Emergency Capacity Building Project a Collaborative Effort of the Interagency Working Group on Emergency Capacity

Emergency Capacity Building Project A collaborative effort of the Interagency Working Group on Emergency Capacity About the Emergency Capacity Building Project’s Accountability and Impact Measurement Initiative Introduction A multi-agency evaluation of NGO responses to the Niger food crisis found: “All respondents were deeply grateful for whatever they had received but none knew what to do or who to approach and where if they had a concern or complaint.”1 Findings like these are common in the humanitarian sector where the practice of accountability to the people served in emergencies is far from ideal. As challenging is measuring what difference our relief efforts make to them. The Center For Global Development notes, “…we have found that a great deal of effort is made to document the resources going into programs, the inputs that are used, and the services that are produced. However, when we ask whether programs have made a difference, we find relatively little reliable information or evidence.” 2 About ECB Seven agencies have embarked on a quest for “what works” in accountability to beneficiaries and the measurement of impact as they relate to emergency programs. These seven agencies are participating members in the Emergency Capacity Building Project (ECB)3, a two-year endeavor funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Microsoft Corporation to improve emergency response and preparedness. The participating agencies, Catholic Relief Services, Save the Children, World Vision, CARE, Oxfam, Mercy Corps, and International Rescue Services, believe that NGOs can be far more effective working together on common problems, than tackling the issues alone. In addition to their work on accountability and impact measurement, the members of the ECB project are working together in the areas of staff capacity, risk reduction, and information and communication technology. Many standards, little practice To find out how practice of accountability and impact measurement could be improved, the seven agencies undertook self-assessments in the summer of 2005. The results showed that the agencies were committed to accountability (all of the IWG member agencies belong to at least one accountability network and many have signed up to multiple sets of standards ) and that there were increasing internal and external pressures to improve accountability (particularly towards beneficiaries). However, these commitments at headquarter levels have not translated into significant changes in practice on the ground. For example, local people in Aceh who benefited from Tsunami relief noted in a discussion that, “no one has ever asked us our opinion of aid before this”4 though all sets of standards specify that local people are to be consulted. Simple answers The seven agencies are attempting to make the complex simple by bringing coherence to the various guidelines, tools and standards for accountability and impact measurement. In February 2006, the agencies and their strategic partners agreed on Basic Elements of Accountability and Impact Measurement to guide their work. These are straightforward practices like providing public information on planned relief operations, and establishing feedback loops. The basic elements were inspired by the “good enough” approach which stresses simple solutions and baby steps toward complicated goals. All the basic elements are in compliance with the practices endorsed in existing sets of standards, such as Sphere. With this approach in mind, the seven agencies have chosen the following activities: • A How-To Guide If every field manager has a handy pocket guide that describes the priorities field staff need to focus on and how to do so, then they could better practice accountability and impact measurement. With this belief, ECB 1 Niger MAE 2 Closing the Evaluation Gap, Center for Global Development, http://www.cgdev.org/section/initiatives/_active/evalgap/faq/#1 3 Find out more about the ECB project at www.ecbproject.org 4 Report of the Listening Project: Aceh, Indonesia, November 2006, p.15. drafted a guide based on existing standards and accountability principles, and a few real-life case studies. It aims to break down accountability and impact measurement into simple “to-dos” for busy field staff to digest on the run, even in complex emergency settings. A field reference group has been established to inform the content of the guide and provide feedback on the first draft. However, it was clear from the beginning that there was not enough information on practice to inform the guide. That would have to be generated by ECB activities. It is expected that the quick reference guide will be considered for adoption by all the seven agencies and by other agencies working in emergencies. • A standing team to implement good practice In order to help test good practice, in February 2006, the seven agencies formed a standing team of 15 experienced emergency workers that are available for short-term deployments. The standing team was created to collectively perform such activities as joint evaluations and provide monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and accountability training and/or coaching support to local staff before or during an emergency. Individually, the team members could also act as M&E and accountability advisors to their agencies. Importantly, when working at field level, they would test the draft “how-to guide” and provide feedback on its relevance. Three deployments have tentatively been planned for the remainder of 2006. • Joint evaluations and activities on the ground Fittingly for a project dedicated to improving emergency response and preparedness, emergencies have dictated some of the activities of the ECB. The December 2004 tsunami threw off the start date of the project by two months but also provided an opportunity for CARE, Oxfam and World Vision to undertake a multi-agency evaluation of their response. Another multi-agency evaluation by Catholic Relief Services, CARE, World Vision and Save the Children took place in Niger in November 2005 following the food crisis response, and another in Guatemala in March 2006, following the Hurricane Stan response. ECB2 expects that joint evaluations will inform learning not only within the seven agencies but in the broader sector on how joint processes are carried out and what their potential benefits are. In Niger, the agencies note that, because of the different perspectives it brought together, the evaluation gave them a deeper understanding of the crisis and its causes. The agencies have since developed joint advocacy positions in relationship to the government of Niger and the World Food Programme and have set up an NGO coordination forum in Niamey. • Learning events to understand and share good practice The deployments will be followed by learning events in the field to discuss the findings, how practice can be improved, and how it can be adopted. It is hoped that these learning events will help consolidate the gains made during the deployment by inspiring improved program quality and strengthening nascent collaboration relationships among the country offices involved. Working with strategic partners The Sphere Project, Humanitarian Accountability Partnership International (HAP-I) and the Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP) are active participants in ECB’s accountability and impact measurement events. HAP-I is a member of the editorial committee being formed to steer the development of ECB’s how-to guide and the guide may be included as a module within a HAP-I manual on accountability. In June, ECB will work with ALNAP to stage a round-table discussion to bringing together learning on joint evaluations. The seven agencies are committed to sharing the findings from their activities with other quality and accountability initiatives and with the broader humanitarian sector Working with other initiatives of the ECB project? Accountability and impact measurement in emergencies is closely tied to other aspects of emergency response and preparedness, including staff capacity, risk reduction, and information and communication technology—the other focus areas (initiatives) of ECB’s work. Members of the accountability and impact measurement initiative will work with members of the staff capacity initiative to ensure that standing team deployments are done successfully. Also, there is on-going collaboration between the accountability and impact measurement initiative and the risk reduction initiative on the multi-agency evaluation in Guatemala, as a key focus of the evaluation is emergency preparedness. For more information about the ECB project and ECB 2, please contact Malaika Wright at [email protected]. March 29, 2006 2.

Load more