The Joint Standards Initiative (JSI)
Stakeholder Consultation Concept Note, Oct 2012
1. INTRODUCTION
Three of the largest quality and accountability initiatives in humanitarian aid (HAP International, People In Aid
and the Sphere Project) are actively collaborating to contribute towards an improvement of the standards
architecture, to support aid-workers and their agencies to improve humanitarian action to affected
populations.
This collaborative process is called the Joint Standards Initiative. The Stakeholder Consultation is a key
element of the process, which will generate robust evidence from a wide range of actors across the
humanitarian sector, which in turn will shape how the process develops and inform the decisions made by
the Boards on the future of the Joint Standards Initiative.
The Concept Note describes the overall consultation process, the principles that underpin it, and broad
output areas. A Consultant will be recruited to support the consultation by further elaborating the
methodology, supporting consultation events, synthesising and analysing survey data and writing the
findings up into a succinct report, in order to deliver the overall outcome of providing robust evidence to
inform the JSI process.
Further information and background can be found in the JSI funding proposal and at www.jointstandards.org
2. PRINCIPLES
A number of important principles are guiding the JSI process:





The three initiatives have a shared commitment to the JSI process, which will be informed by evidence,
based on a thorough stakeholder consultation.
There is no pre-determined outcome to the process.
In order to be credible the consultation needs to be wide ranging, representative and objective.
All stages of the JSI process need to ensure there is adequate representation of affected populations
and the Global South.
JSI is committed to link closely to the SCHR Certification Review, as well as other current quality and
accountability research..
3. SCOPE OF THE CONSULTATION
The aim of the Stakeholder Consultation is to consult widely on the following key areas to gather evidence to
inform the direction of the JSI process:

Current use and accessibility of the three standards - what works well and is effective and should
remain? How do aid workers and others access and use current standards in order to improve
humanitarian action? What standards are being used and why/why not? nb. This line of enquiry should
not turn into a formal evaluation of each of the standards.

Future needs – how would you like the humanitarian quality and accountability architecture to look like
in five years time? And how do we get there? How can we ensure continuous improvement in quality
and accountability?

Integration of standards - is there support for integration of the three standards? If so, what form could
this take? i.e. combine all elements together, start again with a blank sheet of paper, an overarching
standard with a number of specialist strands beneath etc

Implementation of Standards – how do you verify that agencies are compliant with standards and that
staff implement standards? Should there be some sort of external verification of implementation? If so,
should this be optional or mandatory? If you support external verification what models have worked best,
and why?
Once the Consultation is complete, and if the Consultation deems it necessary, JSI may commission a
separate organisational review to consider optimal organisational models. The Working Group will present
recommendations to the 3 Boards based on the Consultation’s findings.
4. LINKAGES
The JSI Working Group has a clearly defined Terms of Reference that makes clear they have responsibility
for defining and commissioning (with the support of the JSI Coordinator) the Stakeholder Consultation and
using the findings of the consultation to inform their thinking and recommendations.
Once the Working Group has completed its deliberations, it will present its findings to the 3 Boards in April
2013. The findings of the consultation will be presented at the Standards Forum, as well as the final
recommendations from the Working Group, as part of a feedback loop to the wider humanitarian community.
The SCHR Certification Review will be running in parallel to the JSI process and the two processes are
regarded as complementary, but separate. Both have a common interest in improving quality and both will
be cross fertilising each other’s projects.
More generally, the JSI needs to take careful note of any substantive and good quality work on going in
standards/ certification/ compliance, amongst the 3 main Q&A initiatives, as well as; Emergency Capacity
Building Project, Group URD, Standing Committee for Humanitarian Response, International Federation of
the Red Cross/Red Crescent, Inter Agency Standing Committee Task Force on Accountability to Affected
Populations, ALNAP and others.
5. STAKEHOLDER MAPPING
The JSI Steering Group undertook some initial Stakeholder Mapping in August, the frame of reference being
those who have a stake in the standards architecture.
Potential Stakeholder Groups
 Affected populations
 Aid Workers – southern & northern; national and international
 Agency Staff – HQ, Regional and local. Federations, UN, INGOs, CBOs.
 Governments
 International and Regional Networks
 Donors – institutional donors, general public, trusts & foundations
 Independent experts (trainers, evaluators, consultants)
 Humanitarian Academics
 Other Quality & Accountability initiatives
 Standards Experts
 Companion Standards
 JSI agency staff
 Military
 Private Sector providers of humanitarian work
6. POTENTIAL RESEARCH METHODS
The Consultant(s) will provide detailed input on who to consult and appropriate methods to use to encourage
meaningful participation and the capturing of useful findings. Initial thinking is as follows:
A mapping exercise should be undertaken, looking at existing standards, technical areas that they cover,
regional coverage, membership approaches and who supports them.
At the heart of the consultation will be a Stakeholder Survey. The survey will be adapted, where necessary,
for different audiences, using a variety of methods to ensure maximum coverage and maximum response
rates. The starting point for defining survey questions will be the initial consultations undertaken by JSI with
InterAction last March 2012 and the HAP General Assembly in April 2012, see Annex 1 for the questions
used.
Survey Questions will be identified that can be used across the various approaches, bearing in mind the
need for usable data and ability to analyse the responses.
Representation issues – the consultation needs to ensure adequate representation from a variety of groups
including; affected populations and voices from the Global South, humanitarian NGO staff (within this group it
is important to ensure a varied sample, in terms of agency size, location, theme, influence etc.), views from
emerging economies and significant cultural and religious groups i.e. key Islamic countries and networks and
those countries where INGOs work with less ease (India, China). The disadvantage of a general survey is
that respondents will be self selecting, so in order to increase the likelihood of wider representation, the
consultant should consider a compulsory survey via member agencies, covering a pre-determined number
of; HQ staff, Country Representatives, Field staff, Partner staff etc.
Affected Population – The research should draw on the significant amount of secondary data already
available concerning the views of affected populations.
7. COMMUNICATION PLAN
Strong and effective communications will be critical to the success of the consultation process, as a means
of both increasing the profile of JSI as well as encouraging maximum participation in the survey and
discussions.
The following methods are being planned for the consultation:
 JSI Coordinator weekly blog.
 JSI twitter account.
 Regular profile on Member agency websites, HAP/People In Aid/Sphere websites, JSI website.
 Email to all contacts linking them to the consultation.
 Regular newsletters and updates on the process.
 Translation of key materials and survey into French, Spanish and Arabic
 Promotional video to accompany the launch of the consultation.
8. KEY PHASES & DELIVERABLES
Phases
1. Define overall
consultation process
Timing
Sep
2. Recruit Consultant
Oct
Key Activities & Deliverables
 JSI Steering Group & Working Group sign off the Concept
Note and outline survey questions (Working Group reps
consult their initiatives memberships on the Concept Note)
 Advertise and recruit a suitable Consultant
3. Consultation
preparation and survey
design
Oct-Nov








Consultant designs the consultation process, with input from
the Working Group.
Specific targets identified for the different elements of the
survey and clarity on how to sample adequate representatives
from each group.
Questionnaire is pre-tested to ensure useful data will be
generated.
Introductory text to the survey signed off by the JSI Chair and
Working Group Chairs.
Survey materials translated into main languages (French,
Spanish and Arabic)
Initial comms on the consultation begins; a news piece
promoting the importance and value of the consultation.
Consider YouTube type video
Twitter & JSI Blog are launched
Focus Group Discussions and interviews start (VOICE,
AIDEX)
4. Consultation
implementation
Nov-Dec




5. Analysis of consultation
findings
Dec-Feb


6. Presentation of
Consultation findings
Feb-Jun




High profile event to launch the consultation, involving
Consultant, JSI staff, Steering Group, Working Group etc
Survey goes live on-line
Regional consultation events take place
Status report by 29th Nov 2012 for the joint meeting of the 3
Boards
Survey and interview feedback is analysed and the final report
drafted in a format that is useful for the Working Group.
Copenhagen Consultation event takes place late Jan/early
Feb
Final Consultation Report is presented to the Working Group
by the Consultant by end Feb 2013
Working Group recommendations and scenarios are
presented to the 3 Boards for decisions by April 2012.
Final Report with Working Group recommendations and
Board decisions presented to the Standards Forum in June
Findings are widely publicised as part of the feedback loop to
survey and interview respondents.
9. KEY OUTPUTS FROM CONSULTANT
Survey methodology and key questions to be defined in November 2012
An initial status report to be presented to the Working Group end Nov 2012.
A final, comprehensive report which fully analyses and synthesises the data from the survey, interviews and
consultations, in an accessible and engaging format, with a maximum 20 pages, plus annexes, by 28th Feb
2013. The report is to be presented by the Consultant to the Working Group, Steering Group and Joint
Meeting of Boards.
10. COST
The overall JSI budget includes approx GBP 73K for all aspects of the Stakeholder Consultation.
ANNEX 1
InterAction Forum, March 2012 – JSI discussion topics and facilitators notes




Participants introduce themselves
Identify someone from the group to feedback
30 minutes available for discussion of your topic
Output is a 3 minute feedback and recommendations on the question your group discussed.
Q1. Rationale for JSI – What are the challenges you face with multiple sets of standards and how do you &
your agency currently deal with this complexity? How could a recasting of standards help fieldworkers?
What might a useful joint standard look like?
Q2. Consultation with Stakeholders – what are the key issues on which we should consult our
stakeholders? How would you like to be consulted?
Q3. Future perspectives – What does the humanitarian quality and accountability architecture look like in
five year’s time? How can we and should we shape it through what we are doing now?
Q4. JSI engagement with other standards – how should JSI engage with other standards (i.e. InterAction
PVO Standards) who might wish to join this process? What criteria should JSI use to determine whether
other initiatives should be included on the Joint website?
HAP General Assembly, Apr 2012 - JSI Table Discussion topics and Facilitators instructions
Q1. Commonalities & Differences – In the JSI process what is common to each of the initiatives (HAP,
PIA and Sphere) and how do we address the differences between organisations and approaches?
Q2. JSI engagement with other standards – how should JSI engage with other standards who might wish
to join this process? What are the characteristics of other standards that have something in common with
HAP, PIA and Sphere?
Q3. Consultation with Stakeholders – what are the key issues on which we want to consult our
stakeholders?
Q4. Future perspectives on JSI – What does the humanitarian quality and accountability architecture look
like in five years time? How can we and should we shape it through what we are doing now?
Q5. Standards & Organisations Working Group – How can the Terms of Reference for the Working
Group be improved to more effectively define this element of the JSI work?
Q6. Non negotiables – What are the non-negotiables for you as the HAP as we move more deeply into the
Joint Standards Initiative?