Beneficiary Accountability Approaches A Review of Partner Approaches to Accountability to Affected Populations in Turkey

Activity 18 of CBI-TWG Work-Plan Review existing accountability approaches and mechanisms and develop minimum standards/guidelines for accountability in CBI AAP Areas reviewed: Information Provision Community Consultations Feedback & Complaints Collecting Recording Referring Responding

Data Received Many thanks to the following partners for sharing their AAP approaches: Danish Refugee Council – operating in Hatay & Urfa World Vision – cross-border operations Welthungerhilfe – operating in Gaziantep, Killis, Merdin and Kiziltepe

Information Provision – Perceived Preferred Communication of Current Modalities/ Most Efficiently Functioning Text message/phone calls - distribution details (time, place, identification documents required); Face to Face - verbal information is also provided to the beneficiaries/communities through Outreach teams and Helpdesk Officers available at community centers. Leaflets - showing list of shops where beneficiaries can purchase items free of charge Posters - specifically for the Code of Conduct Complaint Mechanism Social media outlets - due to the popularity of Facebook and the ease of access, a page will be created, specific to the project, and same information as provided during distributions and through community centers will be made available for public use. DRC Key Messages: *Key messages: Please call SNF hotline phone number: _________ immediately when you face any problem during shopping like; • If shopkeeper forces/pressures you to buy a certain items/ goods that y ou ’ d not prefer to or restricts you from buying certain items/ goods If you think the price is higher what it should be or h igher than price tag If shopkeeper applies pressure on you to spend all money ins ide the card by telling that the card will expire or somethin g else, don t believe and call hotline. If you are not treated in a good manner by the shopkeeper If you need guidance and help from DRC staff to buy the correct item. (especially for medical items)

Community Consultations – Program Phases Design Phase Beneficiaries consulted on: e-card loading time, transportation to/from the shops, e- card distribution points and time. Beneficiaries consulted on timing of household visits. Implementation & Monitoring Hotline modalities to receive feedback, card issues and code of conduct issues PDMs to collect info on quality of service Case Referrals though engagement with host communities Evaluation FGDs KIIs conducted with beneficiaries

Feedback & Complaints Collecting Recording Referring Responding Hotlines: Operational hotlines Code of Conduct national hotline Complaints Boxes in the following areas: Community Center, Livelihood Center, Mutli Functional Safe Space or distribution point). Texts/Whattsup messges Email/Facebook Recording Standard template for recording complaints & feedback Coding for reference purposes. 1.Complaint/suggestion form 2. Call register 3. Complaint Register Referring Complaints are referred internally to the relevant department Depending on the nature of the complaint, they are either handled internally, or referred externally where required. Responding For complaints only: FAQs provided to hotline operators for instant response where possible; responsible manager responds to referred complaint within 7 days, responses recorded on templates Preferred response modalities are text messages and hotlines. WVI Complaints that require written responses are hand-delivered to the complainants (by outreach Assistants); For complaints who cannot be reached via phone or available at their residential places, responses will be kept in the community center and the same will be handed over to the complainant upon visiting the community center.

What is working well? Text messages: good way to get key messages to all beneficiaries Hotline: Allows quick action regarding any issues with shops, e-cards, lack of information Helpdesks (community centers): enjoy a high rating for verbal information sharing Posters: in public places are efficient to distribute information

Opportunities for Improvement Greater community engagement in program design & implementation A more formalised way to feed results into programming (same with feedback collected) as opposed to ad hoc consultations Gaps: Lack of clear guidelines for communicating vulnerability criteria and reasons for exclusion from assistance; No complaints SOP/guidelines outlining referrals for different complaints categories and case management; Leaflets are not sufficient to communicate with broader affected population;

Proposed Next Steps for Discussion: A Sub-Working Group to address: Continuation of AAP Scoping Assessment through analysis of more partner data; Collection of key templates/materials for reference to other partners i.e. Hotline complaint form Hotline response matrix Development of minimum standards/guidelines for accountability in CBI.