Chapter Four - HAP International

More documents

Recommendations

Info

19. Tearfund UK • Lessons learnt included the need to ensure information is available in appropriate languages and with use of diagrams and pictures, and ensuring information reaches the most vulnerable groups. 3. Participation and Informed Consent (Principles 3 & 4) • Standardise the approaches to participation and informed consent across Tearfund operational programmes • Developed guidance for staff on approaches to participation from assessment phase through to project completion. • Lessons learnt included the need to address the participation of particular vulnerable groups. 4. Staff Competencies • Raise general awareness and update standard briefing and induction materials for staff regarding Tearfund’s quality and accountability commitments • Lessons learnt included the need to raise not only awareness amongst staff of the Quality Standards but the specific relevance to their work and responsibilities. • Briefing schedule and induction materials for new staff were adjusted to explain Tearfund’s quality and accountability commitments. 5. Complaints and Response Mechanisms (Principle 6) • Standardise the system for receiving and responding to feedback in all operational programmes • Lessons learnt included the need to fully consult with communities concerning their preferred method for making complaints. • Internal programme reporting template was revised to include feedback from beneficiaries alongside review of project progress and logframe reporting. A summary of the feedback is now shared quarterly with the Tearfund leadership team. 6. Continuous Improvement (Principles 5 & 7) • Raise awareness of Tearfund’s quality and accountability commitments amongst partners and standardise the system for capturing and • Lessons learnt included finding varied levels of consultation with partners with regards to their awareness and responsibilities in relation to the The 2008 Humanitarian Accountability Report • Finalise the field guide on the Quality Standards, to include practical guidance on participation. • Finalise DM Project Evaluation ToRs to include review of levels of participation and beneficiary satisfaction. • Ensure staff are fully aware of the Quality Standards and their individual responsibilities in supporting their outworking. • Establish consistent levels of consultation to identify a community’s preferred methods of making complaints and ensuring the feedback mechanism reflects their preferences. • Update/finalise the feedback mechanisms for partners to Tearfund, for supporters/public to Tearfund and for feedback and complaints from staff. • Facilitate consultation amongst partners regarding the Quality Standards and fully develop the system and plans to support 117 142
THE 2008 HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 19. Tearfund UK sharing lessons learnt across emergency responses. Quality Standards, with consultation most effective in new emergency situations. • Learning reviews and evaluation recommendations were collated into key learning documents. and develop partner capacities, and for monitoring and evaluation. Case Study Example: Good practice in humanitarian accountability and quality management – Summary version Between 2005-2008, Tearfund responded operationally to the post-conflict situation in Liberia, with watsan, public health, food security and community development projects in 4 counties, reaching over 100,000 beneficiaries. The Liberia programme was selected for the <strong>HAP</strong> field audit as part of the certification process. What went well: • Head Office support, and sufficient resources set aside for implementation Tearfund’s HQMS was developed centrally and then adapted to the Liberia Programme context. Accountability Officers were recruited in each field site (integrated with the M&E role), and designated staff time was set aside to oversee implementation of Accountability across the programme. • Integration into existing PCM framework Successfully ‘implementing’ Beneficiary Accountability was reliant on ensuring community participation at all stages of the project (community entry, sensitisation and mobilisation, partnership agreements, day-to-day field staff work alongside community members etc), ensuring communities felt fully involved and listened to throughout the project processes. • Staff Induction Informing staff about Tearfund’s values, including Accountability, was seen as just as important as informing the communities. All staff (and NGO partners) were given training on Accountability and Tearfund’s HQMS. Accountability was made part of all staff inductions, and seen as the responsibility of all staff, not only of management, and integral to all activities carried out by each staff member. • Public Information & Feedback Mechanisms Tearfund/project information was discussed with communities first and foremost, and then relevant printed information was posted on community noticeboards. Feedback mechanisms were agreed together with the communities, and once Beneficiary Accountability was understood, these were well used and suggestions/complaints dealt with in a timely way. Challenges faced/Lessons learned: • Communicating the concepts of Beneficiary Accountability Given the context of long running conflict in Liberia, communities were unaccustomed to giving opinions freely, particularly negative comments, for fear of retaliation or withdrawal of support. The idea of feedback was new not only to beneficiaries but also to local staff. Instead of trying to help communities and staff to understand the term ‘Beneficiary Accountability’, the focus was more on what this meant in practice, in relationships. <strong>HAP</strong> auditors used a patient/doctor sketch (firstly where the doctor decided what the patient needed without listening to their needs, secondly where two-way communication meant that the patient received appropriate medication) which staff and communities found very helpful. This is recommended as a useful training tool for future use in explaining the key concepts of accountability. 118 143
Page 1 and 2:
THE 2008 HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILIT
Page 3 and 4: THE 2008 HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILIT
Page 53: THE 2008 HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILIT
show all

Chapter Four - HAP International

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

Delete template?

Save as template?