and international law think tank Good humanitarian donorship 2003 Principles of accountability and assessment Quality COMPAS a quality assurance method developed by Groupe URD. Tsunami Evaluation Coalition TEC members (UN-research-donors-NGO) Key message #1: ownership and accountability to affected populations Emergency Capacity Building Project (ECB) international agencies working together on how best to put existing standards, codes and principles into practice.

Humanitarian Accountability Partnership International (HAP) Humanitarian Accountability Partnership HAP, established in 2003, is a partnership of member agencies that share a commitment to making

3 Humanitarian Accountability Partnership International (HAP) Humanitarian Accountability Partnership HAP, established in 2003, is a partnership of member agencies that share a commitment to making humanitarian action accountable to disaster survivors Objectives: Promote greater accountability Support members through capacity building Set standards of accountability Monitor and certify compliance of members through certification Handle complaints against members HAP is a membership-based organisation Challenge: how to measure against principles Just a small selection of our membership

4 Benchmarks 1. Humanitarian Quality Management System 2. Information sharing and designed to be realistic and supportive 3. Participation And Informed Consent 4. Competent Staff 5. Complaints-handling 6. Continual Improvement How organisational committments are implemented in practice & are continually improved against. Benchmark 5 Complaint Handling

Benchmark 5 Establish and implement complaints-handling procedures that are effective,

humanitarian partners and other specified bodies Ask intended beneficiaries and the host

complaints-handling procedures These should clearly state: the right of beneficiaries and

the procedure the procedure for submitting complaints the steps taken in processing

referral of complaints that the agency is not equipped to handle the right to receive a

5 Benchmark 5 Establish and implement complaints-handling procedures that are effective, accessible and safe for intended beneficiaries, disasteraffected communities, agency staff, humanitarian partners and other specified bodies Ask intended beneficiaries and the host community about appropriate ways to handle complaints Establish and document complaints-handling procedures These should clearly state: the right of beneficiaries and other specified stakeholders to file a complaint the purpose, parameters and limitations of the procedure the procedure for submitting complaints the steps taken in processing complaints confidentiality and non-retaliation policy for complainants the process for safe referral of complaints that the agency is not equipped to handle the right to receive a response Ensure that intended beneficiaries, affected communities and its staff understand the complaints-handling procedures

Verify that all complaints received are handled according to the stated procedures Establish and implement an effective and safe complaints handling mechanism for its staff Complain

6 Verify that all complaints received are handled according to the stated procedures Establish and implement an effective and safe complaints handling mechanism for its staff Complain ts Benchmark 6 Continual Improvement Benchmark 6: Establish a process of continual improvement for its humanitarian accountability framework and humanitarian quality management system

7 Specify processes used for continual improvement How would the Standard work in your organisation? Monitor and evaluate the agreed means to improve quality with respect to the Principles of Accountability and Principles for Humanitarian Action What would you need to do to meet the following benchmarks as part of a project? + Information sharing + Participation + Complaint Handling What are the main strengths or benefits of the HAP Standard? How can the HAP Standard be improved? (e.g. clarity of application, language, format, content) HAP certification offers the sector A more informed choice for staff, volunteers, partner agencies, donors and disaster survivors Enhanced credibility and standing of certified agencies Strengthening of accountability and professionalism HAP certification is: Applicable regardless of agency size, place of origin, operational or partner-based Available to all agencies who meet the qualifying norms

8 Progress to date Agencies certified against the HAP Standard: 2007: OFADEC, Danish Refugee Council and MERCY Malaysia certified. 2008: DanChurchAid and Tearfund certified. 2009: CAFOD and Christian Aid certified, and UNHCR completed two HAP baselines. 2010: Concern Worldwide certified, Danish Refugee Council re-certified, OFADEC and MERCY Malaysia currently in the process of review. More than 20 organisations baseline analyses, including PMU Interlife, Oxfam America, ACT Alliance, CARE International, ACTED etc. Progress to date Present: HAP Standard Review Purpose to capture learning from its application over the past two years to incorporate emerging good practice on accountability and quality management Result an improved mission-critical, affordable and measurable HAP 2010 Standard along with new guidance materials on how to implement the Standard Experience to date Certification requires leadership and agencywide support Does not need specialists, but they can help, especially in some areas Complaints handling and working with partners poses greatest challenge to most agencies (the drafted revised HAP Standard has focused particular emphasis on improving these two areas.

Draft Version 3 27 th July 2006

Humanitarian Accountability and Quality Management Standard Draft Version 3 27 th July 2006 Drafted by: HAP Editorial Steering Committee Standards Development Working Group 3 Support given by Social Accountability