MAPPING EXERCISE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A CARE INTERNATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK

TERMS OF REFERENCE

(Final ver. 21 Sept 2010)

Background

The CI Program and Operations Committee (POC), which reports to the CI Executive Committee met in June 2010 in Geneva, and agreed to lead the development of a CARE-wide Accountability Framework (AF). It is envisaged that this would build on the lessons, experience and model of the CI Humanitarian Accountability Framework (HAF). This decision reflects both internal calls for such an accountability framework as well as external factors that make it prudent and timely to move ahead with an accountability initiative.

Specifically, the POC proposed that this work be advanced by having a small group who would collaborate to modify the current HAF, based on mapping of existing accountability initiatives within CARE, considering the appropriate scope of an Accountability Framework, and developing a draft outline of a framework, noting gaps that need to be addressed. Like the HAF, a process of consultations, piloting and capturing relevant learning is recommended.

In terms of a critical next step, POC agreed that a brief one page briefing note and a draft ToR for the development of an Accountability Framework be prepared in time for the next Executive Committee meeting in November to seek approval to move ahead with this critical process.

In order to ensure that this is a CI-wide process, an Accountability Framework Task Force (AFTF) has been established whose membership includes key stakeholders in CARE including lead members, other CI members (including prospective new members), and Country Office staff. The AFTF had their first discussion during a teleconference on 16 July 2010 to commence planning for the development of a CO Accountability Framework.

The Accountability Framework Task Force (AFTF) agreed to proceed to develop a CI-wide AF on the following basis:

Develop the AF using the pilot version of the HAF as a starting point. The HAF is already familiar to manyCARE staff and is being internalized. If the AF looks significantly different, then there is a real risk that it will be perceived as another new initiative and encounter resistance. In any case, the HAF already looks like an accountability framework – only a small component is specifically humanitarian in nature. At the same time, the opportunity should be used to “fix” any structural issues with the HAF.

Like the HAF, the people and communities with whom CARE and our partners work[1] must be placed at the centre of the AF. The AF needs to be relevant to all CARE’s stakeholders (both internal and external, including donors, peers, etc.) but the AF needs to be designed to “balance” accountability equitably across those with more and less power. At the moment, CARE’s accountability systems usually tend to be skewed towards those stakeholders with more power.

While maintaining a focus on communities with whom CARE and our partners work, the AF should be organizational as well as program oriented. Though led by the POC, other CI units, such as CARE Finance Directors, are natural stakeholders. (For example, the G&N sub-committee is leading on the development of the CI Information Disclosure & Complaints policy.) It will thus be important to keep “connected” with key parts of CARE as the AF is being developed and to be sure to keep key stakeholders well-informed.

It is important to develop the AF in a way that ensurescoherencebetween different parts of CARE, otherwise it will be very difficult to genuinely be accountable as an organisation. The importance of being coherent across the membership was a theme constantly stressed during the POC meeting.

At the same time, a CI Accountability Framework needs to be general andflexibleenough to accommodate the various accountability requirements of different parts of CARE.

The CI Secretariat (DSG Marcy Vigoda, supported by Jock Baker of the CARE Emergency Group) would lead on the development of a draft TOR for the overall AF. The CI Secretariat will lead on the coordination of the task, including identifying an external reference group to help with the development of the AF.

Accountability Framework Task Force (AFTF) – Roles & Responsibilities

AFTF members represent various CARE constituencies, including three Lead Members, a European member, staff from Country Offices (including CARE Peru) and the CI Secretariat. Marcy Vigoda, CI Deputy Secretary General, is the Chairperson. Several of the AFTF members are also members of the Program & Operations Committee (POC). The main role of the AFTF will be to oversee the process of developing an Accountability Framework for CARE International, which will include raising awareness and promoting ownership of both relevant processes and the final product. This mapping activity represents the first component activity.

Specific tasks and time commitments for the AFTF during the mapping exercise are likely to include:

  • Reviewing draft reports and TORs (probably 2 versions of a report and a couple of draft TORs between now and the end of 2010);
  • Participating in periodic conference calls as required (a call once every 1-2months as required);
  • Providing relevant advice and support to the consultant and AFTF Chairperson;
  • Promoting awareness ownership of the process and results, which will normally be integrated into ongoing program of work within each member’s network/constituency.

Objectives & Approachfor Development of an Accountability Framework

The objective of the mapping exercise is to inform the development of the Accountability Framework by compiling and analyzing information around current approaches to accountability within CARE and peer organisations.

The mapping exercise will seek to answer the following questions:

  1. Which internal and external standards, principles, codes, etc. has CARE signed up to?
  2. What is the level of awareness amongst CARE staff and partners (who are implementing CARE activities) about these commitments?
  3. How is accountability understood in different parts of the organization?
  4. What does the AF need to consider to cover both programmatic and organizational accountability within CARE?
  5. What are the opportunities to link or harmonise work on the AF with existing CARE agendas or processes?
  6. Who are the people in CARE and partners who would have a key role in implementing an AF? What are the current capacities?
  7. Which CARE stakeholders who need to be on board to ensure smooth progress and ownership when it comes time to put the AF into practice?
  8. What lessons can be drawn from outside of CARE amongst peer organizations which can help us move forward with the AF?
  9. What is the AF likely to look like and how will it be used? What supporting guidance, capacities and resources are likely to be required?

The mapping exercise will provide recommendations to help ensure the AF is

technically sound and appropriately targeted

“good enough”, maintaining as far as possible a simple and streamlined approach which can be readily implemented at all levels of CARE while ensuring appropriate rigour to enable accountability to be assessed or demonstrated

Integrated with other current CARE initiatives to help avoid duplication and maximize synergies.

Consistent with CARE International’s 2007-12 Strategic Plan, while informing the next Strategic Plan (thereby ensuring that the AF, or a revised version, is fully integrated into the next Strategic Plan).

Finally, the mapping exercise will produce a draft AF, highlighting any significant gaps which were not possible to fill within the scope of this consultancy and recommending how these might be filled.

Methodology

The mapping activity is likely to involve the following steps:

Review of key CARE documentation relating to accountability initiatives, including:

  1. the Humanitarian Accountability Framework along with relevant documents associated with its piloting and development
  2. July 2010 consultant report to the CI POC on “Advocating Harmonisation within CARE”
  3. List of key documents to be determined.

Review of key documentation relating to relevant accountability initiatives by similar organisations, including other INGOs.

Development of an analytical framework for collating information from CARE and external stakeholders that responds to the questions (i. to vii.) posed above, a set of survey instruments and questionnaires, and a time-bound and resourced workplan for information gathering that will include [some or all of] the following steps

  1. Communications plan for the mapping exercise.
  2. Consultations with staff from CI Members, COs and Field Offices, RMUs and Secretariat [by telephone, email and/or survey, as appropriate].
  3. Visits/interviews with CARE and partner staff in Tanzania and Nepal.
  4. Consultation with external stakeholders, including peer agencies who have been developing their own Accountability Frameworks.

Collaboration with AFTF members in producing communications materials such as briefing notes and powerpoint presentations.

Implementation of the agreed workplan.

Tentative Schedule & List of Deliverables

Task / Milestone / Due by (date)
Inception Reportcontaining a proposed analytical framework, methodology and related workplan for information gathering, for review and approval by the AFTF for review by the AFTF / Sept. 13th
Field Visit - Tanzania / Sept 27th– Oct 2nd
(to be confirmed by CO)
Field Visit - Nepal / Oct 22nd – Nov 3rd
Draft 0 of Reportfor fact-checking by small group / Nov 12th
Draft 1 of Report circulated to the AFTF for their feedback / Nov 19th
Debrief for the AFTF by teleconference / During Nov 25-29th
Deadline for Feedback on Draft 1 of Report by AFTF / Dec 3rd
Final Report(including a draft CI AF) circulated / Dec 10th

Notes:

The draft report to the AFTFwill be no more 20-25 pages plus annexes (key references, persons interviewed, etc.)

A draft CARE International Accountability Framework will be attached as an annex to the report, highlighting any remaining gaps and providing relevant guidance.

The circulation of the report would be supplemented by a debrief during a teleconference with the AFTF

Reviewer(s) & Management Arrangements

A consultant will be engaged under a CI Secretariat contract would lead and undertake this mapping work, starting on September 6th and completing in December 2010. Lora Wuennenberg, Director of CARE USA’s Grant Management Unit, will be a part-time team member for this work.

The review would be managed by the CI Deputy Secretary General, supported by CEG’s Program Quality & Accountability Coordinator and other AFTask Force members.

Provisional Budget(draft)

Costs will be shared between the AF Task Force members[2].

Accountability Framework Mapping Study –Estimated Consultancy Budget
Description / Units / Unit Cost (GBP) / GBP / Euro
Prep & Drafting Inception Report / 3 / 250 / 750
Prepare interview questions and survey / 3 / 250 / 750
Prep for field visits / 2 / 250 / 500
Document review / 3 / 250 / 750
Telephone interviews / 3 / 250 / 750
Field visit Tanzania (inc travel) / 6 / 250 / 1,500
Doc research and drafting reports / 5 / 250 / 1,250
Field visit Nepal (inc travel) / 12 / 250 / 3,000
NepalMission Report / 2 / 250 / 500
Debrief AF Task Force and finalize main report / 3 / 250 / 750
Sub-Total Fees / 42 / 10,500 / 12,600
Misc. (communications, stationary, etc.) / 1 / 125 / 125 / 150
SUB-TOTAL (CI Secretariat contract) / £10,625 / € 12,750
Funds committed by CI-UK / 8,500 / 10285
Funds still required / -£ 2,125 / -€ 2,465

Notes:

  • The above budget assumes that:
  • CARE Tanzania & CARE Nepal will cover in-country costs of the consultant (hotel, per diem and local travel)
  • CARE UKwill cover costs for the consultant’s international return air travel to Nepal
  • It is provisionally planned that Lora Wuennenberg can incorporate relevant consultations around the Accountability Framework into already planned visits to CARE South Africa, Zambia and potentially Canada.
  • Exchange rate used: £ 1. 00 = € 1.20

1

[1]This is a provisional term. As discussed in the AFTF call on September 16th it is expected that the AF mapping work should also result in recommendations on how CARE could describe our primary stakeholders (which in the HAF are described as disaster-affected communities)

[2]CI-UK has confirmed they are able to contribute £8,500 plus air travel to Nepal.