Chapter Four - HAP International

More documents

Recommendations

Info

17. Save the Children UK • Conduct a mid-term review at least in 3 country programmes in the selected region for compliance with HAF. • Several of our programmes have included accountability to beneficiaries as an evaluation question, which once ready will be shared with peer agencies through existing networks. Challenges • We have not been able to finalise the HAF, due to the fact that thorough analysis on the already existing framework/s is needed; we realised we should focus on aligning the existing frameworks, to identify gaps (if such exist) in relation to accountability to beneficiaries that will be informed by new content. • SC Alliance is going through a harmonisation process, and harmonising M&E systems will start in May 2009. Many discussions related to accountability to beneficiaries are to be held within the M&E working group, which will inform the direction of the HAF for SC. Lessons learned: SC Alliance accountability framework (created as a result of ECB I project) has successfully informed work on accountability to beneficiaries in Myanmar during the emergency response. Specific commitments were localised to be relevant to the context of Myanmar especially in relation to participation and information sharing. 2. Accountability in humanitarian action (Principles 3,4,6 & 7) Share SC ambition in increasing accountability across teams and initiatives: • Include Accountability Standards into Programme Management and Grant Management Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs). Achievements: • Content for different capacity building events has been enriched with sessions on accountability to beneficiaries. These are trainings attended not only by SCUK staff, but also by different Alliance members. They cover the <strong>HAP</strong> Standard, Sphere, Good Enough Guide (GEG), etc. The 2008 Humanitarian Accountability Report • Collect various case studies on existing accountability practices to inform guidelines on accountability to beneficiaries in emergency contexts. • Prepare a final draft (included in the ESOP) guidelines for accountability to beneficiaries (applicable both to emergency and development contexts). • Continue discussions across different teams in SCUK around accountability to beneficiaries. • Increase capacities in accountability and M&E through different capacity building opportunities. 109 134
THE 2008 HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 17. Save the Children UK • Preparedness workshops will have sections on accountability • Project evaluations will have an evaluation question that looks at accountability systems, practices and procedures. • The new emergency projects (managed through and by the Emergency Section in Save the Children UK) will set up complaints mechanisms from the very beginning together with an M&E system to monitor their effectiveness and implementation. • Partnership MoUs for Emergency programmes 31 signed during 2008 will include a section on following mutually agreed humanitarian standards within the project. • We have standardized evaluation ToRs, where we request all emergency programme evaluations:“ to measure the extent to which the response has been accountable to the local needs of children and their families”. This has already been applied in at least 2 emergency responses: Myanmar and Swaziland. • We have established complaints mechanisms in Myanmar, continuously improved and changed them to meet the changing needs. Experience in Myanmar has been documented and will be used for further capacity building in other countries, including Zimbabwe in the nearest future. Lessons learned: Building capacity on accountability to beneficiaries at all levels helps to strengthen the quality of delivery, and is less frightening. When built in the culture of the organisation, with support from senior management teams, staff members find accountability to beneficiaries to be a fulfilling component of programme quality. 3. Monitoring and Evaluation (Principle 5) Increase the extent of monitoring in programmes against accountability standards: • Have a strategy and plan for developing the HAF and furthering improvements, as well as monitoring and reporting against HAF mutually shared with a selected region. • The bar for M&E and requirements for better quality data for accountability standards will be increased in programmes in the targeted region for review and reporting. Achievements: • In the Myanmar response, accountability commitments were regularly measured through the existing M&E framework and systems. The M&E system was horizontally matched with the respective organisational chart where each management level took responsibility over a part of programme’s M&E. Impact in the Myanmar context was “the way beneficiaries valued our interventions”. 31 Targeting emergency programmes managed by and through the Emergency Section 32 MS-IRA – Multi-Sector Initial Rapid Assessment 110 • Work towards bringing the focus on children in our work when developing different reviews, feedback reviews. • Work with our emergency programmes to ensure feedback mechanisms are used, and feedback is acted upon. • Work towards enabling a global level regular monitoring of sector-specific outputs. Align existing information management mechanisms (like sitreps) with output tracking, that will also include feedback from beneficiaries. • Produce first drafts of guidelines on enabling accountability to children in first phase of emergency response. • Work towards testing the MS-IRA 32 in different contexts and improving the 135
Page 1 and 2: THE 2008 HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILIT
Page 45: THE 2008 HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILIT

Chapter Four - HAP International

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?