IASC Task Team on
Accountability to
Affected Populations
and Protection from
sexual Exploitation and
Abuse (AAP/PSEA)
What should happen with the TT
after Dec 2015 ?
Future strategy:
•Status of Achievements and main challenges
•Anticipated needs to support AAP /PSEA
•Suggested key areas of work for 2016
Overview of the IASC AAP PSEA TT
Objective of the
Task Team (in the
current TORs)
What have we
been working
on ?
Create a system-wide “culture of accountability”:
institutionalization of AAP, including PSEA, in function and
resourcing within each humanitarian organization alongside
system level cohesion, coordination, and learning.
As reported to the IASC principals, The Task Team undertook
following main tasks :
• work with, and support, Humanitarian Country Teams
operationalise accountability & PSEA at the collective level
• engage with donors in advancing the accountability agenda,
including the strengthening of requirements for funding
recipients to demonstrate progress on accountability and PSEA;
• develop a broader advocacy strategy to ensure that all
humanitarian actors are aware of their roles and responsibilities
with regard to AAP & PSEA, and disseminate good practices on
AAP & PSEA
Key Achievements of the Task Team
Work Stream 1
AAP/PSEA
Advocacy
Work Stream 2
Operationalizing
AAP/PSEA in
country-level
activities and
provision of
technical support
Work Stream 3
PSEA activities
•Advocacy with partners and donors to highlight the essential linkages between
AAP and PSEA, and increased collaboration at policy and field level.
•Support provided to the World Humanitarian Summit (WHS) Secretariat regarding
AAP/PSEA and engagement of communities in the WHS consultations.
•Field missions to support operationalisation of AAP /PSEA
•STAIT webinars on AAP
•Increased collaboration between AAP/PSEA Task Team and Protection
Mainstreaming Task Team, to capitalise on linkages between protection and AAP
and specific work on the recommendations of the Whole of System reprot on
Protection
•Helpdesk set up to share good practices and respond to technical queries from
partners.
•AAP included in Disaster Risk Reduction strategies in multi-agency projects
including local governments
•Increased links with some clusters to support them in operationalising AAP, and
workshop planned with Global Cluster Coordinators
•Inclusion of AAP and PSEA into Humanitarian Coordinators (HC) compact, HC
annual workshop, Humanitarian Country teams (HCT) self assessment indicators,
and planned support to some HCTs (Niger and Iraq, dates to be confirmed) .
•Advocacy work through webinar and initial development of a PSEA campaign
•Support to CBCM pilot projects in Dolo Addo and DRCongo and link with the global
SOPs
•Support to UN agencies, NGOs and HCT’s technical requests on PSEA through the
helpdesk
Challenges to complete task team workplan
Participation
Fragmentation
Need to clarify
between
collective and
individual
achievements
•While the TT has over hundred members on the mailing list, a few are active
members.
•In link with the “subsidiarity” approach of our work, the TT need to secure the
active participation at the global level of local and national members
•Membership active in achieving Task Team goals continue to do so based on
individuals interest more than on organisational commitment :
When staff actively participating in the TT change jobs, it takes months until
another staff member is identified by the organisation to join the TT.
 Disruption is significant when the organisation was the lead on one TT
objective.
Active participation in the task team and leadership on one objective
requires time, which needs to be factored into staff workplans by
organisations.
•Need to clarify how initiatives on community engagement or CWC can be better
coordinated with the task team, to avoid confusion and fragmentation. While it is
encouraging to see an increasing commitment to meaningfully and continuously
engage with communities throughout the project cycle, we should endeavour to
avoid fragmentation of the humanitarian response and work together
•The “merger” of the AAP and PSEA Taskforces into one task team proved difficult
initially, but collaboration both at policy level and in the field support this joint
approach
•Task team objectives should not be the sum of individual agencies achievements
on each of the areas of work, but rather collective work under the leadership of
one member. It means additional work on top of each agency’s workplan, and this
needs to be factored into work plans.
Question to Task team members :
•Do you see any other challenges the Task team
is facing to complete its workplan ?
Why the Task Team needs to continue after Dec 2015
Delivering on
our workplan
Operational Peer
Reviews (OPR)
Community
Based
Complaints
Mecanisms
(CBCM)
•While many task team objectives will have been reached in Dec 2015, some will
still be pending due to major gaps in staffing during the year. New staff on board
particularly for Objective 2.5 (Civil society, National NGOs and Implementing
Partners’ involvement in AAP/ PSEA) and Objective 3.3 (PSEA included in
organisation recruitment processes, policies and performance appraisals) will need
additional months to catch up and implement the planned actions.
•Many objectives such as the one related to advocacy (block 1) or to
operationalisation ( block 2) need continuous attention and the scope of support
should be expanded
•AAP and PSEA is repeatedly emerging in the Operational Peer Reviews as one of
the main course correction needed. HCTs recognize that AAP and PSEA are
important, but need support on operationalising them at collective level.
•The drafting of global Standard Operating Proecedures under the leadership of
IOM DG Swing for community-based complaints mechanism has been initiated
following requests from the field and implementation will need support
Global processes requiring Task Team support in 2016
WHS
Whole of System
review on
Protection
Transformative
Agenda
•Accountability has emerged as a priority in the WHS regional consultations, which
will lead to AAP and PSEA specific recommendations in the final synthesis report.
The task team could promote, support and follow-up recommendations that
emerge.
•The Task Team contributed to the WHS Community Engagement strategy and
should support it in the implementation phase to ensure fragmentation is avoided
and essential linkages with accountability kept.
•The Whole of System report on protection in humanitarian settings has a set of
recommendations dedicated to AAP and PSEA .
Taking into account work already being done in the workplan, the Task Team has
worked closely with the Global Protection Cluster and the Protection
Mainstreaming Task Team to analyse and propose follow through on the
recommendations.
•Accountability is one of the 3 pillars of the Transformative Agenda, and the task
team is supporting the STAIT team in this regard with for instance planning of
additional webinars on AAP and specific ones on PSEA.
Questions to Task Team members :
•Do you see other reasons for the task team to
continue after 2015 ?
•Which key areas of work would you envisage
for 2016?
•Do you think the structure of the Task Team
needs review for 2016?