COLLECTIVE RESOLUTION TO ENHANCE ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY IN EMERGENCIES SOUTHERN SOMALIA REPORT Transparency International is a global movement with one vision: a world in which government, business, civil society and the daily lives of people are free of corruption. With more than 100 chapters worldwide and an international secretariat in Berlin, we are leading the fight against corruption to turn this vision into reality. The Humanitarian Aid Integrity Programme is a new global initiative based in Transparency International Kenya. Applying TI’s strengths and expertise, the Programme’s goal is to ensure that humanitarian aid resources are used effectively and for their intended purposes. It aims to achieve this by enhancing transparency and accountability in the implementation of humanitarian operations at institutional, policy and operational levels. In partnership with: Funded by: www.transparency.org Authors: Nisar Majid and Adele Harmer, Humanitarian Outcomes © Cover photo: Nisar Majid / Belet Weyne, Somalia Every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of the information contained in this report. All information was believed to be correct as of November 2016. Nevertheless, Transparency International cannot accept responsibility for the consequences of its use for other purposes or in other contexts. This document covers humanitarian aid activities implemented with the financial assistance of the European Union. The views expressed herein should not be taken, in any way, to reflect the official opinion of the European Union, and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. ISBN: 978-3-96076-034-4 Printed on 100% recycled paper. Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0 © Transparency International 2016. Some rights reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 2 KEY FINDINGS ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 5 STUDY OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................ 5 STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT ........................................................................................................... 5 2. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 6 3. BACKGROUND FACTORS ............................................................................................. 9 3.1. GOVERNANCE, LEGAL AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT ............................................... 9 3.2. AID ARCHITECTURE .............................................................................................................. 10 3.3. PERCEPTIONS AND (MIS)INTERPRETATIONS OF CORRUPTION ..................................... 12 4. CORRUPTION RISKS .................................................................................................... 14 4.1. HUMANITARIAN PRESENCE AND ACCESS ......................................................................... 14 4.1.1. Negotiating access.............................................................................................................................. 14 4.2. PROGRAMMING APPROACHES ........................................................................................... 16 4.2.1. Partnership-based programming ........................................................................................................ 16 4.2.2. Targeting and registering beneficiaries ............................................................................................... 20 4.2.3. Monitoring, evaluations, audits and feedback mechanisms................................................................ 23 4.3. PROGRAMME SUPPORT ....................................................................................................... 25 4.3.1. Procurement ....................................................................................................................................... 26 4.3.2. Contracting.......................................................................................................................................... 28 4.3.3. Financial documentation ..................................................................................................................... 29 4.3.4. Human resources and staffing ............................................................................................................ 29 5. PREVENTION AND MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................. 31 5.1. EXISTING LEGAL OR REGULATORY MEASURES ............................................................... 31 5.2. AGENCY-SPECIFIC MEASURES ........................................................................................... 31 5.3. ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS ......................................................................................... 33 5.4. INTER-AGENCY MEASURES ................................................................................................. 35 5.5. ROLE OF DONORS ................................................................................................................. 36 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 38 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 39 7. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 42 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This case study is part of Transparency International’s CREATE (Collective Resolution for Enhanced Accountability and Transparency in Emergencies) project, which is supported by funding from the Directorate General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Operations (ECHO). The case study was researched by Guhad Adan, Khalif Abdirahman, Nisar Majid and Adele Harmer, and written by Nisar Majid, independent consultant and Adele Harmer of Humanitarian Outcomes. Transparency International (TI) Kenya’s lead role in coordinating the case study is greatly appreciated. Special mention goes to TI Kenya’s Humanitarian Aid Integrity Programme coordinator Nicolas Séris, who steered all components of the research, and Executive Director Samuel Kimeu for providing overall guidance for the project. Thanks also to other TI Kenya staff that supported the study through technical and logistical support. We would also like to thank Larissa Schuurman from the TI Secretariat, for overall coordination as well as report design and formatting, and Roslyn Hees, Senior Advisor at TI, for her valuable contributions. We would also like to express our sincere appreciation to all stakeholders who participated in the development of this study. In particular we would like to acknowledge the invaluable contribution of all the members of the National Stakeholder Group who participated in the consultative workshops and gave their time to review and provide critical feedback on draft versions of the report. This includes: the resilience advisor from the Somali Federal Government; representatives from the UK Department for International Development (DFID), the European Commission Directorate General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Operations (ECHO) and the US Agency for International Development (USAID); the United Nation’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) and the Risk Management Unit (RMU); UN agencies including UNICEF, Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) and the World Food Programme (WFP); international NGOs including ACTED, Adeso, Concern Worldwide, Islamic Relief and World Vision; national NGOs including the Centre for Education and Development (CED) and Humanitarian Initiative Just Relief Aid (Hijra); as well as inter-agency bodies including the Somalia NGO Consortium and the Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS) Alliance. We would also like to thank all the interviewees, as well as the Somali aid recipients, who provided their views to the research team. CREATE: southern Somalia case study 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents findings from the southern Somalia case study for the Collective Resolution to Enhance Accountability and Transparency in Emergencies (CREATE) initiative, led by Transparency International. The goal of the study was to produce an evidence base concerning corruption risks and prevention and mitigation measures in relation to the implementation of humanitarian assistance in southern Somalia. In its mapping of corruption risks, the study both describes perceived risks, as perceived by the stakeholders consulted, as well as specific examples of corruption. It also captures many of the good-practice mitigation measures being utilised. It was not, however, an investigation of any individual agency or group of agencies; nor does it attempt to quantify or estimate the overall percentage of losses due to corruption. The study used a qualitative research approach, with findings generated from over 122 key-informant interviews and community