Humanitarian Accountability Partnership International

Humanitarian Accountability Partnership International (HAP International) , established in 2003, was the humanitarian sector’s first international self-regulatory body . [1] A multi-agency initiative working to improve the accountability of humanitarian action to people affected by disasters and other crises, HAP members ranged from organizations with a mandate for emergency relief and development activities to institutional donors. The organization avocation to Strengthen Accountability Towards Those affected by crisis situations and to Facilitate Improved Performance dans le humanitarian sector. [2]The ultimate goal of the organization was to uphold the rights of people affected by the crisis. [3]

HAP International merged with People In Aid on 9 June 2015 to form the CHS Alliance and no longer exists.

Humanitarian Accountability

HAP International, along with other quality and accountability initiatives, [4] has-been pivotal in defining the concept of “humanitarian accountability”, qui has-been much debated by the international humanitarian community. [5] The definition of “accountability” in a general sense is the responsibility of power, while “accountability in humanitarian situations” ensures that the power to help in situations of conflict and disaster is exercised responsibly. [6] When implemented, they are able to influence their decision-making process and to give feedback and complain that they feel empowered. ” [7]

Commendation by the British Minister for International Development:On the 7th of October 2008 during a UNHCR Executive Committee Meeting, the British Minister for International Development, Gareth Thomas, highlighted the achievements of the world and most important agencies in the world. vulnerable. The minister added, however, “I also want to challenge anyone who thinks the task of reform is complete, but we have come a long way.” He went on to say that there were, in his view, the “key elements essential for improving the international humanitarian response”, including greater accountability. He argued, “Agencies urgently need to put in place standardized monitoring arrangements.[8]

Importance of Accountability

The following are the reasons for the following:

Acute needs People who have survived a conflict or a natural disaster often have acute needs. Frequently, they have been displaced from their homes and lack their usual economic, social or psychological support systems.

Lack of choice, lack of competition Normally, recipients of humanitarian aid can not choose between relief providers. They can not signal they are unhappy with a service provider, unlike consumers in competitive retail markets.

Lack of voice Disaster survivors usually lack access to formal procedures for participation in decisions about assistance. Traditional governance structures are likely to be highly strained by the disaster or if they have survived at all, and (until recently) relief agencies do not include participation and complaints systems in their programs.

Donor-survivor disconnect furthermore, the people with choices of influence relief organizations – donor governments and their citizens – are not recipients of humanitarian aid. Therefore, they may not be in a position to judge

Life and death decisions Finally, in humanitarian situations the consequences of decisions can be particularly severe. For example, a person ‘s decision to sell for distribution may be a matter of life or death if the organization has underestimated the amount of food needed to go around. [9]

Humanitarian Accountability Report

The Humanitarian Accountability Report, [10] an annual report published by HAP International, reviewed the progress made in the area of ​​humanitarian sanctions. The report also provides detailed findings of the annual “Perceptions of Accountability in Humanitarian Action” survey. The annual Secretariat Report, published by HAP International, was the organization’s self-assessment of progress against its annual work plan, and included accountability reports by HAP members.

HAP International’s aims and activities

HAP International developed the “Standard HAP in Accountability and Quality Management”, a tool to help organizations design, implement, assess, improve and recognize accountable programs. Being accountable to crisis-affected communities helps organizations, and reduces the possibility of mistakes, abuse and corruption. The 2010 HAP Standard is the result of an extensive review process that involved various stakeholders, including crisis-affected communities, and aid workers. [11]

HAP’s strategic value is that quality, accountability and program results are inextricably linked. By improving accountability in a systematic manner, the program quality, impact and outcomes would also be enhanced. The essential tools for driving this virtual circle are the application of a quality management system (designed in accordance with the HAP Standard), reinforced through shared learning and independent auditing. To these ends HAP International offered a range of training workshops and audit services (members can be officially certified by HAP). All stakeholders, including the organization’s people to assist, crisis-affected communities, donors and the humanitarian organizations themselves, made measurable gains as a result of the work undertaken by the Partnership. [12]

The objectives of HAP International were:

  • to develop and maintain the HAP Standard through research, consultation, and collaboration;
  • to support members and potential members of HAP International in the HAP Standard by providing training and advice;
  • to communicate, advocate, promote, report on the HAP Standard;
  • to monitor and report on the implementation of the HAP Standard and to certify its members accordingly; and
  • to assist members in finding solutions.

HAP International’s work on the findings of the Humanitarian Accountability Project, a 2001 inter-agency action research initiative, and the Joint Evaluation of the International Response to the Genocide in Rwanda. [13]

HAP Standard

The HAP is a practical and measurable tool that represents a broad consensus of what matters most in humanitarian action. The Standard helps organizations design, implement, assess, improve and recognize accountable programs. Being accountable to crisis-affected communities helps organizations, and reduces the possibility of mistakes, including abuse and corruption.

The 2010 edition of the HAP Standard in Accountability and Quality Management is the result of an extensive review of the 2007 Standard that involved wide consultation with different stakeholders, including crisis-affected communities, and aid workers. Over 1,900 people in 56 countries contributed to the review process and the preparation of the 2010 edition, bringing to the process authentic experiences from different perspectives. [14]

The HAP Standard is a quality assurance tool for humanitarian organizations. By comparing an organization’s processes, policies and products to the Standard’s six benchmarks, it is possible to measure the organization’s accountability and quality in its humanitarian work. Organizations that comply with the Standard:

  • declare their commitment to HAPs seven Principles of Accountability [15] and to their own Humanitarian Accountability Framework (a set of definitions, procedures and standards that specify how to achieve accountability);
  • develop and implement a Humanitarian Quality Management System;
  • providing key information on key management;
  • enable their representatives to participate in their decisions and give their informed consent;
  • determines the skills and development needs of staff;
  • establish and implement a complaints-handling procedure;
  • establish a process of continual improvement. [16]

Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA)

Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (SEA) is the most important outcome of any organization . In particular, women and girls are particularly vulnerable. The Building Safer Organizations Project , which aims to develop the capacity of NGOs “to receive and investigate allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse” (17) relocated from ICVA [18] to HAP in 2007, and its lessons and materials were subsequently integrated into HAP’s “Building Safer Organizations – Investigation Learning Program” training.

In June 2008 HAP published a report on the issue of humanitarian aid. [19]

Scheme certification

HAP’s certification scheme aims to provide assurance that they are managing the quality of their humanitarian actions in accordance with the Standard HAP. In practice terms, a HAP certification basis provides the provision of external auditors with access to the organization ‘s mission statement, accounts and control systems. [20]

To achieve HAP Certification an organization has been reviewed and tested by a third party independent system against the benchmarks and requirements of the HAP Standard. [21]

The Certification audit process included:

  1. Review of head office and field site documents.
  2. Interviewing of head office and field site staff, partners and disaster survivors.
  3. Humanitarian Accountability Framework.

HAP certification allowed agencies to demonstrate their achievements in accountability and quality management in a process developed by humanitarian peers. It was a voluntary commitment of the centrality of beneficiaries to an organization’s humanitarian work. [22]

Membership

At the time of its merger with People In Aid , HAP International had 100 member organizations. The membership included 79 full members and 21 associates from organizations with a mandate for emergency relief and development activities to institutional donors. [23]

Donors

The work of HAP was supported by AusAID (Australia), Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (USA), DANIDA (Denmark), Irish Aid , Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs , Oak Foundation (Switzerland), SIDA (Sweden) and SDC (Switzerland).

In the past, HAP had been supported by the following:

2003 : AusAID (Australia), DANIDA (Denmark), Ford Foundation (USA), Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, SIDA (Sweden)

2004 : AusAID (Australia), DANIDA (Denmark), Ford Foundation (USA), Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, SIDA (Sweden)

2005 : AusAID (Australia), DANIDA (Denmark), Ford Foundation (USA), Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, SIDA (Sweden)

2006 : ACIFID (Australia), AusAID (Australia), CARE International, DANIDA (Denmark), Ford Foundation (USA), Irish Aid, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oxfam UK, SDC (Switzerland), SIDA (Sweden), World Vision

2007 : AusAID (Australia), BPRM (USA), DFID (UK), DANIDA (Denmark), Ford Foundation (USA), Irish Aid, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oak Foundation (Switzerland), OFDA (USA), SIDA (Sweden)

2008 : BPRM (USA), DFID (UK), DANIDA (Denmark), Ford Foundation (USA), Irish Aid, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oak Foundation (Switzerland), SIDA (Sweden)

2009 : BPRM (USA), DFID (UK), DANIDA (Denmark), ECHO (EU), Ford Foundation (USA), Irish Aid, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, SIDA (Sweden)

2010 : BPRM (USA), DFID (UK), DANIDA (Denmark), ECHO (EU), Irish Aid, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

2011 : BPRM (USA), DFID (UK), DANIDA (Denmark), Irish Aid, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oak Foundation (Switzerland)

2012 : AusAID (Australia), BPRM (USA), DANIDA (Denmark), Irish Aid, Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Oak Foundation (Switzerland), SDC (Switzerland), SIDA (Sweden)

Quality & Accountability Initiatives

The humanitarian community has launched a number of inter-agency initiatives to improve accountability, quality and performance in humanitarian responses. The most widely known initiatives are ALNAP (Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action), People In Aid , Sphere Project and HAP International. A move towards greater coherence started in 2006 with the creation of the Quality and Accountability Initiatives Complementarities Group, which included ALNAP, Southern Coordination, Emergency Capacity Building (ECB) Project, Groupe URD, HAP International, People In Aid, and the Sphere Project. Over the years, the group with Disaster Affected Communities (CDAC), the Listening Project, and the Disasters Emergency Committee joining.

Moreover, the three organizations HAP International, People In Aid and the Sphere Project started the Joint Standards Initiative (JSI) . The JSI was a collaboration building on the strengths of each initiative. In mid-2011, the three initiatives made a joint commitment to promote convergence of their respective standards. Greater coherence should strengthen the workers’ ability to put these standards into practice around the world. The ultimate aim is to improve the quality of humanitarian action for affected communities. [24]

The JSI process for the publication of the Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS) in 2014 and the creation of the CHS Alliance in 2015.

References

  1. Jump up^ Jordan, and Lisa van Tuijl, Peter (2006). NGO Accountability: Politics, Principles and Innovations Earthscan, London. p. 39.ISBN 1844073688
  2. Jump up^ GlobalHAND Profile
  3. Jump up^ Geneva Peacebuilding Platform Profile
  4. Jump up^ ALNAP; SUD Coordination; ECB Project; Groupe URD; People in Aid; The Sphere Project
  5. Jump up^ Humanitarian Practice Network; Humanitarian Practice Network; Harvard University; The Guardian; Hammad, Lama and Morton, Bill (October 2011). Greater influence, greater responsibility: Are INGOs self-regulatory accountability standards effective? pp. 13, 18. Retrieved on February 2, 2014 .; Lloyd, Robert and Las Casas, Lucy. “NGO self-regulation: enforcement and balancing accountability”p. 4. Retrieved on February 2, 2014.
  6. Jump up^ IRIN
  7. Jump up^ IRIN; AlertNet
  8. Jump up^ DFID
  9. Jump up^ ATHA
  10. Jump up^ HAP Publications
  11. Jump up^ NGO Disaster Relief AlertNetForum; HAP 2010ArchivedStandard2013-07-03 at theWayback Machine.
  12. Jump up^ About HAP Archived2012-10-16 at theWayback Machine.; Geneva Peacebuilding Platform Profile
  13. Jump up^ ATHA
  14. Jump up^ GlobalHAND Profile; HAP 2010 ArchivedStandard2013-07-03 at theWayback Machine.
  15. Jump up^ HAP Principles of Accountability
  16. Jump up^ HAP 2007 Standard; HAP 2010 ArchivedStandard2013-07-03 at theWayback Machine.
  17. Jump up^ ICVA’s Building Safer Organizations Learning Program
  18. Jump up^ ICVA
  19. Jump up^ To Complain or Not to Complain: Still the Question
  20. Jump up^ The Economist
  21. Jump up^ HAP Certification
  22. Jump up^ Geneva Peacebuilding Platform Profile; HAP Register of Certified Agencies and Auditors
  23. Jump up^ Current Members Archived2014-07-14 at theWayback Machine.
  24. Jump up^ Joint Standards Initiative

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *