Improving accountability in the field
Promoting and sharing good practice
In a piece entitled "Resilience in Darfur", Lisa Henry (DanChurchAid, 2009) describes the circumstances of August 2009 in a number of refugee camps. She was with the first team from the ACT International (Action by Churches Together) donors to visit the camps since President al-Bashir ordered 16 humanitarian organisations out of Sudan in March.
Monthly Community Engagement Best Practice Awards were used by the World Vision’s Sri Lanka Tsunami Response Team (2007) to recognise good practice and share learning between offices. Awards were given to the Batticaloa and Jaffna offices for their constructive communities project, to the Hambantota office for its community information provision meeting, and to the Matara office for its economic recovery community transition programme.
Good practice guidelines on beneficiary accountability
Humanitarian Accountability Team World Vision Sri Lanka: A Case Study (World Vision, 2009). It provides the reasons behind the development of a Humanitarian Accountability Team along with its scope of work, implementation, lessons, resources developed and future plans as a way to share these experiences with other agencies.
Disaster Management Team Good Practice Guidelines: Beneficiary Accountability (Tearfund, 2008). These guidelines place the importance of accountability in the context of the organisational values. They outline practical steps for improving accountability in the field based on the HAP benchmarks, and contains examples.
Resources for quality and accountability
Quick Reference – ideas for resource allocation to support accountability (HAP, 2010). This document provides some ideas to aid development of emergency response project proposals that can be adapted based on programme focus and context.
The Uganda case study (Medair, 2008). In Patongo, Northern Uganda, Medair appointed a Beneficiary Accountability Officer in 2008 who works full time on communicating with local communities, measuring progress against objectives and responding to community complaints and requests.
North Kenya Programme's approach to improving accountability and Accountability to Beneficiaries in Kashmir (Tearfund, 2007). In North Kenya and Kashmir, Tearfund hired a dedicated Beneficiary Accountability Officer to provide operational support to staff in improving accountability practices and integrating them into existing project plans. Both case studies give an overview of the activities undertaken to strengthen information sharing, participation, and complaints handling. They highlight advantages and lessons learnt.
Why Do Accountability? A Business Case From Sri Lanka (World Vision, 2008) outlines the advantages observed by the Sri Lanka Tsunami Response Team as a result of mainstreaming quality and accountability through a separate Humanitarian Accountability Team. It details the enabling factors that led to improved accountability, including the role of senior managers, as well as the role of technical specialists (communications, finance and human resources specialists).
Medair has provided three updates on its activities to improve beneficiary accountability and participation throughout its operational programmes in Madagascar, Somalia and Somaliland, and South Sudan.
Self-assessments for reviewing accountability
Accountability Snap-Shot and Action Planning Exercise (HAP 2011). This can be used by organisations to assess themselves against the 2010 HAP Standard. It is an interactive exercise aimed at generating discussions and debates and increase the understanding of staff on the benchmarks of the HAP Standard. It can be easily adpated and used with senior managers, field staff and partners.
Self-assessment methodology used to review agency accountability during the response in northern Sri Lanka (ACTED, 2009). This case study summarises the approach and methodology used to examine practice against the HAP 2007 Standard in a context where access to project beneficiaries was highly restricted.
Self-assessment methodology used by agencies responding to Cyclone Sidr in Bangladesh (HAP, 2008). It summarises the approach undertaken to review practice using the HAP Standard at one project site, including seeking feedback from cyclone-affected communities and beneficiaries.
Self-assessment questions on the 6 benchmarks of the 2007 HAP Standard. These questions provide a starting point for reviewing an agency's level of humanitarian accountability. Responses can then be compared to project level data.
Focus Group Discussion guidance notes (HAP, 2008). Developed by HAP for use with volunteers and beneficiaries of a World Vision community kitchen project in Zimbabwe, these notes provide an example of how accountability can be reviewed at project level.
Structured discussion guides for beneficiaries and staff (World Vision, 2008). These were developed in Sri Lanka in order to evaluate the impact of the Humanitarian Accountability Team. Also available in Creole and French.
Humanitarian Accountability Team Lessons Learned: Perspectives from Communities and Staff (World Vision, 2007). This document details the methodology used to evaluate the impact of the Humanitarian Accountability Team in Sri Lanka.
Community Voting Notes (Oxfam GB, 2008). These notes form part of the staff toolkit and are intended for use with communities to seek feedback on a range of programmes-related issues, including accountability of the agency. This includes a few questions that could be used with this method to assess the degree of accountability.
Developing an accountability workplan
Developing a country-level accountability work plan - the process (Muslim Aid Bangladesh, 2008). This document outlines the steps taken to strengthen accountability and quality management over a period of twelve months, following Cyclone Sidr. This includes the process followed with staff in developing a country-level accountability work plan.
