Independent Auditor’s Report
British Red Cross Society
People In Aid Code of Good Practice accreditation
QM2 “verified compliant”
CONTENTS
Objective
Method
Conclusions regarding People In Aid QM2 accreditation
Other Findings
Date April 2015
1 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
Objective
i.
to provide assurance to managers of BRCS that the policies, strategies and
systems it has in place for the management and support of personnel are
consistent with the People In Aid Code Principles, understood throughout BRCS
and implemented in practice. This process will assess the performance of BRCS
against the People In Aid Code as well as providing assurance that reliable
management and information systems are in place.
ii.
to provide assurance to People In Aid that BRCS’s HR management systems
and performance are consistent with the requirements for the award of People In
Aid’s QM2 Second Quality Mark – verified compliant
iii.
to facilitate continuous self-evaluation and improvement against the People In
Aid Code.
iv.
to provide evidence to both BRCS and People In Aid that BRCS’s systems and
practices for good support and management of its people are sufficiently robust
and will be continuously reviewed and adjusted in response to changes in the
humanitarian context and in human resource strategies to sustain compliance with
the People In Aid Principles until the next accreditation.
2 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
Method
Until recently, all member agencies seeking accreditation for the second People In
Aid ‘verified compliant’ Quality Mark (QM2) have submitted a report. The process is
described in the People In Aid Code Implementation Manual. The purpose of the
report is:
“to inform people, who are interested in, employed by or otherwise involved in,
or affected by your organisation, about how you manage your staff and the
extent to which the organisation complies with the Principles of the People In
Aid Code of Good Practice.”
(People In Aid, Implementation Manual)
On the basis of this report and the auditor’s statement that there is sufficient
evidence to support the claims made, People In Aid consider awarding the second
Quality Mark.
The accreditation process for BRCS in 2014/15
BRCS is a large, complex organisation with an international reach. This makes the
‘normal’ People In Aid compliance reporting process demanding, and inappropriate,
in terms of the resources that would be needed were they to produce a written
report.
BRCS is a member of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, the
world's largest independent humanitarian network. BRC has approximately 3,800
staff including an international division of 200, with around 50 delegates working
abroad, and 30,000 volunteers in the UK. Apart from raising funds in the UK and
contributing substantially to the budgets of the International Movement, BRCS also
plays a key role in recruiting and providing international staff or ‘delegates’ and
consultants, to work on programmes managed by the International Committee of the
Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies (Federation) and national societies.
BRCS delegates who are selected for Federation or ICRC assignments are
contracted to BRCS, which is responsible for: their terms and conditions of
employment; salary and benefits; insurance; health checks; induction; welfare; travel
to and from the posting; briefings and training. However, the management of
delegates on field assignments, including all other HR related matters: direction;
supervision; appraisal; grievance and disciplinary procedures; and safety, is the
responsibility of the in-country ICRC or Federation member.
This division of responsibilities limits BRCS’s ability to influence management styles
and consistency in the field and its ability to directly monitor practice and the
experience of delegates on assignment. This clearly has implications for how the
concept of compliance with the People in Aid Code is to be understood.
The standard method of audit does not easily account for the high level of
organisation and competence in human resource management that the larger
international agencies like BRC have developed.
3 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
ethics etc… worked with People In Aid in 2007 to design an alternative method that
does not involve the production of a ‘compliance report’ by the organisation. The
alternative method – Systems and Performance Assurance of Code Implementation
(SPACI) was first trialled with Save the Children in 2008 and uses the same audit
criteria based on the assurance principles set out in AccountAbility’s AA1000AS
Assurance Standard:
Completeness – has the organisation provided sufficient evidence that
it is implementing policies in each of the areas of HR management
covered by the seven People In Aid Code Principles and that these are
applied consistently to all personnel in all areas where the organisation
operates?
Materiality – has the organisation provided sufficient evidence that it
understands stakeholders’ concerns and interests and is providing
relevant (material) information that will help them make informed
judgments about the organisation’s HR management performance?
Responsiveness – has the organisation provided sufficient evidence
that its HR policies and practice are responding to employees’
concerns, their needs for information, and the specific commitments it
has made to improve its performance?
In addition the assurance process seeks:
to ascertain the extent to which adherence to the People In Aid Code
Principles is embedded in operational and management practices
throughout the organisation
to ascertain the quality and effectiveness of consultation and
communication of its policies and performance with stakeholders.
BRCS was last audited for People In Aid’s QM2 in 2008/09. The organisation did
then produce a report and the audit provided assurance of the reliability and balance
of the claims and data in this report.
4 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
What we did in 2014
For the audit of BRCS’s HR management and support in 2014 we used the SPACI
method, (Systems and Performance Assurance of Code Implementation). The
process:
1. established BRCS’s strategies, standards (policies and practice) and
performance in relation to each of the seven Principles of the People In Aid
through:
•
an examination of policy and strategy documents;
•
reviewing BRCS’s self-assessment of its HR functions against the
requirements of the People In Aid Code (Policy Matrix);
•
interviews, face to face at HO and by Skype, with selected employees
to establish what policies and strategies relevant to the People In Aid
Code are in place and the management systems established to ensure
their effective communication and the consistency of their
implementation;
2. reviewed results and feedback from the 2013 BRC People Survey;
3. sought to ascertain through interviews, with managers, HR managers and
employees, including selected delegates, whether the policies are
implemented effectively at an operational level in: recruitment and selection;
induction; security; health and safety; remuneration; retention; performance
appraisal; safeguarding and communication;
4. investigated governance arrangements for human resource management and
support and formed a view about the effectiveness of implementation and ongoing policy and strategy development.
5 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
Interviews and meetings list (in order of interview date/time)
Cathy Fitzgibbon
Head of International HR
Paula Gay
International HR Advisor
Hugh MacLeman
Head of Humanitarian Policy
Robert Sweatman
Head of Performance and Accountability
Alastair Punch
Performance and Accountability Adviser
Paul Jenkins
Head of Partnership Development
Deanna Clements
Organisation Development Manager
Khosi Algir
Learning & Development Coordinator
Katy Atfield
Head of Disaster Management
Alexandra Benedict
Humanitarian Policy Support Officer
Luis Sfeir-Younis
Recovery Programme Support Officer (DM)
Clive Hawkins
Vice-Chair of Staff Association, Finance Support in Wales
Karen Peachy
BRCS Representative for East Africa (based Kenya)
Wendy McCance
Programme Coordination Manager, Haiti
Richard Casagrande
Disaster Management Adviser, Myanmar
Joy Singhal
Programme Manager, Philippines
Employees working in the North of England on an ‘Engagement’ day-event in
Durham, 22nd July 2014.
6 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
Notes on the 2013 People Survey.
The 2013 People Survey took place at the end of 2013. Overall 2,146 people
responded which was 56% of the total of employees at the time. BRCS management
considered this a reasonable response rate. It was a significant improvement on the
41% overall response to the 2011 People Survey. The response rate in the
International Division was similar, 58%, 116 employees out of a possible total of 200.
Because of changes in the questionnaire scoring, it was not possible to compare
results with previous surveys. However, the analysis by Agenda Consulting made
comparisons with their benchmarked results from 32 third sector organisations. We
also compared overall results for all employees with the results from International
Division staff and delegates.
The strongest results were for alignment with the purpose and values, personal
commitment, leadership vision and fairness and respect. Generally people
responded very positively to questions about relationships with and the effectiveness
of their line managers. The level of engagement came out at 65% which was a little
below Agenda’s benchmark median score of 73% and the percentage judged to be
‘neutral’ (23%) or ‘disengaged’ (12%) were both slightly higher than the benchmark.
A high proportion of the total staff (86%) identify themselves with the values of BRCS
(courageous, dynamic, inclusive and compassionate) but gave lower scores to
“seeing the organisations values being acted out in practice” (63%) and
“demonstrating by its actions that it cares about its people” (59%). Within the overall
context of positive responses I think these results are typical for organisations with a
high commitment to humanitarian principles and a concomitant high expectation of
how the organisation, management and colleagues will deliver. They are worth
exploring further, as are results on communication and consultation and on the
extent to which employees believe their views are given serious consideration by the
leadership.
The responses returned for International Staff were largely similar to the ALL Staff
results, but there were some differences. International Staff were less convinced that
the leadership group created a compelling vision and led by example. Only a third of
ALL Staff believed there were good opportunities for promotion or advancement and
the score for International was even lower. More than half the International Staff
respondents believed they were fairly rewarded compared to others in the
organisation doing similar work compared to only 40% of All Staff, although
International Staff were equally divided on the question of whether their pay was
competitive compared to others in similar organisations. The other issue with a
significantly different response is whether staff believe the organisation delivers a
high quality service to its beneficiaries – All Staff scored a positive 83%, International
Staff a more cautious 66%. In my view this is, in part at least, because International
Staff are much closer to the point of delivering services to crisis affected populations
and are probably more critical and more informed. In some of the discussions with
International Staff they suggested that BRC programme strategies were not always
clear and this could affect the quality of response. While this is not strictly an HR
matter it does highlight the importance of clear connections between organisational
and response strategy and HR strategy and deployment. This is an area where BRC
is making considerable effort.
7 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
In general, the 2013 People Survey shows a high level of commitment to the
organisation and an encouraging level of satisfaction with the way it is led and
managed.
I also welcome the systematic approach BRC is taking to following up the People
Survey through focus groups and appreciative inquiry sessions. Eighty facilitators
were trained across the organisation to run these. I participated in a day follow-up
event in the North of England and was impressed by the openness and frankness of
the discussion and the commitment to empower staff and to follow through at
national and senior management level.
8 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
Note on HR Policy Development and Implementation
A major part of the People In Aid audit process is to test the organisation’s HR policy
framework for completeness in relation to the People In Aid Code and relevance to
the needs of all employees.
In assessing the effectiveness of BRCS’s policies, the audit requires evidence that:
a. a range of employees are involved in policy development;
b. that policies are effectively communicated to all employees and those working
alongside them;
c. that training is provided where necessary to managers who are required to
implement BRCS policies; and
d. that implementation is monitored, recorded and reported.
These requirements were tested against BRCS’s management of HR policy
development and implementation in general and in the interviews with field based
managers, HO staff and the staff association representative.
I have also reviewed the “Policy Review Matrix: Self-Assessment of British Red
Cross objectives, policies and activities against the People In Aid Code”, prepared by
the HR team. I am satisfied that the scoring and the detailed analysis are a fair
reflection of the work the HR team is engaged in to maintain standards to the level
required by the People In Aid Code of Good Practice.
I have also read two significant strategy documents in the course of the audit:
“The difference our people make supporting strategy”, Roger Smith, Director of
People and Learning, June 2014, and “Review of the International division”, David
Peppiatt, Director of International Division, January 2014.
Both have a very significant bearing on preparing BRC staff recruitment and
development to meet the future strategic goals of the organisation. Both are the
product of high levels of engagement of existing staff and will be important in
delivering and developing appropriate staff policies in the near future.
9 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
Conclusions regarding People In Aid accreditation
Based on the documentary evidence, staff survey feedback, interviews with
London HO managers and employees and interviews with delegates in the
field, it is my opinion that there is good evidence to support the following
conclusions.
1. The policies, strategies and systems BRCS has in place for the
management and support of personnel are consistent with the People In
Aid Code Principles.
Evidence: BRCS HR Policies and strategy.
2. The policies, strategies and systems are understood throughout BRCS
and implemented in practice.
Evidence: Interviews and employee surveys.
3. Adherence to the People In Aid Code Principles is embedded in
operational and management practices throughout the organisation.
Evidence: Interviews, HR Strategy documents, HR Implementation
against PIA Principles matrix and self-evaluation.
4. The quality and effectiveness of consultation and communication of
BRCS’s HR policies is consistent across all countries and operations,
and is managed systematically to a high standard.
Evidence: Based on interviews with HO managers, Staff Association
representative and employees and international delegates in the UK and
field deployments.
5. Processes and systems are in place and effective for continuous selfevaluation against BRCS’s people management standards and the
People In Aid Code.
Evidence: Based on interviews with HO managers, Staff Association
representative, employees and international delegates.
6. Good governance and high level reporting and monitoring are secured
through BRCS’s Senior Management Team and Board of Trustees.
In my opinion BRCS’s HR policies, management systems and
performance are consistent with the requirements for the award
of People In Aid’s QM2 “verified compliant” Quality Mark.
10 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
Other findings
The following observations are more detailed notes of issues that arose mainly
during the interviews with employees, including:
BRCS Head Office Senior Managers
Other Head Office staff across a range of departments, grades and gender
Staff Association Vice Chair
Staff in the north of England (during the Engagement Event)
International delegates
The interviews were conversational rather than restricted to a pre-determined set
of questions. Interviewees were encouraged to raise issues they considered
relevant to BRCSs performance against the People In Aid Code.
These observations are set out under the eight People In Aid Code Principles.
They are not intended as criticism of the organisation or its human resource
policies, practices and managers, but to pass on to BRCS’s senior management
team the more significant observations made by employees.
Cathy Fitzgibbon has added responses to the draft report on behalf of BRCS HR
and Management. These are reproduced here in a smaller font and indented.
Guiding Principle: People are central to the achievement of our mission.
Our approach to the people who work for us is fundamental to the achievement
of our mission. We recognise that the people who work for us merit respect and
proper management, and that the effectiveness and success of our operations
depend on the contributions of all salaried and contract staff, and volunteers.
The word ‘family’ occurred frequently and spontaneously in discussions around
peoples’ experience of working for BRCS. I think this is an indication of the
respect surrounding people who work for the organisation and the value placed
on their contribution. The Fundamental Principles of humanitarian action are
deeply embedded and undoubtedly influence the character of BRC’s employees’
commitment to people in crisis and to their fellow workers. I believe this is
recognised by BRCS management and evidenced by senior management’s
commitment to develop appropriate people strategies to meet the needs of a
turbulent and unpredictable humanitarian environment.
Principle One: Human Resources Strategy.
Human resources are an integral part of our strategic and operational plans.
Our human resources strategy is central to our organisational strategy.
Our human resources strategy is long-term and encompasses every part of the
organisation.
Both the documentary evidence and discussions with senior managers and
delegates show the effort BRC is putting into developing HR strategies that are
long-term, organisation wide and directed at addressing changing needs in an
increasingly volatile humanitarian environment – both in terms of need and the
nature of crisis and in terms of resources available.
11 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
It is not appropriate, in a report that is limited to auditing the quality and
effectiveness of HR strategy and management, to attempt to review
organisational strategy. However, members of staff raised issues during
interviews that have a bearing on the integration of HR policies and practices
with organisational change and with wider organisational strategy.
There are some tensions around the International Division reorganisation
although the resource rationalisation and shift to evidence based programming is
widely accepted. Some believed BRCS has reduced its capacity to respond to
major crises/ emergencies and in the process lost relevant management and
technical expertise. The focus is on recruitment and fundraising. Several
commented on a lack of integration between adequate HO support and cross
departmental co-ordination to support major field operations.
Change and re-organisations happen all the time – they are a fact of HR life.
However, there was a sense that the international restructuring of BRCS
methods was affecting support for existing operations and reducing the
organisation’s particular capabilities and expertise for future crisis response.
I note that some staff felt that the ID review was going to result in less
support for emergency response, but I believe that this was down to a lack
of understanding off the role of the new geographical teams in emergency
response and the addition of DM specialists in each region. Interestingly
some of our new starters, including the new Director of People &
Programmes ,have observed that we have over-resourced DM response in
the regions, given that so much of our response is multilateral through the
Federation and ICRC rather than as a direct implementer. Overall I feel we
have the balance as good as we can get it given the huge element of
unpredictability inherent in emergencies and therefore the impossibility of
having the right human resource in place to respond effectively when the
number and complexity of crises in any one region is so hugely variable.
We may need two DM Coordinators in the pacific and none in West
Africa, but we cannot predict that. A large part of the ID review was
about ways of working and having standard JDs which would then give us
the flexibility to move DM Coordinators or Response Officers to where
they were needed rather than them being in a geographical silo. In
addition, the ID review has resulted in a significant increase in the number
of technical roles, e.g. increasing from two logs officers to 4 Logs
Advisers, increasing from one to two Food Security/Livelihoods Advisers,
doubling the WASH Advisers etc. Perhaps those you spoke with were at
that time unaware of the final approved business case where all this
additional resource was made evident.
The comment about the lack of HO support to field operations is well
taken. It is something that we have developed into a workstream of its
own, the decentralised ways of working workstream, which will look
specifically at how we support field operations. Also the alignment of
Technical Advisers to regions had already led to a much better crossdepartmental way of working where the regional/field teams have
dedicated resource and support and are building strong relationships which
are already leading to better outcomes.
12 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
Principle Two: Staff Policies and Practices
Our human resource policies aim to be effective, fair and transparent.
There is good evidence that HR policies are communicated to all staff and are
well understood. The interviews confirmed that policies are generally considered
to be up-to-date, effective, fair and transparent and that staff are systematically
consulted about policy changes. The HR department’s own analysis identifies
areas where policies need to be updated and has recommended appropriate
actions.
There were examples where discrepancies between terms and conditions for
delegates working to BRCS contracts and terms and conditions for international,
Federation contracts were significant.
The issues of terms and conditions differences is a constant area of review
– we use British Red Cross terms when seconding to the Federation or
ICRC, but the staff member would be on a much higher salary if they were
directly contracted by the Federation., however, we believe that the
internal equity of staff contracted by British Red Cross outweighs the
inequity of a British Red Cross person in a Federation operation being on
a different salary to their Federation contracted counterparts. This is
inherent in our Movement, with second staff from home National
Societies all on their home T&C so within one country operation, where
there are a range of staff seconded in for a range of National Societies, all
delegates will be on different T&Cs. We are currently working on creating
a unified grading structure for our UK based and overseas staff, and we
will cross reference the overseas staff grades to the Federation grades so
that all staff can see how their grade is set and how they relate to staff in
the UK or their Federation counterparts. When it comes to salaries we
operate one payscale for UK staff and a different one for overseas staff –
this is because they have such different market rates, but we review this
regularly to ensure that differences are justifiable.
Principle Three: Managing People
Good support, management and leadership of staff is key to our effectiveness.
The 2013 People Survey indicates that the majority of staff is content with the
management and support they get from their line manager.
Work is in progress to train managers to see their responsibility as supporting the
development and effectiveness of the staff they manage rather than focussing
purely on delivery.
Delegates working overseas were generally very positive about their line
managers and the pastoral support available, but quite critical of technical
support from other HO departments. They also questioned whether BRCS put in
place the necessary level of HO support when planning overseas operations and
whether the organisation was accountable for spending the UK allocation of
programme budgets.
13 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
Principle Four: Consultation and Communication
Dialogue with staff on matters likely to affect their employment enhances the
quality and effectiveness of our policies and practices.
While People Survey results indicate that staff are not inhibited in expressing
their ideas and opinions and believe they are given serious consideration, the
results were more equivocal in response to questions about the organisation’s
communications to them. Just less than half believed BRC was open and honest
in communicating and sharing information and only half said they were consulted
about changes which affect their role.
In general, the staff I interviewed who were working overseas felt communication
with HR and line managers was very good – very honest, willing to listen, engage
and change. Communications with other departments was at times difficult.
Some felt that pre-assignment briefing was not specific enough. Questions were
also raised about post-assignment debriefing and whether HO saw this as an
administrative formality rather than an opportunity for organisational learning.
Briefing and debriefing are hard to get right, and we are currently
reviewing our debriefing, to shift to a group debriefing on programmatic
issues and a confidential debrief with HR on more personal matters. We
feel that the group debrief will offer a better chance for learning. We also
hope to put in place a systematic quarterly summary of debriefs, to look at
trends which will also help with lesson learning.
Principle Five: Recruitment and Selection.
Our policies and practices aim to attract and select a diverse workforce with the
skills and capabilities to fulfil our requirements.
Good policies and practice are in place. There were positive comments about the
quality and scope of induction.
Principle Six: Learning, Training and Development
Learning, training and staff development are promoted throughout the
organisation.
While 73% said their line manager encouraged them to learn and develop their
potential, the lowest score in the survey was that only a third believed there were
good opportunities for promotion or advancement.
I do find this frustrating. I was responsible for running the meeting where
this was discussed in follow up to the People Survey. There were about 20
people in the room, almost all were in the programme support roles. I
opened by asking how many people in the room were in the same job that
they had been in two years ago (for all who had more than two years’
service). I was the only person in the room who had not had a promotion
in the last two years!
14 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
It seems to me that there is an extraordinary imbalance in the perception of
staff when it comes to expectations around promotion or advancement.
For me, I believe that staff should not necessarily expect a promotion
every two years, but they were getting that and were still expressing
dissatisfaction. I think that as an organisation we need to temper
expectation, not increase the opportunities, which are already very
extensive. The conversation revealed that what they wanted was a role in
the field, but none had overseas experience and as a non-operational
agency we do not have non-management field roles, so these staff will
need to go outside of British Red Cross to get field experience. That is not
something we should change, we are a partnership organisation and are
not going to have lots of operational roles overseas. We need to set a more
realistic expectation around promotion or advancement. We already do
more than most organisations, with support staff being given the
opportunity to be on the ERU rosters etc. and lots of training given.
I was told that efforts to encourage staff to undertake training were frustrated by their
managers saying the training was inappropriate or the departmental workload could
not cope with staff absence for training.
It was also said that there was too little discussion within teams on workload,
individuals’ capacity and training needs and understanding other teams’ members’
responsibilities.
Again when questioned on this it seems that the expectation of staff is for
far more training than is realistic. We have to balance their training needs
with a focus on beneficiaries and whether the money should be spent on
training them or delivering to beneficiaries. We have instances of admin
staff going on the 4 day personal security course even though they do not
travel for their role. There can be persistent demands for training that are
not appropriate. I am currently advocating with L&D for a change to
policy so that training is differentiated to three levels: 1) essential for the
role, 2) beneficial for the role but not essential and 3) beneficial for the
individual but no benefit to the role. There should be very few level 3
requests granted and they should be on the basis of some merit. At the
moment staff expect level 3 training as standard and do not see that this is
not a good use of charitable funds.
Career development within BRC for people on limited term overseas assignments is
an issue, but the people I spoke to, on the whole, recognised this was in the nature
of their work and the skills and experience they had. They were happy to have their
independence and to make their own choices. However, they had issues with the
wide discrepancies in terms of employment contracts and support within the Red
Cross Movement international workforce.
Given the experience, knowledge and commitment of these people, who have a key
role in delivering BRC’s vision and goals, efforts to retain them within the BRC ‘orbit’
may be important in achieving future organisational strategy. The HES roster was
cited as an excellent example of organisational investment in a valued cadre of
specialists. The continuity it built not only developed a committed ‘community of
delegates’ but also ensured that shared experience was made to contribute to
organisational learning.
15 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15
Principle Seven: Health, Safety and Security
The security, good health and safety of our staff are a prime responsibility of our
organisation.
Adequate policies and support are in place to provide a safe and secure working
environment for all staff.
Only one interviewee questioned the thoroughness of Health and Safety policy
and briefing.
My Thanks
I am grateful to all who contributed to and facilitated this audit. I have been
supplied with all the information I requested and have appreciated the honesty
and enthusiastic cooperation of those I interviewed.
My particular thanks go to Paula Gay, Cathy Fitzgibbon and Penny Cornish for
helping to make it all happen.
Richard Evans
ethics etc…
17th April 2015
16 ethics etc…
British Red Cross QM2 audit 2014/15