“Show me the money”: Generating evidence from and for accountability in

Humanitarian work

Christina Laybourn (One World Trust) and Alice Obrecht (Humanitarian

Futures Programme)

Accountability and evidence: Where two worlds collide…

Accountability

Expectations

‘Reality’

External party(ies)

Evidence use

Analysing evidence

Identifying evidence

Collecting evidence

Accountability and evidence: Where two worlds collide…

Expectations

‘Reality’

External party(ies)

Evidence: information supporting the comparison of organisational reality to set expectations

Analysing evidence

Identifying evidence

Collecting evidence

Accountability

Accountability and evidence: Where two worlds collide…

Evidence use

Analysing evidence

Identifying evidence

Collecting evidenceExternal party(ies)

Accountability: mechanisms through which external parties are engaged in an organisation’s evidence use

Overview• Part 1: The contribution of evidence to assuring

accountability

• Part 2: Putting it to use: accountability mechanisms as evidence generators

• Part 3: Limitations of accountability and evidence practice in Humanitarianism

The contribution of evidence to

assuring accountability: self

regulatory initiativesHumanitarian Accountability

Partnership: Certification against the 2012 Standard in Accountability

and Quality Management

16 Certified members, 12 further members have undertaken a

“baseline analysis” against the Standard

Disasters Emergency Committee: Accountability

Framework

Action Aid, Age UK, British Red Cross, CARE, CAFOD, Christian

Aid, Concern, Islamic Relief, Merlin, Plan, Save the Children,

Tearfund, World Vision

Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response Peer Review

CARE, Save the Children, ICRC, IFRC, Lutheran World Federation, Oxfam, Caritas, ACT Alliance and UNHCR

i- Identification of evidenceHAP Standard Certification DEC Accountability Framework SCHR Peer Reviews

Baseline analysis against the Standard (either internal or external)Internal review of compliance across all sitesIndependent Audit (every 3 years, 18 month review checks progress)

Self-assessment against the frameworkIndependent audit of 5 ways of working in 2 countries, chosen by auditors“Peer” workshops of 2-3 agencies and auditor to discuss findingsDiscussions between pairs of CEOs

Self-assessment at head office and two selected countriesNo set assessment framework, but agreed areas for investigationHead quarter visits and Field visits to 2 countries by staff from 2 peer agencies and an independent facilitatorGroup discussion by 9 CEOs of findings

ii- Collection of evidenceHAP Standard Certification DEC Accountability Framework SCHR Peer Reviews

Desk review of documents at head officeAt least 1 programme site visit (chosen by auditors)

Desk review of submitted evidence: looking for evidence of Policy/ Procedure, Application and Assurance mechanismsMeeting with key staff to discuss evidence

Field visits include desk reviews as well as interviews with staff, partners and disaster affected persons.Head office desk reviews and interviews

iii- Analysis of evidenceHAP Standard Certification DEC Accountability Framework SCHR Peer Reviews

Certification against the HAP StandardAreas for improvement identified and addressedSummaries are published

Component of DEC membership“Improvement Commitments” of changes to be made by next year2011/12 process published a summary report

Learning exerciseSummary of lessons learnt published“12 months on” reports on progress against peer review recommendations

Putting It To Use: Accountability

mechanisms as evidence generators

• Adequacy of current activities to meet stated needs

• Evidence of serious misconduct/ fraud

• Community satisfaction (!)

• Reflective perspectives on organisational achievements

• Urgent needs

• Contextual challenges

• Beneficiary entitlements

• Community skills/ ability to contribute

Putting It To Use: Accountability mechanisms as evidence

generatorsHead office

Country offices

Field offices

EVIDENCE LEARNING

Limitations of evidence and accountability practice

1. Internal organisational barriers to evidence-accountability cross fertilisation

2. The backwards-looking orientation of evidence-based policy

EVIDENCE LEARNING

Limitations of evidence and accountability practice:

1. Internal barriers

EVIDENCE LEARNING

Limitations of evidence and accountability practice:

1. Internal barriers

Limitations of evidence and accountability practice

2. Backwards-looking and short term perspectives

Evidence-based strategy

? Black swan event

Limitations of evidence and accountability practice

2. Backwards-looking and short term perspectives

Dialogues for Disaster Anticipation and

Resilience • Community-based and national workshops in

advance of rains to inform design• Transmission of information before and over the

course of the rainy season • Community-based evaluation after the rains• Technical consultation • Cross exchange learning

http://www.elrha.org/dialogues

Dialogues for Disaster Anticipation and

Resilience

Thank you!

CLaybourn@OneWorldTrust.org Alice.Obrecht@kcl.ac.uk