Chapter Four - HAP International

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The 2008 Humanitarian Accountability Report 18. Sungi Development Foundation, Pakistan communities. Banners were displayed on which details of relief packages to be distributed in each IDP community (UC) were given. Address of Sungi’s office was given to forward any complaints. 6. Continuous Improvement (Principles 5 & 7) To involve stakeholders in monitoring compliance of HAP principles and bench marks • 235 project committees were established with the purpose of continuous monitoring. • Monthly /quarterly and annual reviews were established, to include HAP compliance review. • Partners Assembly is a mega event of Sungi, in which more than 900 people participated this year to evaluate Sungi’s programmes and suggest future recommendations for strategic directions and field operations. Involve beneficiaries in progress and HAP compliance review process Case Study Example: Good practice in humanitarian accountability and quality management – Summary version Under the Sustainable Livelihood Project in Abbottabad, assets were distributed among poor people affected by earthquake to improve their livelihoods. As part of the accountability and complaint mechanism, the accountability committees were informed about the packages different beneficiaries had to receive. One of the Community Facilitator (temporary field worker of Sungi) did not provide complete package to some households. The community sent a quick complaint to Sungi management; Sungi devised an enquiry team, and quickly identified that the person responsible was guilty. The assets were recovered from the perpetrator and closed their contract. In the same project, the vendor provided quality feed bags initially, but he started adding poor quality feed in the supply, which was directly delivered in the field. The accountability committees found that the feedbags were of very low quality, and they informed Sungi. Sungi made swift response to this complaint. On inspection by technical experts, it was found that the complaint was valid. Sungi cancelled the contract and withheld the security deposit. Sungi’s Micro Finance and Empowerment Programme (MFWE) has designed and instituted a complaint handling mechanism to know the issues that beneficiaries of this programme may face. A complaint and performance evaluation form has been designed. Each beneficiary of this programme is provided with this form. All beneficiaries are informed to fill in this form in case of any complaint and send it directly to the senior management, through a pre-paid self-addressed envelop. This mechanism helped to improve our programme and to ensure accountability. On the beneficiaries end, this mechanism has brought satisfaction and has guaranteed the direct and closer interaction with senior management. During the year, 50 complaints were received through this process. Plans with regard to: undertaking a baseline analysis, a certification audit, or mid term certification review Sungi had applied for HAP certification; HAP baseline analysis is scheduled in May 2009 and a certification audit is expected before the end of 2009. 115 140
THE 2008 HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 18. Sungi Development Foundation, Pakistan Summary / Other comments Challenges • Influencing government line agencies and other stakeholders to be accountable to the beneficiaries is relatively difficult, however assertive communities could play a critical role. Regular accountability forums could play a major role in this regard. • A workable complaint mechanism for emergencies in the new working areas is relatively difficult. Lesson learned • By promoting and practicing accountability, credibility of the organisation improved among stakeholders, particularly beneficiaries • By instituting accountability mechanisms, we reduced the misuse of resources • By conducting regular accountability forums and meetings,we increased the coordination among stakeholders and humanitarian agencies 19. Tearfund UK Introductory comments: Tearfund continued to pursue Beneficiary Accountability as a corporate priority through 2008. Following on from the baseline analysis carried out in 2007, the head office certification audit was undertaken in March 2008 and field audit in June 2008. Certification was awarded for Tearfund’s emergency responses on 18 June 2008. Key goal for 2008 Achievements / challenges / lessons learned 2009 objectives 1. A humanitarian quality management system (Principles 1, 2, 5 & 7) • Integrate Tearfund’s Quality Standards, which represents Tearfund’s Humanitarian Accountability Framework (HAF), into policy and practice • A summary version of the Quality Standards was placed on the Tearfund website and posters were printed for use in the field. • Disaster Response decision making procedures were updated to include Beneficiary Accountability commitments and Project Approval procedures for operational programmes updated to include a review of project design in relation to the Quality Standards. • Publish Tearfund’s learning on outworking our Beneficiary Accountability commitments in a range of emergency programmes. • Produce a field guide for project staff and partners explaining the practical outworking of the Quality Standards and the ways they relate with international codes and standards: Sphere, Red Cross Code, HAP Standard etc. 2. Information, Communication, Transparency (Principle 3) • Standardise the information to be made publicly available across operational programmes • Template of standard information was updated and distributed to operational programmes, with guidance on contextualisation and exoneration. • Further develop standard information that provides appropriate and accessible information for communities, including vulnerable groups. 116 141
Page 1 and 2: THE 2008 HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILIT
Page 51: THE 2008 HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILIT

Chapter Four - HAP International

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?