1. CARE consortium accountability strategy
Beneficiary accountability in the community resilience project in Grande-Anse – real time feedback to inform on beneficiary satisfaction
La CCP a ete innovee au Malawi dans le cadre d’un project de sante de la reproduction. Elle a depuis gagner en popularite au sein et en dehors de CARE;
Le .
Le suivi participatif est le pillier central de l’approche gouvernance inclusive de CARE International. Le fondement/soubassement du travail de suivi participatif de CARE est l’augmentation continue du volume d’interactions entre prestataires et usagers de service au tour de la performance et la qualite des services fournis. Ceci est realiser a travers:
l’encouragement/promotion du feedback des usagers des services sur la performance et la qualite des services fournis par une unite de service;
Fournir les prestataires et decideurs locaux d’un canal d’information sur la perception des citoyens/users sur la performance et la qualite des services fournis.
Pour CARE le suivi participatif a un double interet: (i) permettre aux usagers des services d’evaluer eux-meme la performance et la qualite de la prestation des services et partager leur perception sur leur satisfaction en rapport avec le service evaluer. (ii) d’un autre cote le suivi participatif permet aux prestataires de service et/ou autorites locale et nationale de connaitre la perception des usagers d’un service quelconque sur la qualite, les resultats/impacts, et prendre les mesures correctives/amelioration de la qualite et/ou performance.
Objectifs:
Augmenter la redevabilite sur les engagements pris: Impliquer les citoyens comme usagers a demander des comptes aux prestataires
Evaluation de l’efficacite + la qualite des resultats: Suivi participatif d’une intervention – ce qui marche et ce qui ne marche pas
CARE consortium accountability strategy
January 13, 2019

2. CARE Consortium accountability strategy
Aims:
Strengthen target groups feedback to enhance:
Local ownership of CRP intervention
Beneficiaries voice in the CRP implementation & decision making
Create avenues for dialogue to:
Increase beneficiaries satisfaction – reduce unintended negative effects
Improve relationships with target groups – beneficiaries & local authorities
Generate real time data to:
Evidence the performance of the project over project lifespan
Evidence of challenges & successes
Systematic info sharing; and collection, response, & report on beneficiary feedback
Approach:
1. Improved relationships with beneficiaries
2. Enhanced ownership of CRP interventions
Outcomes
The implementation of the accountability strategy will focus more on the project delivery level due to time constraint.
Target Results
Result1: Quality of CRP coordination
Result2: Performance & quality of the CRP
Result3: CRP beneficiary satisfaction
Result4: Target beneficiaries voice in CRP decision making
January 13, 2019

3. Accountability strategy focus
Comparable
Satisfaction
Ownership
Complaints
Capacity development
Quarterly
VSLA
DRRM
Bridges
Social protection
Data to inform
Annual
Quality of relationship
Performance
On the status of beneficiary interaction with the CRP over time – evidence of impact
January 13, 2019

4. Accountability dialogue
Beneficiary accountability system
systematicReporting
Real time data on beneficiary satisfaction
Obj.: Continuous info sharing
Channels: hot desk, sms, update
Information sharing
Obj.: Close the feedback loop – inform on corrective actions
Channels: Hot desk; radio; etc.
Obj.: Continuous feedback
Channels: Quarterly micro survey; feedback ledge; sms; scorecard
Corrective actions/measures follow up
Beneficiary voice in CRP implementation
Feedback gathering
Obj.: Feed management with real time feedback
Channels: PMU, and PIT
For further details on the process to undergo for each of the building block of the system, do read the implementation guide.
Project management Feedback review meeting
Accountability dialogue
Ob.: Open dialogue & systematic response to feedback
Channels: CAF; Open accountability day; radio programmes

5. Implementation plan 4 the strategy
Beneficiary accountability used as strategy for sustainability
Pilot the beneficiary feedback system in two communities: 1 peri-urban community close Jeremie and 1 remote rural community
Context
On project implementation/delivery to generate data on beneficiary feedback on CRP: (i) effectiveness ; (ii) relevance; & (iii) quality of project interventions. 3 target groups: LA, direct & indirect beneficiary
Focus
Seek & respond to beneficiary feedback on project activities
Draw comparable data on beneficiary satisfaction – real time data to evidence CRP experience
Objective
Design feedback system & share work plan :15th June15
Finalise working documents and test tools – 10th July15
Implementation of activities start on – 15th July15
Process
Resource
Staff time – M&E & accountability focal points – 2 days/month
Feedback database & sms system – 10th July15
Learning
Documentation of the feedback system – end of cycle/fiscal year
Refine the system for wide sharing, and scale up – Sept2016
January 13, 2019

6. Operationalisation of the feedback system
Info sharing
Monthly activity plan update sharing
Monthly review of community feedback ledges
Regular sms alerts
Account officer with support from M&E
Set survey database and application for collection, analysis and reporting
Calendar for field survey & CAF meetings
SMS and feedback ledge for confidential & non confidential solicited
Solicited Feedback
Account officer; FO& M&E with support from PQL
Open dialogue
Account officer; FO & account focal points with support from PQL
Quarterly forum to discuss & agree corrective actions on shared feedback: immediately after micro survey
Use radio to discuss issues/queries raised from micro surveys – quarter
Yearly forum to showcase project activities
Reporting
Account officer; FO& M&E with support from PQL
Quarterly report on beneficiary satisfaction on CRP activities
Quarterly report on CRP corrective actions
January 13, 2019

7. Pilot & scale up phases of the feedback system
3 communities: 1 per partner – IRC; CARE & B2P
July – October 15:
Purpose: capacity transfer to CRP partners
Focus: info sharing; micro survey + dialogue
Pilot phase
Account officer and M&E, with PQL support
All target communities: sample of formed groups
Nov15 – Jun16:
Purpose: systematic application of the feedback system
Focus: consolidate experience on the feedback system
Scale up phase
Account officer and M&E officers, with PQL support
Links with communications strategy – at information sharing levels; and dialogue on beneficiary feedback through satisfaction micro survey
PQL support & leadership
Use of existing resources: materials like PDA for micro survey & staff time – set working groups of CRP M&E and comms staff
Specific guidance
2 channels for feedback on misconduct: feedback ledge commissioned to a community accountability focal point (to be identified and train); & contact numbers for sms and calls
January 13, 2019
Report on beneficiary feedback in all quarterly report

8. Analysis and response to collected feedback
Type of feedback
Collection channel
Analysis
Response channel
Reporting – responsible
Feedback on activities
Micro survey
First level of automatic analysis – by the account officer & M&E
Joint analysis with beneficiary in community meetings – Account officer & M&E officer with Support from Account Advisor + impact measurement advisor
Community account forums – M&E & Account officers;
Radio – Account officer + comms advisor;
Cty meeting
Accountability officer & M&E officer, with Support from PQL
Feedback/complaints on malpractices
Feedback ledge
Monthly analysis – Accountability officer
- Monthly through Hot Desk – Account officer & M&E
Confidential feedback/complaints
SMS or call
Instant analysis based on the severity of reported cases
Monthly analysis
Individual responses – PQL/PC/ACDP
Radio messages – Account Officer and comms advisor
January 13, 2019