1. ‚Show me the money‛:
Generating evidence from and
for accountability in
Humanitarian work
Christina Laybourn (One World Trust) and
Alice Obrecht (Humanitarian Futures
Programme)

2. Accountability and evidence:
Where two worlds collide…
Expectations
Analysing evidence
External
Collecting evidence
party(ies)
Identifying evidence
‘Reality’
Accountability Evidence use

3. Accountability and evidence:
Where two worlds collide…
Expectations
Evidence:
information
Analysing evidence
supporting the
External
comparison of Collecting evidence
party(ies)
organisational Identifying evidence
reality to set
expectations
‘Reality’
Accountability

4. Accountability and evidence:
Where two worlds collide…
Analysing evidence
External
Collecting evidence party(ies)
Identifying evidence
Accountability:
mechanisms
through which
Evidence use external parties
are engaged in
an organisation’s
evidence use

5. Overview
• Part 1: The contribution of evidence to assuring
accountability
• Part 2: Putting it to use: accountability mechanisms
as evidence generators
• Part 3: Limitations of accountability and evidence
practice in Humanitarianism

6. The contribution of evidence to assuring
accountability: self regulatory initiatives
Humanitarian Accountability
Partnership: Certification against
the 2012 Standard in Accountability
and Quality Management
Steering Committee
for Humanitarian 16 Certified members, 12 further
Response Peer members have undertaken a
Review “baseline analysis” against the
Standard
CARE, Save the Disasters Emergency
Children, ICRC, IFRC, Committee: Accountability
Lutheran World Framework
Federation, Oxfam, C
aritas, ACT Alliance Action Aid, Age UK, British Red
and UNHCR Cross, CARE, CAFOD, Christian
Aid, Concern, Islamic Relief,
Merlin, Plan, Save the Children,
Tearfund, World Vision

7. i- Identification of evidence
HAP Standard Certification DEC Accountability Framework SCHR Peer Reviews
Baseline analysis against the Self-assessment against the Self-assessment at head office
Standard (either internal or framework and two selected countries
external) Independent audit of 5 ways No set assessment
Internal review of compliance of working in 2 countries, framework, but agreed areas
across all sites chosen by auditors for investigation
Independent Audit (every 3 “Peer” workshops of 2-3 Head quarter visits and Field
years, 18 month review agencies and auditor to visits to 2 countries by staff
checks progress) discuss findings from 2 peer agencies and an
Discussions between pairs of independent facilitator
CEOs Group discussion by 9 CEOs of
findings

8. ii- Collection of evidence
HAP Standard Certification DEC Accountability Framework SCHR Peer Reviews
Desk review of documents Desk review of submitted Field visits include desk
at head office evidence: looking for reviews as well as
At least 1 programme site evidence of Policy/ interviews with staff,
visit (chosen by auditors) Procedure, Application and partners and disaster
Assurance mechanisms affected persons.
Meeting with key staff to Head office desk reviews
discuss evidence and interviews

9. iii- Analysis of evidence
HAP Standard Certification DEC Accountability Framework SCHR Peer Reviews
Certification against the Component of DEC Learning exercise
HAP Standard membership Summary of lessons learnt
Areas for improvement “Improvement published
identified and addressed Commitments” of changes “12 months on” reports on
Summaries are published to be made by next year progress against peer
2011/12 process published review recommendations
a summary report

10. Putting It To Use: Accountability
mechanisms as evidence generators
• Reflective
perspectives on
organisational
Participatory
evaluations achievements
• Adequacy of
current activities to Feedback • Urgent needs
meet stated needs
mechanisms • Contextual
• Evidence of serious challenges
misconduct/ fraud • Beneficiary
• Community
Consultations entitlements
satisfaction (!) • Community
skills/ ability
to contribute

11. Putting It To Use: Accountability
mechanisms as evidence generators
Head
office
Country
offices
EVIDENCE LEARNING
Field
offices

12. Limitations of evidence and
accountability practice
1. Internal organisational barriers to evidence-accountability cross
fertilisation
2. The backwards-looking orientation of evidence-based policy

13. Limitations of evidence and accountability practice:
1. Internal barriers
EVIDENCE LEARNING

14. Limitations of evidence and accountability practice:
1. Internal barriers
EVIDENCE LEARNING

15. Limitations of evidence and accountability practice
2. Backwards-looking and short term perspectives
Evidence-based
?
Black
strategy
swan
event

16. Limitations of evidence and accountability practice
2. Backwards-looking and short term perspectives
Greater
Better use of
involvement of
evidence from
stakeholders in
accountability
the evidence use
mechanisms
process
Sensitivity to Improved
process and
to drivers of learning
change
Knowledge that Better
supports accountability to
anticipatory & future disaster
adaptive affected
capacities populations

17. Dialogues for Disaster Anticipation and Resilience
• Community-based and national workshops in
advance of rains to inform design
• Transmission of information before and over the
course of the rainy season
• Community-based evaluation after the rains
• Technical consultation
• Cross exchange learning

18. Dialogues for Disaster Anticipation and Resilience
http://www.elrha.org/dialogues

19. Thank you!
CLaybourn@OneWorldTrust.orgAlice.Obrecht@kcl.ac.uk