Accountability to Affected Populations

UNICEF Interdivisional Working Group

Quarterly meeting

18th September 2014

Participants:OED (DED Geeta Rao Gupta), DHR (Bintou Keita), Ethics Office (Suomi Sakai), Child Protection (Mendy Marsh), HATIS (Karin Sorensen), HFSS (Carla Martinez), Evaluation Office (Erica Mattellone), HPS (Sibi Lawson-Marriott and Kariane Peek Cabrera), EMOPS (Yasmin Haque)

Welcoming words from DED AAP Champion Geeta Rao Gupta:

The DED welcomes the role of champion and chair of the quarterly meetings. She expressed that AAP is an important part of UNICEF as well as the wider UN system, we must focus our efforts on the ‘how’ rather than the ‘what’ we do. The DED sees the role of UNICEF as an important ‘shifting the agenda’ actor at the interagency level. Other than WFP, UNICEF is also known for the work carried out at field level.

The DED reinforced UNICEF’s commitments to the PSEA agenda as GBV issues are included in the recently endorsed Gender Action Plan and consequently UNICEF holdsitself accountable on how UNICEF interacts with affected populations. The DED recognises the work on PSEA and AAP is challenging but hopes to make progress in this sector as tools have already been created and the work will follow on from what was started by the previous AAP champion DED Yoda Brandt.

The DED sees the role of the quarterly meetingsas an opportunity to move forward, on a technical level, the recommendations from the self –assessment as well as the UNICEF led activities from the interagency work plan. The DED feels the merge of PD and EMOPS provided an opportunity to learn from past positive experiences such as the ‘Social Accountability’ and ‘A Promise Renewed’ mechanisms.

The DED expressed the principle of ‘do no harm’ as a guiding principle for the work on AAP and PSEA. This principle demands we ‘listen’ and ‘learn’ while we ‘do’ and ‘speak’. The DED turned the attention on the current Ebola crisis as it is not a traditional crisis and requires an adapted response that includes more listening as there are ethical repercussions. The response needs to be done with a full buy-in from the community and the solutions proposed by the affected communities must be taken into account.

Reflections from around the table:

  • All working group members expressed enthusiasm at the principles articulate by the DED. The Ethics division felt there was a rejuvenation of the group.
  • It was felt that an important part of working on AAP and PSEA is strengthening the internal communication about AAP and PSEA, once the internal communication system is in place, it will incentivise external communication.
  • It was expressed that the work on AAP so far happened as isolated cases and it is great to hear the level of buy-in at a senior level. It is important that this buy-in permeates down to the field level.
  • The WG members agreed at the opportune moment of the PD and EMOPS merge as development settings are a good place to attend to AAP, if this becomes a habit it becomes transferable to humanitarian settings. Humanitarian settings should not have to ‘catch up’ the work on AAP.
  • To further complement the link between PD and EMOPS, EMOPS shared with the group that much work is already ongoing with regards to the preparedness phase of the humanitarian cycle. It was expressed that UNICEF needs to take stock hold of ongoing initiatives and using new technologies such as the U-report initiative and other initiatives where affected populations get to map their own risks. However it is important to also have responses once all the information is collected. The work on cash transfers is an opportunity.
  • The evaluation office reminded the group that it is in fact important to close the loop on the data that is collected. The data needs to be collected and used in real time and DHR reminded the group that this calls for more human and financial resources, if we do not deliver once we have created an expectation we are in fact ‘doing harm’.

Work planning for AAP/PSEA

  • The DED suggested that the recommendations from the self-assessment must be used as a basis for drafting a UNICEF work plan for AAP and PSEA. Special focus must be given to the operationalization of AAP at sector and cluster level.
  • The working group meetings will be used to monitor advancements of the recommendations and the next quarterly meeting should look at the most immediate actions that can be carried out.
  • Focal points will be assigned to each recommendation.

Update PSEA

  • The risk of sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) is higher during humanitarian crises. A recent report by Human Rights Watch reports SEA being committed by the AMISOM mission in Somalia. EMOPS told the group members that a PSEA ‘refresher’ email has been sent out to all UNICEF humanitarian action countries. This email contained information on simple steps to take within UNICEF in order to prevent sexual exploitation and abuse.
  • PSEA mechanisms in the UNICEF offices: there are policy guidelines available for a country to country system. DHR reminded the group that including PSEA in the PER is not an effective way to go forward. PSEA is a mind-set and that is what needs to be addressed, it is important to look at how people make sense of PSEA internally and move forward. DHR reminded the group that this should also be taken into account when looking at doing trainings; awareness of PSEA can wear out in two week, it is the mind-set that needs to be changed. PSEA reporting mechanisms are not only limited to the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) but are internal to each UN agency.
  • ‘Perception of PSEA’ Survey: it was suggested to include questions on PSEA in the upcoming Staff Survey. The questions will aim to better understand perceptions of SEA rather than as a basis for reporting on SEA incidences. [it was too late to include the questions in this year’s survey. Other options are being explored].
  • Discussion starters on PSEA: to create conversations starters on PSEA, two current initiatives were highlighted as a good practices; firstly the ‘discussion vignettes’ within Supply Division that encourage a thematic one hour lunch discussion every quarter based on a specific topics.A similar discussion of PSEA case studies could to be gathered in order to inform discussions. The second practice ighlighted was the ‘leadership dialogue sessions’ carried out at the Secretariat; during these sessions the SG calls on the ASG to hold a discussion on one of the UN values with all their staff, (including directors) who are then to do this in their offices.
  • Ethics dialogue focal points in the field: Out of the 160 UNICEF country offices, 50% have an ethics dialogue focal point. Included in the trainings carried out by the ethics focal point is a section on dialogue on SGBV. During past trainings, many questions were asked on what to do when we see or suspect SEA. People recognise this is a violation but they do not know how to report on them. Issues of domestic violence can also be touched on in these discussions. Internal mechanisms need to be clear. ‘Leadership dialogue sessions’ are included in the ToRs of ethics focal points, including facilitating similar dialogues with the UNICEF field office representatives. If it is wished to have PSEA included in this process, adequate material needs to be prepared and targeted messaging developed, and, if necessary, translated into other languages. It was also suggested that, in the meanwhile the checklists on the ethics guidance for reporting on children could be reviewed to see if PSEA can be integrated.
  • Global PSEA screening:The DED suggested drafting a roll-out plan for a global PSEA video screening. This could comprise part of the ED’s all staff meeting, and subsequently replicated at regional and country office level. It is important screenings targetboth development and humanitarian staff. A tracking system of the screenings must be put in place.

Summary of action points:

Primary Actions:

  • Develop recommendations for DED on Geeta PSEA screening campaign. Explore possibility of video screening at next ED All staff meeting. (EMOPS /DHR)
  • Work with Ethics Office and DHR to develop clear one pager on PSEA referral and reporting mechanisms for use at field level (EMOPS/DHR/Ethics Office)
  • Identify simple actions that can be taken to increase AAP at the cluster level (EMOPS GVA)
  • Develop a tracking mechanism to report back to Geeta periodicallybased on the recommendations from the assessment– but keep workplan to refer to at technical level (EMOPS / WG members)

Secondary Actions:

  • Draft message on AAP in Ebola (EMOPS: DONE)
  • Review checklist in Ethical Research guidelines

Next proposed quarterly meeting:

December 11th, 2014 (TBC)