Download
1 / 12
120 likes | 234 Views
Development of an Accountability Framework for CARE International. POC Meeting in Geneva June 2012. Update on AF Development. Several AF tests took place during late 2011 and early 2012.
E N D
Development of an Accountability Framework for CARE International POC Meeting in Geneva June 2012
Update on AF Development • Several AF tests took place during late 2011 and early 2012. • Despite continued interest, pace has slowed due to competing demands on time, notably the Pamodzi roll-out. • Since last update for the POC, AF testing by CI-UK marketing department, CARE India, CARE USA’s Emergency Unit.
AF Update continued… • Feedback from Gender Specialists, CARE WBG, CARE Osterreich, WASH Specialist and CARE Mozambique. • Awaiting feedback from West Africa regional consultations. • CARE USA has recruited a focal point to lead follow-up to their scoping study. • Two-page draft version of AF developed
Original AF work plan will probably need revision… 2011 2012 2013
Other Accountability “Headlines” • CARE participated in the INGO Charter General Assembly in March and is involved in planning a “Public Challenge to NGOs” simulation next September in NL. • SCHR is recruiting staff to help develop a humanitarian agency certification scheme. • Sphere, HAP and People in Aid are recruiting a Coordinator to help with their alignment processes.
“Headlines” continued… • IASC Principals approved a pilot version of the Operational Accountability Framework that is based on “Key Elements of Accountability” developed by CARE and other agencies in the ECB project. • With ECB project funding from ECHO, CARE UK is leading a pilot of the IASC framework in the shelter cluster.
Summary of AF Feedback • The AF provides a clear and easily-communicated synthesis of CARE’s accountability commitments • Definition of accountability needs to be made clearer using wording in the HAF. • AF Benchmarks seem to take a ‘one size fits all approach’ and be program-driven.
Feedback Summary cont… • EHAU test suggested what to include in AF and what should be in annexed guidelines for humanitarian operations. • Concern that we don’t have the means to be accountable without better impact data. • Media should be included as a stakeholder.
Feedback Summary cont… • Suggestion to target “relevant” rather than “all” stakeholders to reduce transaction costs. • Uncertainty as to how the environment can be considered as a stakeholder. • None of the tests were fully completed. One result is that we only have indicators from the HAF for benchmarks.
Next Steps • We need a pilot version of the AF that is user-friendly and can help busy CARE staff prioritize their work in a way that makes sense. • Proceed with development of annexed guidelines for selected functional units to more easily see its practical application. Decide which units should be prioritized.
Next Steps cont… The proposed organizational model that has been discussed with the CI Board places considerable emphasis on the centrality of a robust Accountability Framework. It is important that future work tie ongoing work on the AF into further development of the organizational model.
Some Key Challenges… • How can we rationalize and prioritize all our commitments to produce a useful AF? What will we have to leave out? How will we need to change ourselves? • How can we consider the potential impact on communities during our decision-making processes? • How can we ensure that CARE has the necessary motivation, capacity & resources to put the AF into practice? • How can we still fulfill our accountability commitments when working via partners?
