The HAP Standard 2009-2010 Survey Highlights Monica Blagescu mblagescu@hapinternational.


52 views
Uploaded on:
Description
The HAP Standard. 2009-2010 Review Highlights. Monica Blagescu. mblagescu@hapinternational. ... primary lessons learnt from the execution of the Standard to date ...
Transcripts
Slide 1

The HAP Standard 2009-2010 Review Highlights Monica Blagescu mblagescu@hapinternational.org "making compassionate activity responsible to recipients "

Slide 2

Why survey the Standard and The Guide? To reflect gaining from application to date To consolidate developing great practice To enhance openness To guarantee they are "live" archives that drive changes on responsibility and quality administration

Slide 3

HAP Secretariat Steering Committee Working Groups Reference Group/interviews HAP Board and GA Management Leadership Technical input Wide possession Endorsement The audit procedure Main strides so far Preliminary counsels; January – June 2009 Online criticism; July 2009 – March 2009 Consultation workshops; September 2009 – March 2010 Summary from conferences

Slide 4

Who contributed Consultation gatherings, center gathering discourses and workshops: Hosted by: ACFID, CARE International, COAST Trust, Concern Worldwide, CWS Pakistan/Afghanistan, DEC, DRC, LWF, Muslim Aid, Naba\'a, NCA, OFADEC, PMU Interlife, SEEDS; ECB Project and the IASC. in Bangladesh, Georgia, India, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Lebanon, Norway, Pakistan, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Southern Sudan, Switzerland, Uganda and the UK. On the web, email, telephone Over 120 associations in 42 nations

Slide 5

Who contributed A sum of 1,595 people: 198: national NGOs and different CSOs 81 staff from actualizing accomplices 813 were immediate recipients of help projects, agents of host groups, and neighborhood powers 394 were national and worldwide staff of global NGOs 65 were delegates of the giver group and the UN ; 28 agents of Red Cross Societies; 97 were autonomous specialists or from other quality and responsibility activities.

Slide 6

Overall remarks No noteworthy changes in the substance of the Standard It is short; useful to have prerequisites and MoVs "it challenges organizations to address power irregular characteristics between help specialists and groups" "it separates responsibility to influenced populaces into particular and legitimately connected parts" "First endeavor to definitively go past voluntarism and set up quality benchmarks that are checked"

Slide 7

However… Make dialect more easy to use Clarify linkages and maintain a strategic distance from cover Balance arrangements and practice Balance the heaviness of various necessities Standard/review process contrasts Benchmarks 1 and 6 are slightest clear Benchmark 3 is minimum express

Slide 8

Highlights (1) Handling objections of misuse and manhandle No new Standard or benchmark Standards of conduct for staff/sets of accepted rules Role of chiefs Partners: as partners in the CRM; would it be a good idea for them to be required to have principles of conduct? Money related responsibility The Standard to reflect current review rehearse Financial responsibility between accomplices Requirements for organizations working with accomplices

Slide 9

Highlights (2) Gender Application to multi-command offices Coherence and complementarity Content: Sphere Content and process: ACFID, DEC, People In Aid, INTOSAI No extra benchmarks Coordination Supply chain Ethical gathering pledges

Slide 10

Immediate next strides Sphere Handbook update meeting Input from People In Aid Follow up meeting with the DEC Support from ICVA on corresponding methodologies

Slide 11

Tentative Timeframe June: open discussion on first draft end July: Steering Committee survey 26 July to 3 September : open counsel on the second draft, including: the Reference Group every part office asked for to submit formal criticism 20 September : last draft imparted to the Steering Committee 4 October : Final draft prepared for endorsement

Slide 12

Outputs Reports from all conferences Summary of proposed changes from the Standard Review interviews Feedback on the two draft renditions Briefing paper on primary lessons learnt from the usage of the Standard to date Report on advantages and difficulties of actualizing the HAP Standard Revised Guide, reviewer rules, other instrument

Slide 13

Unresolved issues Working with accomplices (Group 1) Accountability Framework (Group 2) Quality Management System (Group 3) "Different partners" (Group 4) Principles (Group 5)

Recommended
View more...