Sri LankaConsortium (FINAL DRAFT)
Contents
Acronyms......
1.0Executive Summary......
2.0Background......
2.1Introduction to the Project and Its Purpose......
2.2Brief on the Self-Assessment Activity and Its Purpose......
2.3Overview of the Consortium Members......
3.0Methodology......
3.1The Methodology Used By Each Organisation......
4.0Consolidation of Key Findings......
4.1Overall Understanding of CS within Organisations......
4.2Policies and Strategies......
4.3Institutional Commitment......
4.4Learning and Knowledge Management......
4.5Integration into Programming......
4.6Institution-wide CSA Mainstreaming......
4.7CSA Competencies......
4.8Funding/Donors/ Partners......
5.0Change Objectives......
5.1Organisation-level......
5.2Consortium-level......
6.0Conclusion......
Acronyms
APA- Annual Performance Appraisal
CAFOD- Catholic Agency For Overseas Development
CoC- Code of Conduct
CS- Conflict Sensitivity
CSA- Conflict Sensitive Approach
CSD- Conflict Sensitive Development
DNH- Do No Harm
EMT- Executive Management Team
FGD- Focus Group Discussion
HAP- Humanitarian Accountability Partnership
IHL- International Humanitarian Law
IOP- Individual Operational Plans
KII- Key Informant Interviews
LCP- Local Capacities for Peace
LNGO- Local Non Governmental Organisation
NGO- Non Governmental Organisation
PCA- Peace and Community Action
PCM- Project Management Cycle
Red R UK/CHA LSCB- Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies Learning Support &
CapacityBuilding (LSCB) Programme
SCiSL- Save the Children in Sri Lanka
SLT- Senior Leadership Team
WVL- World Vision Lanka
1.0Executive Summary
The main goal of the Practice of Conflict Sensitivity Project is to ensure greater impact of development and humanitarian assistance through improved and more widespread mainstreaming of conflict sensitive approaches. Key outcomes will include fostering a shared understanding of conflict sensitivity across a network of international and local development and humanitarian organisations, collation and dissemination of lessons and recommendations for mainstreaming effective CSA across a range of contexts and sectors to policy-makers, donors and practitioners as well as to strengthen expertise and capacity amongst member organisations and civil society partners to institutionalise and implement CSA at HQ and local levels. While UK is the contract holder with DFID, the project focuses on 3 countries -Sri Lanka, Kenya and Sierra Leone and works in a consortium in each country. The contract holder of the 44 month project is CARE International UK while CARE is the in-country lead agency in Sri Lanka, Action-aid in Kenya and World Vision in Sierra Leone.
Sri Lanka began implementation in June 2009 and is at present in its third year. The SL consortium consists of 8 organisations; CAFOD, CARE, International Alert, Peace and Community Action, RedRUK, Saferworld, Save the Children in Sri Lanka, and World Vision Lanka.
Having a strong focus on effecting organisational change through learning and sharing lessons, the project has been broken down into the following 6 elements;
- Development of a Shared Definition of Conflict Sensitivity
- Analysis of Constraints and Barriers to Conflict Sensitivity
- Building Capacity for Conflict Sensitivity
- Documenting and Sharing Existing Practice
- Testing, Monitoring and Evaluating Innovative Approaches
- Advocacy and outreach
Following the development of a framework for the self-assessment process and as part of analysing the constraints and barriers to CS; each member agency determined its own methodology for undertaking the assessment[1] in November 2009. This included the following;
The Monkey Survey: This online survey aimed at identifying staff’s understanding and the use of CS and to ensure maximum participation it was translated into local languages.
The analysis of the outcome of this process revealed that, while 82% of participants thought CS was relevant to their work, 90% believed they were already conflict sensitive and did not require further training. With regard to the PMC, it was found that all staff believed there should be a CS focus in the planning and assessment stages, a smaller number thought it relevant during implementation stage, while less than half felt it was required during monitoring and evaluation. In addition to the aforementioned, the consortium also broadened the UK definition of CS, which was essentially war and armed-conflict related.
Interviews: The interview process included questions which assessed agencies capacity for mainstreaming CS and focused on understanding their status on CS policies and strategies and its integration into programmes etc. This step in the process was adapted by each agency in order to suit their own requirements i.e. the use of only relevant sections from the lengthy questionnaire and varied data collection methods.
The findings from the responses to the interview showed that despite a commitment to be CS, all agencies lacked any clear policies or guidelines on it and that the understanding of the concept varied widely within each organisation with disparities in relevance and application; also a lack of commitment by senior staff on CS integration into programming had resulted in the lack of resources to develop staff capacity. It was also found that organisation partners lacked an understanding of CS.
Desk Analysis: The desk analysis carried out by all agencies assessed policies and procedures on conflict sensitivity. It included an assessment matrix which combined the results of the monkey survey and the interviews, and ‘ranked’ each of the seven areas identified in the self assessment document.
Sharing of findings: This step in the process brought about an agreement to develop a clear understanding of the strengths and support needs of each organisation and the consortium as a whole. It also helped to develop learning objectives and potential activities to build CS capacity. Each agency illustrated their ‘self assessment journey’ in picture form and the developed learning plans which helped determine potential change objectives and activities to achieve them etc. This process concluded with the change objectives along with related plans being finalised in August 2010.
The key findings of each agency based on the categories listed in the SA process outline document are summarised as follows;
-All agencies were aware of CS although there were varied degrees of understanding
-Despite reference to CS in major policies and practices,agencies lacked a clear policy outlining what CS meant and how it was to be mainstreamed
-Leadership’s role in raising the profile of CS was mixed
-Despite the existence of ‘safe spaces’ to discussand reflect on CS, recognition and use of these by staff was uncertain
-When it came to assessing CSA competencies, staff in some organisations had a solid understanding of CS, while in others it was found that staff were unable to clearly articulate appropriate attitudes.
-Agencies experience in incorporating CS in their interactions with partners and donors varied greatly.
Finally, the self-assessment process looked at determining the change objectives at the individual organisation level and at the consortium level. The organisation-level change objectives included raising awareness of CSA and ensuring it is viewed as part of the organisation development process, development of CS policies and structuring CSA into existing reporting mechanisms and improving donors’ understanding of CS. At the consortium-level agencies collectively identified objectiveswhich included the strengthening of CS understanding within member organisations, their partners and beneficiaries, to develop guidancetools for mainstreaming CS into the project cycle and support functions; and finally, to document and share best practices.
2.0Background
2.1Introduction to the Project and Its Purpose
In an attempt to work more effectively in conflict-prone and affected situations and in order to limit the possibility of doing harm, a wide range of conflict sensitive approaches (CSA) have been utilised by donors and NGOs over the years. Despite these efforts significant challenges to the mainstreaming of CSA remain.
Therefore, the main goal of this project is to ensure greater impact of development and humanitarian assistance through improved mainstreaming of CSA. Its purpose is to improve the policies and practices that support CSA across a broad network of NGOs, local partners and donor agencies. It is hoped that the key outcomes will include, fostering a shared understanding of conflict sensitivity across a network of development, humanitarian and peace-building organisations; collation and dissemination of lessons and recommendations and strengthening of expertise and capacity amongst member organisations and partners in order to institutionalise and implement CSA.
The project works in a consortium of agencies and is implemented in 4 countries. UK, Kenya, Sierra Leone and Sri Lanka. While CARE UK is the contract holder with DFID, the in country lead agencies are CARE (Sri Lanka), ActionAid (Kenya) and World Vision (Sierra Leone).
The project broadly consists of three phases; Phase 1 (August 2008 to March 2009)[2]- Assessment, analysis and partnership building: this stage includes the articulation of a common working definition for Conflict Sensitivity Approaches (CSA) at UK and country levels, self assessments of consortia members in the UK, and consequent identification of change objectives and associated capacity building plans, in addition to building a knowledge base regarding CSA practice and knowledge of the consortia, donor and other actors in each country.
Phase 2 (April 2009 to March 2011) - In country application and capacity-building. This section will include interagency capacity-building, self assessments and identification of change objectives of the pilot country consortia; outreach, building knowledge base etc. Additionally, at this stage each country consortia will design a pilot and related M&E system for CSA mainstreaming. Initial findings will be disseminated as well. At the UK level one rapid onset emergency will be chosen to pilot CSA (will not be based within a pilot country).
Phase 3 (April 11 to March 12) - Consolidation, dissemination and policy influencing. Activities will include consolidation of lessons, practical guidance for CSA and clear recommendations for DFID and the NGO sector on quality standards, principles and best practices for CSA, dissemination of learning, and development of strategy for follow up beyond project period.
2.2Brief on the Self-Assessment Activity and Its Purpose
In September 2009 the Sri Lankan consortium comprising the following 8 organisations; CAFOD, CARE, International Alert (IA), Peace and Community Action (PCA), RedR, Saferworld, Save the Children in Sri Lanka (SCiSL), and World Vision Lanka;went through a consultative process where each member shared their organisations definition and understanding of Conflict Sensitivity (CS) and how it was applied practically in the organisational structure. The consortium then arrived at a working definition of what ‘conflict sensitivity’ meant by linking the commonalities. (Annexure 1)
“A conflict sensitive approach involves gaining a sound understanding of the two-way interaction between activities and context and acting to minimise negative impacts and maximise positive impacts of interventions on conflict, within an organisation’s given priorities/objectives (mandate).”
Informed by this definition of CSA, the Sri Lankan consortium met in October 2009 to plan its self-assessment process. The meeting was convened by World Vision Lanka, which was the lead agency on this activity and attended by Saferworld, Peace and Community Action, and Save the Children. The main outcome of this meeting was a 3-page document providing a framework for the self-assessment process. (Annexure 2)
The objectives of the self-assessment:The process began by agreeing on what the objectives of the self-assessment should be;
-To assess the capacities, strengths and weaknesses of each organisation in order to develop a plan that would build capacity and address impediments to CSA
-To document clearly what it means to be conflict sensitive in different environmentsi.e. peace building, development, humanitarian etc.
-To use the self-assessment as a baseline to monitor the progress of project activities
Sharing of findings: Since each organisation’s findings would be at varied levels and at times controversial and confidential, it was decided to let each one select the finding they wished to share with the consortium, following approval from the management. However, it was decided that as far as possible all would share a summary of findings.
Language: In order that staff at all levels would be able to understand and participate fully in the exercise, it was agreed that the monkey survey be translated into local languages. However, as there was room for misinterpretation of terminology in the translation process, it was suggested that English be the chief language while the main questions of each section be translated into Sinhala and Tamil, while also using peer support where necessary.
The assessment process:In determining the areas of assessment, it was agreed that while all the organisations would explore all the areas, when it came to sharing experiences, each one would have the freedom to select which areas they would share with the consortium.
a.Human Resources
b.Finance
c.Development
d.Humanitarian Emergencies
e.Administration
f.Peace building
g.Ministry Quality/ M and E
h.Management and Field Staff
i.Partners
j.Donors (especially for Local NGOs)
k.Communities/Beneficiaries
Therefore, the entire self-assessment process took the following steps;
1.Online Monkey Survey (which assessedstaffs understanding of CS, how they perceived its relevance and use in particular contexts)
2.Interviews (which assessed each agency’s capacity for mainstreaming CS, their status on CS policies and strategies, institutional commitment, CS use in terms of dealing with donors etc.)
3.Desk Analysis (which was carried out by agencies to review whether policies and procedures were conflict sensitive)
4.Assessment Matrix to determine:
a.The ranking of each of the seven areas identified in the Self-Assessment Document i.e. Emerging orDiscovering (considering, enquiring), Developing (partly in place) Advanced (in place)
b. The Change Objectives
2.3Overview of the Consortium Members
CAFOD
The Catholic Agency for Overseas Development (CAFOD) is the official agency of the Catholic Church in England and Wales. CAFOD raises funds from the Catholic community, the UK government and the general public to: promote long-term development, respond to emergencies, identify the causes of poverty, promote social awareness, campaign in favour of poor communities, and promote human development and social justice in accordance with Christian faith and values in more than 40 countries worldwide.
In Sri Lanka, CAFOD has been supporting projects focusing on humanitarian response, economic justice and/or conflict resolution and peace-building through partners for over 20 years. We aim to bring hope, compassion and solidarity to poor communities and standing side by side with them to end poverty and injustice.
CARE Sri Lanka
CARE Sri Lanka was established in 1950. Initially the organisation focused on food-related programmes and addressing maternal and child health issues. In the 1980s CARE Sri Lanka diversified its programme portfolio in response to the changing needs of the country and the organisation’s wider objective of poverty alleviation. This diversification emphasised programming in the areas of agriculture and natural resources, small economic activity development, and relief and rehabilitation.
In the 1990s CARE Sri Lanka continued to decentralise its service delivery structures and began implementing programmes through a network of field offices around the country. During this time CARE Sri Lanka’s project portfolio continued to reflect a commitment to poverty alleviation. In recent years CARE Sri Lanka’s programmes have sought to move beyond addressing the traditional causes of household and community vulnerability, to address the underlying issues of marginalisation and exclusion.
International Alert (IA)
IA is an independent peace building organisation that has worked for over 20 years to lay the foundations for lasting peace and security in communities affected by violent conflict. The organisations multifaceted approach focuses both in and across various regions; aiming to shape policies and practices that affect peace building; and helping to build skills and capacity through training.
In Sri Lanka IA’s areas of programme activity emphasize a focus on the Sri Lankan regions, addressing the socio-economic drivers of conflict. IA’s activity consists of four components, which are:
(a) the mobilizing of regional business leadership in conflict sensitive business interventions and mediations in the regions;
(b) the analysis of regional socio-economic conditions and development policy gaps;
(c) the mobilizing of national and Diaspora business leaderships in region-level engagements, and
(d) the facilitation of policy dialogue on youth exclusion issues.
Peace and Community Action (PCA)
PCA is a relatively small Sri Lankan Peace building NGO primarily working in the South and East of the island, with its national office in Colombo.PCA is the Sri Lankan lead for the South East Asia Peace Alliance and has lead training responsibility throughout South Asia.
The organisation functioned on the premise that it is intrinsically conflict sensitive, thus it was initially felt by fieldwork staff that the need for a focus on conflict sensitivity and a self-assessment process was unnecessary. This together with insubstantialstructured policies, procedures, staff guidance and a lack of a systematic process for updating and keeping them “live” in the minds of staff have been seen as challenges to embedding conflict sensitivity into the organisation.
These challenges have been offset to a large extent by the values and practice of conflict sensitivity having been adopted through inculcation into the staff culture rather than the structure of the organisation and are regarded a personal responsibility.
The result is the lack of regular review processes and strategies to anticipate the need for new policies together on one side and a willingness to build the organisation and embed systematic tools into the way the organisation works so it supports the staff culture of conflict sensitivity, on the other.
PCA is undergoing an organisational development process which conflict sensitivity will feed into and be supported by.
RedR
The organisation first started operating in April 1980, recruiting engineers to work with a variety of relief agencies, including the United Nations, Save the Children, the International Red Cross, Oxfam, Islamic Relief, Merlin and the UK Department for International Development (DFID). It quickly established its niche in supporting disaster relief efforts worldwide. The RedR idea spread to other countries and an international family of humanitarian non-governmental organisationsformed. Its range of support services has grown, most importantly since 1992 in training and learning activities for humanitarian personnel, with both regular and bespoke training being offered in the UK and in the field.