Standard 3: Accountability
Our Commitment:
We are committed to transparency,
participation, feedback and learning
with our project participants
A community notice board in Northern Kenya, one
method of providing information to a community on
the organisation, the project and the selection
criteria
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
The issues
In the past, accountability has often described the way NGOs report back to their
donors on how their funds have been used. In recent years there has been
growing momentum to recognise the ways that NGOs need to be accountable to
the people they serve on the ground – the project participants.
In previous emergency responses, NGOs have often been criticised for not fully
living up to this commitment, and a cross-agency evaluation of the Asia Tsunami
response called for a “fundamental reorientation from supplying aid to
supporting and facilitating communities’ own relief and recovery priorities.” In
order for this to be achieved, the evaluation report suggests that affected
populations need to themselves set priorities and draw up plans for recovery
programmes and that this will only be possible if the affected population “owns”
the relief response and aid agencies hold themselves accountable to the affected
people. This approach is commonly called “beneficiary accountability”.
In the absence of good beneficiary accountability, a whole range of problems
arise:
• The project will be in danger of being poorly designed
• There may be poorer acceptance by the community of the project team and a
poorer security environment,
• Beneficiaries will have less of a sense of dignity or value
• Communities will be more vulnerable to exploitation and abuse.
Biblical foundations
This quality standard recognises that our intended beneficiaries are the main
clients of relief aid and our primary focus should be on them. In the Bible, ‘The
Parable of the Good Samaritan’ (Luke 10: 25-37) illustrates that “loving your
neighbour as yourself” means showing compassion for anyone in need, regardless
of nationality, race, creed, social status or political affiliation. And in the context
of our emergency projects loving your neighbour as yourself means asking, “If I
was a beneficiary in this project, how would I like to be treated?”
“If I was a beneficiary in this project how
would I like to be treated?”
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
Good Practice commitments
Beneficiary accountability is a measure of the quality of the relationship
between the NGO and the beneficiary. In practical terms, it involves the
following:
• Ensuring transparency and providing detailed information to project
participants and communities concerning the organisation, its programme
plans and project details so that people are fully informed.
• It means encouraging community participation as much as possible, for
example in assessments, in project design, in agreeing selection criteria for
beneficiaries, for monitoring and evaluating project progress. This includes
obtaining informed consent from the community at the start, confirming
that they are happy for the project to go ahead.
• Establishing a formal feedback mechanism whereby project participants
and community members know how to give feedback and complaints
concerning the project, so that we can act on and respond to their
feedback and suggestions. If community members don’t feel they are able
to comment or complain about project decisions such as selection criteria
or ration sizes, they are unlikely to be willing to complain about highly
sensitive issues such as corruption or sexual exploitation.
• It means that staff are fully briefed and understand the organisation’s
values, the principles of good accountability and the importance of our
relationships with project participants.
Close links to other Quality Standards
There are close links with Values, as we need to make information on our values
and standards of conduct publicly available; Impartiality, as we need to make
information on our commitment to impartiality publicly available; Children, as
we need to make information on our commitments to children publicly available
and our feedback from communities needs to include feedback on any child
protection issues; Gender, as participation means the full participation of both
men and women and our feedback from communities needs to include feedback
on any exploitation issues; and Conflict, in recognising the particular
considerations needed in making information publicly available in conflict
situations.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
Where to look for more information:
• Tearfund Good Practice Guide on Beneficiary Accountability
• The HAP 2007 Standard in Humanitarian Accountability and Quality
Management
• HAP-I Website www.hapinternational.org is regularly updated and has a
section on field reports which has HAP research examples from the field. It
also contains training materials.
• Mango – Financial accountability: www.whocounts.org see paper “Who
Counts / Financial Reporting to Beneficiaries: Examples of Good Practice”
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
Practical Steps for carrying out an Accountability commitment
Identification, Design and Implementation
Step 1: Obtain the informed
consent of beneficiaries and
ensure their ongoing
participation from assessment
through to implementation
Step 2: Set aside the
resources needed – funds and
staff - to support beneficiary
accountability
Step 3: Make information on
your organisation and your
programme publicly available
Step 4: Ensure thorough
induction, appraisal and
development of staff
Step 5: Establish a system to
hear and respond to feedback
Step 6: Monitor the
accountability system and act
on the feedback received
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
Step 1: Obtain the informed
consent of beneficiaries and
ensure their ongoing
participation from assessment
through to implementation
True participation is essential to good accountability and it is needed right
from the assessment stage in a project through to project completion and final
evaluation. Participation is an area of good practice where further
improvement is always possible. The “ladder of participation” is a helpful way
of looking at this, as it recognises that there are different levels of
participation, from only providing information at the most basic level all the
way through to the community having control of the project.
Information
Consultation
Influence
Partnership
Control
When working with a group of beneficiary representatives, ensure that they are
involved in decisions at all stages of the project cycle. It is critical to ensure
that both men and women are consulted extensively and that the beneficiary
representatives are a cross section of individuals trusted by the wider
community, including vulnerable groups (such as elderly or disabled) which
may traditionally be overlooked. It is better that the community select their
own representatives but it is important that they truly are a cross section.
Ensure that responsibilities are clearly defined and explained, and ensure that
they are communicating with the wider beneficiary group. Carry out regular
public meetings if appropriate. Ensure that records of meetings with
beneficiary representatives are kept. It is important to record all the
discussions and decision and to be able to show what changes have been made
to the project as a result of beneficiary feedback.
In the past we have sometimes simply assumed that the community is happy
with the proposed project without intentionally seeking a “decision point”,
when all participants are fully aware of the detailed plans and the
contributions they are expected to make. This is informed consent and it may
be verbal or may be documented in a Memorandum of Understanding, which
should be made public.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
Step 2 Set aside the
resources needed – funds and
staff - to support beneficiary
accountability
All project proposals should include staff positions and budget lines for
Beneficiary Accountability.
Our experience has shown that having a dedicated role on the project team
(such as a Beneficiary Accountability Officer) makes a huge difference to being
able to carry out this commitment in practice if the right type of person is
recruited, as this ensures that there is capacity on the team to focus on this
commitment. However, it is equally important that accountability is
understood to be everyone’s responsibility; each team member has a part to
play. What is important is that specific roles and responsibilities are agreed
and understood.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
Step 3: Make information on
your organisation and your
programme publicly available
You need to agree, in consultation with
beneficiary representatives, the amount of
information to be given to beneficiaries. The
organisation’s head office should provide a
summary of all the information that they
recommend be included as standard public information. The level of detail
and the amount of information you share will vary in different situations, but
it always needs to be easily accessible, in the language and format most
appropriate for the target audience. It should be kept current and updated
regularly and should include staff roles and responsibilities and contact
details.
What is most important is that the methods for sharing information reflect
the community’s own preferences. These methods may be through meetings,
information boards, leaflets, pictures, local radio or any other means that
are appropriate to the community, particularly taking into account literacy
levels. Always take account of the communication needs of different groups
(e.g. children, persons with disabilities), to ensure that they can have access
to the information. Financial information should be provided in local
language and currency and in a style that is easy for users to understand.
One of the most important aspects of transparency is providing information
on beneficiary selection criteria. This includes making publically available
the criteria for selection which was agreed with the community, and the
names of proposed beneficiaries when this is appropriate to the project and
context.
You also need to think about situations where it may be necessary to
withhold information in order to meet other commitments such as safety and
security of beneficiaries. Security issues may make it inappropriate for you
to share certain information – this is okay as long as you can justify why you
have not shared the information and have documented reasons why.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
Step 4: Ensure thorough
induction, appraisal and
development of staff
We have learnt that successfully carrying out the
commitment to Accountability hinges on good
quality induction of staff. The more the staff
understand and support the commitment, the greater the impact will be.
There may be traditional barriers or organisational cultures to overcome in
becoming more transparent, promoting greater community participation and
letting go of control, and being supportive of receiving critical comments from
beneficiaries. It is important not to underestimate, therefore, the need to tackle
any organisational or cultural constraints and to ensure that induction of all staff
is comprehensive and explains the organisation’s values and standards and the
individual’s role in upholding values and adhering to standards. Ensure that all
staff understand the project so they can explain it to others. Local staff have a
very important role to play in sharing information in a community. Drivers and
guards interact constantly with beneficiaries and communities – are they clear on
the project plans and organisational values in the same way that project staff are
familiar?
Carry out regular performance management appraisals with all staff. When
reviewing performance it is important to consider both technical abilities in
performing the work and the attitude with which it is carried out.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
Step 5: Establish a system to
hear and respond to feedback
The opportunity for beneficiaries to
provide feedback is an essential part of being accountable. Having a
feedback mechanism as a formalised system is a relatively new concept and
it can be extremely difficult to establish due to the power dynamics between
an NGO and a community and within a community.
What is critical is that you agree with the community which feedback
procedures are their preferred choices. Different groups in a community may
prefer to give feedback in different ways so it is important to hear from the
whole cross section of a community. There are many ways of welcoming
feedback – directly to a Beneficiary Accountability Officer, by phone or mail,
referring to a beneficiary complaints committee etc.
There needs to be a focal person identified, so that the community knows
who to direct their feedback to and information on how to use the system
should be readily accessible and appropriate, e.g. where literacy levels are
low. This information needs to include an explanation that feedback should
relate to issues which are within the organisation’s control. It should also
emphasise that the system is free to use and safe – there need be no fear of
retaliation if complaints are made.
The feedback should be recorded and reported on, so that you can track
what feedback has been received, which groups are giving feedback, what
responses were given and most importantly what changes to the project
were made based on the feedback received.
You will need to agree specific procedures to respond to sensitive feedback
such as regarding sexual abuse and exploitation, in order to involve senior
management immediately and to commence investigation procedures
appropriately.
When recruiting Beneficiary Accountability Officers it is important to have
both male and female officers, to help facilitate feedback, especially in
situations where it is difficult or inappropriate for women to share their
comments with men.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
Step 6: Monitor the
accountability system and act
on the feedback received
Once the accountability steps are in place
you need to monitor the system and make
changes and improvements where needed:
- Is the method for ensuring ongoing
participation by the community effective? Are the community
representatives truly representative of all beneficiary groups?
- Is the public information being understood? Do all community groups have
access to the information?
- Is refresher training and induction needed for staff, especially if there has
been a turnover with new staff recruited
- What feedback is being received, positive and negative? Is it being
recorded? And most importantly are changes to the project being made
based on the feedback received?
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009
Standard 3: Accountability
Project Examples
In Zimbabwe, a partner running a food aid project for families with orphans
shared information on selection criteria, ration sizes and entitlements and
set up ways for children to give feedback. This led to better targeting and
ownership of the project by the families themselves.
In Kashmir, Pakistan, feedback from beneficiaries included the fact that
influential community leaders were misleading the NGO. As a result changes
were made in the way project committees were set up.
In a North Kenya livestock restocking project, “Beneficiary Reference
Groups” were set up, with community members elected onto the groups by
the community. Their responsibility was to oversee the selection of
beneficiaries and deal with any problems or complaints that arose. This
enabled the whole process to be owned by the community.
With the construction of a school in Spin Boldak, Afghanistan, sharing budget
information with the community and school authorities strengthened local
relationships and led to the identification of a fraud taking place with
inflated costs of construction materials.
In Darfur, Sudan, a programme team printed a short leaflet which explained
in English and Arabic details about the organisation, its programme in Darfur,
its commitments and staff contact information. An insert of project-specific
information was also added for use in each project location.
Quality Standards Field Guide – First Edition, December 2009