1. CARE International Humanitarian Accountability Framework (HAF) March 2010

2. CARE’s Humanitarian Mandate Articulates CARE’s commitment to the humanitarian imperative in line with its vision, mission and program principles. Goal Responding to humanitarian emergencies is an essential part of CARE’s work to fight poverty and injustice (…). CARE helps people cope with crises through disaster risk reduction, emergency relief, preparedness and post-crisis recovery. Objectives The primary objective of humanitarian response is to meet immediate needs of affected populations in the poorest communities in the world. Recognizing that people have the fundamental right to life with dignity, CARE also strives to address the underlying causes of people’s vulnerability CARE is a major force in humanitarian response and has a responsibility as a leader in the sector to demonstrate the highest standards of effectiveness and quality.

3. Rationale …. (1) Proliferation of manuals, procedures, standards and principles - what is mandatory and what is just guidance? (2) Good standards (e.g. Sphere), but not applied consistently; (3) No adverse consequences for poor quality at beneficiary level as long as donors are kept happy. (4) Complex internal structures

4. HAF objectives Help ensure that these issues remain visible throughout CARE Help provide clarity for senior managers who need to know what CARE ’ s commitments mean for them and their teams Help CARE staff, particularly those working with disaster-affected communities, put accountability into practice throughout their work Help CARE staff at all levels fulfil our commitments to our primary stakeholders.

5. CARE’s Humanitarian Accountability Framework (HAF) Using our power responsibly * Accountability is both a means for CARE to improve the relevance, quality and impact of our work, and an end in itself, as our stakeholders – especially beneficiaries – have a right to hold CARE to account. * Humanitarian accountability is an appropriate shift of the balance of power back towards disaster affected people.

6. Foundations of HAF Draws on existing internal and interagency standards and codes for humanitarian quality and accountability that CARE has committed to. This includes: CARE International’s Program Framework CARE International’s Humanitarian Mandate The Code of Conduct for International Red Cross and Red Crescent movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief (RCRC Code of Conduct) The Sphere Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards for Disaster Relief The Humanitarian Accountability Partnership (HAP) Standards The Good Enough Guide: Impact Measurement and Accountability in Emergencies and The People in Aid Code of Conduct.

7. Good Enough (GE) Approach The HAF will be used as a basis for judging the quality and accountability at each phase of a response using a ‘good enough’ approach. GE approach acknowledges that in an emergency response, adopting a quick and simple approach to impact measurement and accountability may be the only practical possibility. GE does not mean second best, but rather it means recognizing and acknowledging limitations in terms of capacity and time, prioritizing appropriately, taking steps to anticipate and fill gaps and, as the situation changes, review and revise accordingly.

8. 3 Components of the Humanitarian Accountability Framework Humanitarian Benchmarks Response targets (Performance Metrics) Compliance System

9. CARE’s Humanitarian Accountability Framework

10. Indicators for Benchmarks Indicators link to key internal and external: –Standards (e.g. Sphere, CARE Project Standards) –Humanitarian Principles (e.g. HAP, CARE Programming Principles) –Codes of Conduct

11. Performance Metrics Indicators 1. Timeliness of Response 2. Quality & Accountability 3. Competence in Core Sectors 4. Emergency Revenue Trends - Funding 5. Emergency Revenue Trends - Capacity

12. Leadership Benchmark (as an example…) -a clear statement of humanitarian accountability that is publicly available and easily understood by key stakeholders; -senior leaders take all reasonable steps to ensure that adequate mechanisms are in place to comply with CARE’s Humanitarian Accountability Framework.

13. Compliance Compliance vs. feedback ! Level 1 (Internal): Periodic self-audit reviews, internal peer review and external evaluations ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Level 2 (External): Option 1: Interagency Peer Reviews looking at compliance of accountability framework. Option 2: External Certification (e.g HAP2007, ISO 9000). External audit after a “baseline” self- assessment against standards.

14. Requirements of Quality and Accountability Sufficient human resources Setting standards and commitment Induction and capacity-building Communication resources for information provision Stakeholder feedback and complaints systems and taking responsibility of our work Learning and reflection i.e. AARs, external evaluations, etc. Emergency Preparedness Planning (EPP)

15. Discussion