Guidlines 4haii, Final

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA
Public Interest Research and Advocacy Center Humanitarian Forum Indonesia 2011
Author First edition ISBN Editor Design & Layout Publisher
: Editorial team, Guidelines for Humanitarian Accountability, 2011 : October 2011 : 978-979-3597-69-0 : Kristanto Sinandang, MSi Maria R. Nindita Radyati, PhD : Moelanka : PIRAMEDIA Jl. M. Ali No. 2 RT. 003/04, Kel. Tanah Baru Beji Depok 16426 Telp/Fax: 021 7756071 e-mail: pirac@cbn.net.id
PREFACE
In principle, accountability is the obligation of every humanitarian aid agency, be it a government body or other institutions, such as local and international NGOs (nongovernmental organizations), the mass media, educational institutions, corporations and faith-based organizations. Some humanitarian aid agencies understand accountability simply as the submission of reports audited by the public accountant. Accountability, in fact does not only involve reports, national laws and policies but also other essential components such as beneficiary engagement, swift distribution, well-targeted beneficiaries and aid efficiency, and the organizations ability to respond to emerging issues related to the management of humanitarian aid. As such, humanitarian accountability refers to the state of being answerable to donors as well as the public at large and beneficiaries. From the accountability perspective, both the public and beneficiaries as target groups earn the right to be involved in program planning, oversight, evaluation, implementation and reporting, and offer criticisms and feedbacks, and make inquiries to humanitarian aid agencies with regard to the implementation of their humanitarian responses within society.
Public Interest Research and Advocacy Center (PIRAC) together with Humanitarian Forum Indonesia (HFI) with support from the Ford Foundation have initiated efforts to establish accountability guidelines for managing humanitarian aid. This initiative is preceded by a study and mapping of accountability practices and issues in managing humanitarian actions in four disaster-stricken areas, namely Bandung-West Java, Padang Pariaman-West Sumatera, Aceh Besar-Aceh and Bantul-DI Yogyakarta. In addition, PIRAC and HFI have also reviewed six sets of international guidelines for managing humanitarian aid which encompass key aspects related to accountability. Results of the study and mapping exercise were disseminated to various humanitarian aid agencies and the general public to generate feedback for improvement and building awareness. Subsequently, PIRAC and HFI in collaboration with members and partners have helped draw up accountability guidelines involving a broad range of organizations engaged in the management of humanitarian aid, including NGOs, OPZ (organisasi pengelola zakat or alms management organizations), community-based organizations, the mass media, and the Government of Indonesia represented by BNPB (Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana or National Agency for Disaster Management). The guideline formulation team draws together representatives from these organizations, as shown below:
Team Coordinator:
1. Hamid Abidin (Public Interest Research and Advocacy Center/PIRAC) 2. Hening Parlan (Humanitarian Forum Indonesia/HFI)
Team Member:
1. 2. A. Eddy Sutedja (KOMPAS) Apri Sulistyo (HFI)
iv
3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.
Catur Sudira (Masyarakat Penanggulangan Bencana Indonesia/MPBI) Dear N. B. Sinandang (HFI) Dian Lestariningsih (KARINA) Hari Eko Purwanto (LAZIS Muhammadiyah) Husnan Nurjuman (MUHAMMADIYAH/Universitas Prof. Hamka) Joyce Manarisip (Yayasan Tanggul Bencana di Indonesia/YTBI) Ninik Annisa (PIRAC) Nor Hiqmah (PIRAC) Robby Reppa (YEU) Sigit Budhi Setiawan (PIRAC) Syahri Ramadhan / Adhong (Catholic Relief Services) Syamsul Ardiansyah (Yakkum Emergency Unit/YEU) Tomy Hendrajati (PKPU/FOZ) Victor Rembeth (HFI) Vincentia I. Widyasari (Karina) Yus Rizal (Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana/ BNPB)
The formulation team had intensively conducted meetings and FGDs necessary for establishing the accountability guidelines. Through meetings and discussions, the team had managed to gather feedback from experiences related to humanitarian accountability, and generate opinions and ideas on accountability concepts. Team members finally agreed on 13 (thirteen) fundamental principles for the management of humanitarian aid. These basic principles were subsequently translated into indicators, measurement tools, and means of verification, also drawn from the field experiences or lessons learned from Humanitarian Forum Indonesia (HFI) members,
such as Muhammadiyah, PKPU/FOZ, Wahana Visi Indonesia, Karina (Caritas Indonesia), Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU), and Perkumpulan Peningkatan Keberdayaan Masyarakat (PPKM), as well as from other institutions outside of HFI, including Catholic Relief Services (CRS), and Masyarakat Penanggulangan Bencana Indonesia (MPBI). The team also gained valuable insight from several resource persons who willingly contributed constructive ideas, namely Lusi Herlina (Konsil LSM Indonesia), Whisnu Yonar (CARE Indonesia), Ari Wibowo and Indra Y. Meira (Karina), and Surya Rahman Muhammad (HFI). From the outset, this initiative was not meant to develop accountability guidelines as the only source of reference for humanitarian aid agencies operating in Indonesia, but intended to encourage and facilitate these agencies to conduct selfassessments from which results can serve as the basis for building the capacity of the respective organization. These guidelines are laid out to help humanitarian agencies assess on the extent to which they have been accountable for their performance. The open nature of these guiding principles means that any other civil society organization can avail itself of these guidelines. We sincerely hope that the established guidelines can help foster understanding, attitudes and practices related to humanitarian accountability in Indonesia, whereby the delivery of aid should engender benefits for the people of Indonesia, allowing them to lead a more dignified life. Jakarta, August 2011
Hamid Abidin Director, PIRAC
Hening Parlan Director HFI
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface ............................................................ iii Table of Contents ............................................................ vii Part One Why Establish Accountability Guidelines? ...... 1 Part Two How to Use these Guidelines? ........................ 9 1: As Accountability Guidelines ...................... 10 2: As An Accountability Measurement Tool .... 11 Part Three Principles and Definitions ............................... 19 1 : Independence ........................................... 19 2 : Organizational Commitment ...................... 19 3 : Competence .............................................. 20 4 : Non-Discrimination .................................... 20 5 : Participation ............................................... 20 6 : Transparency ............................................. 20 7 : Coordination .............................................. 20 8 : Lessons learnt and Improvement .............. 20 9 : Partnership ................................................ 21 10: Non-Proselytizing ...................................... 21 11: Feedback Mechanism ............................... 21 12: Self-Reliance ............................................. 21 13: In Favor of Vulnerable Groups .................. 21 Part Four Indicators and Field Experience in Implementing Accountability ........................... 23 Principle No.1: Independence ..................... 23 Principle No. 2: Organizational Commitment .. 25
vii
Principle No. 3: Competence ...................... 26 Principle No. 4: Non-Discrimination ............ 28 Principle No. 5: Participation ....................... 30 Principle No. 6: Transparency ..................... 32 Principle No. 7: Coordination ...................... 34 Principle No. 8: Lessons learnt and Improvement ................................................ 36 Principle No. 9: Partnership ......................... 37 Principle No. 10: Non-Proselytizing ............. 39 Principle No. 11: Feedback Mechanism ..... 41 Principle No. 12: Self-Reliance ................... 42 Principle No. 13: In Favor of Vulnerable Groups ......................................................... 44 Part Five Assessment Sheet: Application of Humanitarian Accountability Guidelines ......... 47 Appendixes ............................................................ 57 Appendix 1.Basic Definitions .......................... 57 Appendix 2.Code of Conduct for IFRC ........... 63 Appendix 3.Karinas Volunteer Application Form ............................................. 67 Appendix 4.Reference on Equal Partnership between Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU) and Lutheran World Relief (LWR)........ 71 Appendix 5.Organizational Profile of Contributors ................................. 75 References ............................................................ 85
viii
PART ONE
Why Establish Accountability Guidelines?
Relief aid must strive to reduce future vulnerabilities to disaster as well as meeting basic needs
A crucial milestone reached in the wake of the tsunami disaster in Aceh in 2004 with regard to disaster management in Indonesia was the initiative to formulate a regulatory framework for disaster management which culminated in the passing of Law No. 24/2007. This serves as the legal foundation for the establishment of BNPB (National Agency for Disaster Management), followed by the formation of local-level disaster management offices across Indonesia that specifically deal with disaster situations. Apart from the establishment of these agencies, multi-party forums on disaster management have also emerged and discourses on disaster risk mitigation explored in a body of academic literature and in the countrys development planning process. The role of civil society should not be taken lightly. Recent developments with regard to disaster response have seen the emergence of many community-based organizations making a
Part One
noticeable effort to strengthen their disaster management capacities. These organizations are often at the front line of disaster response. Apart from community groups which have professionally built their disaster handling capacities, other elements in society acting as volunteers in the spirit of mutual help have also played an equally central role in disaster response. Different community groups constituting housewives, youths and heads of neighborhood associations are in fact often the first to provide early response in times of disaster. This was recently illustrated by groups of housewives who took it upon themselves to prepare packaged meals in response to the Mount Merapi eruption in 2010. Another example concerns the ingenious advocacy efforts of local neighborhood associations representing dwellers along the Kali Code riverbank which was inundated by the Merapi cold lava floods in 2010-2011. These are only minor illustrations of the actual breadth of community engagement in disaster situations. The strengthening of capacities and widespread attention on disaster-related issues have afforded a propitious momentum for building the resilience of the public and communities inhabiting areas known as the ring of fire, making them the most susceptible to disasters. This is an opportune time to create an enabling environment for all disaster management actors that allows them to play an optimal role in order to engender maximum contribution. Disaster management involves a series of concerted efforts, including the establishment of development policies that take into account disaster risks, disaster prevention, emergency response and rehabilitation.1
Law No. 24/2007 on Disaster Management
Part One
John Cosgrave has put forward several key points in the Tsunami Evaluation Coalition2 report which among others include the following:
In line with humanitarian principles of aid, we must do better at delivering aid that is based on sound and commonly-owned assessments. Assistance should be proportionate to need, and must be carried out with those we aim to support at the heart of spending decisions taken.
One of the most crucial elements in building humanitarian response capacities is the need to guarantee the accountability of humanitarian efforts thus far implemented. Accountability is an oft-mentioned word in several key documents guiding humanitarian work, be it in the Humanitarian Charter or Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. The Humanitarian Charter contains the following sentence:
We expect to be held accountable to this commitment and undertake to develop systems for accountability within our respective agencies, consortia and federations. We acknowledge that our fundamental accountability must be to those we seek to assist.3
Why are accountability principles so essential for humanitarian work? Point 9 (nine) of the Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement provides a normative formulation on the importance of accountability in managing humanitarian aid. The Code of Conduct places emphasis on the institutional role of
2 Cosgrave, J (2007). Synthesis Report: Expanded Summary. Joint evaluation of the international response to the Indian Ocean tsunami. London: Tsunami Evaluation Coalition. 3
Humanitarian Charter in SPHERE Edition 2004.
Part One
humanitarian agencies in linking partnerships between those who wish to assist and those who need assistance. Transparency and openness as key factors for humanitarian accountability contribute to ensuring that relief aid effectively reduces future vulnerabilities, in addition to fulfilling fundamental needs necessary in times of disaster. Accountability principles have inspired various humanitarian agencies in Indonesia to work towards applying them in existing accountability guidelines. A review conducted by PIRAC and HFI has taken note of at least six sets of guidelines on humanitarian accountability standards. 1. People in Aid, Code of Good Practice in the Management and Support of Aid Personnel 2. Humanitarian Accountability and Quality Management Standard 2007 (the 2010 version is already available) 3. Impact Measurement and Accountability in Emergencies: The Good Enough Guide 4. ALPS (Accountability, Learning and Planning System of ActionAid International) 5. The Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP) 6. The Sphere Project, Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standard in Disaster Response In addition to the foregoing guidelines, Indonesia has also passed several laws and regulations which serve as reference for applying accountability principles in managing relief aid, such as: 1. Law No. 9/1961 on Mobilizing Funds or Goods. 2. Decree of the Directorate General for Social Aid and Social Security of the Department of Social Affairs No.
Part One
57/BJS/2003 concerning General Guidelines on Social Aid for Disaster Victims. 3. Health Ministerial Decree No. 145/Menkes/SK/I/2007 concerning Guidelines on Disaster Management in the Health Sector. 4. Law No. 24/2007 on Disaster Management. 5. Government Regulation No. 23/2008 on the Engagement of International and Foreign NonGovernmental Institutions in Disaster Management. 6. Presidential Regulation No. 8/2008 on the National Agency for Disaster Management. 7. Government Regulation No. 22/2008 on Funding and Management of Disaster Relief. 8. Regulation of the Head of the National Agency for Disaster Management No. 7/2008 on the Procedure for Aid Distribution for the Fulfillment of Basic Needs. 9. Government Regulation No. 21/2008 on the Administration of Disaster Management. The aforementioned guidelines and legislation have been adopted and applied by humanitarian aid organizations operating in Indonesia. The willingness of disaster management actors in Indonesia to comply with existing accountability standards demonstrates good will and early awareness in applying the aforementioned principle that relief aid must strive to reduce future vulnerabilities to disaster as well as meeting the basic needs. If the foregoing guidelines are already in existence, then why must humanitarian accountability guidelines be formulated in Indonesia? Several key findings of a joint study, followed by a series of focus group discussions facilitated by Public Interest Research and Advocacy Center (PIRAC) and Humanitarian
Part One
Forum Indonesia (HFI) showed the underlying importance of formulating humanitarian accountability guidelines in Indonesia. First, not all humanitarian agencies are oriented to accountability standards recognized by various stakeholders. This implies on the need to continually disseminate information on the importance of applying accountability standards to ensure the effectiveness of humanitarian work. Second, in addition to awareness building, almost all accountability standards adhere to the principle of volunteerism. As such, the compliance of an institution toward a given accountability principle often depends on encouragement from donor agencies. Third, with regard to user friendliness, these guidelines fill the need for guiding principles that incorporate relevant illustrations as well as practical and empirical reflections based on the Indonesian context for easier understanding and application, while inspiring others to similarly establish their own humanitarian accountability standards. It should be noted that these guidelines are a living document which should be reviewed periodically, in view of the fact that a whole range of new experiences, lessons learnt, feedback and findings will certainly emerge to enrich and refine these guidelines for better understanding and application of humanitarian accountability principles in Indonesia.
Part One
Objectives
1. To provide reference for minimum humanitarian accountability standards within the context of Indonesia. 2. To serve as a learning medium for humanitarian agencies, particularly disaster management actors, in increasing the accountability of their respective institutions.
Function
This document essentially functions as basic guidelines for assessing/measuring the accountability of humanitarian agencies and disaster management actors. In addition, this document also serves as an internal educational instrument for humanitarian agencies and to help build awareness on humanitarian accountability.
Part One
PART TWO How to Use these Guidelines?

This document sets forth humanitarian accountability principles along with inter-related indicators and measurement tools. The link between principles, indicators, and measurement tools allows for easier comprehension of this document. In order to gain a systematic understanding, this document should be read in sequential order. On the other hand, these guidelines can also be understood by reading each part in a modular manner according to the readers need.
This document essentially functions as:

1. Guiding principles or reference. This document presents basic accountability principles which users can use as reference and guidance, whereby humanitarian agencies must comply with in order to work in an accountable manner. 2. Measurement and assessment of accountability practices for humanitarian agencies. An explanation on this function shall be provided in the following section.
Part One
How to Use these Guidelines?
In Part Four, details will be presented on indicators, measurement tools, and means of verification for each accountability principle, supplemented with an assessment sheet in Part Five. 3. Internal oversight of humanitarian agencies with regard to accountability through participatory focus group discussions (FGDs). 4. Effort to increase the accountability of humanitarian agencies. From these four functions, this document shall essentially look at two key functions: as accountability guidelines and as a measurement tool for institutional accountability in the management of humanitarian aid.
1. As Accountability Guidelines
This document guides every agency in the execution of its mandate, of mobilizing and managing humanitarian aid. Principles and indicators presented in this document can serve as reference for each disaster response phase beginning from preparedness, rescue operations, rehabilitation, reconstruction to empowerment, even during non-disaster situations. With regard to competence, an organization should among others, possess and develop relevant capacities for managing humanitarian aid in conformity with humanitarian standards. It is essential to review and gauge such competencies by assessing on the adequacy of human resources within the organization. Do staff members implementing humanitarian activities have adequate knowledge and skills? Does the organization have adequate management standards in relation to personnel, resource mobilization and distribution, and operational support, including logistics, administration, and finances? For further information, these principles along with
10
Part One
their definitions can be found in Part Three and explored further during field experiences presented in Part Four.
2. As an Accountability Measurement Tool

As an accountability measurement tool, this document provides consideration of facilitator selection and accountability assessment methods for humanitarian aid agencies. In selecting assessment facilitators, two options are available, each having distinct consequences on assessment results. The first option is by using internal FGD facilitators, while the second option refers to the appointment of external FGD facilitators (outside of the organization). For measuring institutional accountability, this assessment method can be used internally by the organization by performing self-assessments. On the other hand, these guidelines are also useful for an external evaluation of institutional accountability. The following are points to consider when choosing between internal and external facilitators:
11
Part One
In accordance with accountability assessment, it can be assessed through the following methods:
a) Review of Organizational Documents

Accountability assessment of an organization can be carried out through the review of relevant organizational documents. Documents indicative of the level of accountability in an organization include: organizational policies (standard operating procedure/SOP, memorandum of association, articles of association, directives on the appointment of employees, strategic plan, program planning and others) and program implementation reports (monitoring & evaluation report, progress report, external/internal evaluator report, audit, minutes of meetings, and others). The following are the strengths and weaknesses of using this method in assessing organizational accountability.
12
Part One
b) Interview
Accountability can also be assessed through interviews with staff and executives. Interviews can enrich information not found in organizational documentation. Interview material covers organizational policies (consensus as well as written and official documentation) related to accountability principles/ indicators for the management of humanitarian assistance. Principles and indicators included as interview material are provided in Parts Three and Four. The weaknesses and strengths of the interview method are as follows
c) FGD (Focus Group Discussion) for Self-Assessment

Another method for assessing the accountability of an organization is through focus group discussions. The specific characteristic of this method lies at its highly participatory process as it involves all staff and executives of the organization. During FGDs, information
13
Part One
is shared, while document reviews and interviews are clarified, thus enhances the knowledge and understanding of FGD participants on the implementation of accountability principles in managing programs. FGDs for assessing accountability shall be attended by all staff and executives of the organization. The facilitator will preside over FGD sessions, which essentially covers discussions on the following aspects: a) Instruments for measuring institutional accountability. b) The condition of the organization to be measured according to the respective accountability principle. c) Individual assessment (scoring) of the organization in relation to accountability principles and indicators. This allows each individual the opportunity to assess the organizations actual situation. d) Compilation and discussion of scoring results. Provide justification/rationale/insight on the organizations situation for the scoring/assessment of each principle/indicator. When the facilitator has explained on the available accountability assessment tools, two options are available for the facilitation of accountability assessment. The first option relates to direct assessment from FGD participants on the organizations situation based on principles and indicators. The second option is by holding discussions on the organizations situation in advance prior to the assessment. Consequences arising from the respective options are as follows:
14
Part One
Facilitation Flowchart1
4 Adapted from the Organizational Capacity and Performance Assessment Tools (OCPAT) compiled by Yappika.
15
Part One
Calculation of Assessment Results

Assessment is performed through interviews and FGDs at the respective organization, involving executives and program implementers (staff and volunteers). For the interview process, every personnel shall use their own assessment sheet. Each personnel provide an assessment of the organizations situation by awarding a score of 1 to 5. A score of 1 indicates the lowest assessment rating while a score of 5 is the highest value. Description of the score range is explained below: 1 = Organizational policies for this indicator are not documented (written and official), and are not put into practice. Organizational policies for this indicator are documented, but are not put into practice. Organizational policies for this indicator are not documented, but several good practices have become the organizational consensus, or are put into practice but are not embedded in internal policies. Organizational policies for this indicator are documented, but inconsistently implemented, or are consistently implemented, but several practices are not documented in organizational policies. Organizational policies for this indicator are documented and put into practice, and are even been adapted in accordance with developments in the organizations situation.
2 3
= =
Assessment is performed when each indicator has been thoroughly discussed. In general, discussions for each indicator are carried out in a participatory manner according to the following stages:
16
Part One
1. Begin with the discussion of each indicator from each principle presented in Part Five. The following questions may be put forward: a. What is the current situation? b. Are there any proof of the said situation? c. Is this situation equally known to everyone? This is intended to obtain baseline data understood by everyone. 2. Individual assessment affords each personnel with the opportunity to make use of the one person one vote mechanism, as a means to exercise democracy and prevent the dominance of relatively vocal and highly influential individuals in the organization. 3. Compilation and assessment process for generating the total score of the respective indicators and subindicators, as well as the agreement level for each score (e.g., score = 2.5, with an agreement level of below 0.5) 4. Discussion of results (total score) by re-examining the obtained score and the level of agreement. The final assessment stage is totally the scores of each indicator and divide the amount with the total number of indicators.
Final Score = Total Score / Total Indicators
17
Part One
18
PART THREE Principles and Definitions

In this document, 13 (thirteen) principles along with their corresponding definitions have been formulated and agreed upon in order to explain various aspects related to humanitarian accountability.
The 13 (thirteen) principles are as follows:

1. Independence
The state of being autonomous and free from the influence and vested interest of the government, political parties, donor agencies, business sectors and any other person who may undermine the organizations independence in taking actions for the purpose of serving public interest.
2. Organizational Commitment
The organization has clear and well-defined policy instruments with regard to quality and accountability for application in managing humanitarian aid.
Part Three
Principles and Definitions
3. Competence
The organization has the relevant capacity in managing humanitarian aid and develops these capacities in conformity with humanitarian standards.
4. Non-Discrimination
The humanitarian aid agency consistently applies the principle of not discriminating against people on the grounds of sex, ethnicity, religion, race and political leaning.
5. Participation
The organization ensures the involvement of relevant stakeholders and beneficiaries in all phases related to aid management.
6. Transparency
The organization provides clear and truthful information and can be held accountable for the management of humanitarian aid.
7. Coordination
The organization communicates with stakeholders and other humanitarian agencies through existing coordination forums for managing humanitarian assistance.
8. Lessons learnt and improvement

Every experience gained in managing humanitarian aid serves as a lesson learnt for further improvement.
20
Part Three
9. Partnership
Cooperation in managing humanitarian aid should be carried out in compliance with the principle of equality.
10. Non-proselytizing
The organization does not engage in the proselytization of religion, faith, belief, and political ideology through the distribution of humanitarian aid.
11. Feedback mechanism

The organization has an appropriate mechanism in place to receive suggestions, criticisms and feedback from stakeholders for the purpose of strengthening and improving aid management.
12. Self-reliance
The organization has the capacity to mobilize resources and distribute humanitarian aid in a manner which does not create dependency.
13. In favor of vulnerable groups

The organization is clearly in favor of vulnerable groups (expectant and nursing mothers, children, senior citizens, the disabled, people living with HIV/AIDS, sex minority) in every phase and impact related to the management of humanitarian assistance.
21
Part Three
22
PART FOUR
Indicators and Field Experience in Implementing Accountability
Principle No. 1: Independence
Indicator
1. Adoption of a policy that prohibits the holding of concurrent positions as decisionmaker and/or an equivalent interest between humanitarian agencies and government bodies, private corporations, executives and members of political parties, or other organizations affiliated with practical politics 2. Organizational programs and activities are independent and open in nature
Measurement Means of Comment tool Verification

Policy documents on organizations independence Organizational vision and mission Organizational values Interview and FGD Document review
Part Four
PKPU: Sorry Teungku, its impossible!

At the time when humanitarian aid for landslide victims in Tangse was to be distributed, the advance team dispatched by PKPU was intercepted by an armed group who demanded that PKPU distribute the aid through them. Through a courteous yet firm approach, the advance team explained about the nature of the organizations humanitarian work, and succeeded in thwarting the armed groups demand, eventually managing to deliver the relief aid directly to beneficiaries. Sorry Teungku, we are from PKPU. It is our policy to distribute these directly, said Wayir Nuri, head of PKPU operations division in Aceh.
24
Part Four
Principle No. 2: Organizational Commitment

Indicator
1. Availability of a written and official document on the organizational vision and mission 2. Implementation of humanitarian response programs, and strategic programs and activities 3. Procedures or mechanisms (SOP) are in place within the organization for the implementation of activities 4. Adoption of policies that protect staff and beneficiaries

Memorandum of association/articles of association Organizations strategic plan and/or programs SOP Organizational profile Website Interview and FGD Document review
PKPU: The Commitment Keepers Manual

PKPU strives to instill an organizational culture based on honesty, responsibility, cooperation, promptness and care as laid out in a technical procedure set forth in the Implementation Manual for 7 PKPU Key Programs (printed in 2010).
25
Part Four
Principle No. 3: Competence

Indicator
1. Adequate personnel 2. Sufficient knowledge and skills among staff responsible for program implementation. 3. Availability of management standards, the ability to manage aid, personnel and their distribution (human resource, systems and operational support such as logistics, administration and finances). 4. A security and rescue procedure is in place for field staff and volunteers.
The delivery of aid during an emergency response covers three main phases: the first 3 hours, the first 3 days and a 9-day response involving various parties. This SOP reflects the dynamic culture of rapid aid delivery, accountability, cooperation and honesty which seeks to dispense aid consistent with the entrusted mandate, whereby this chain of activities constitutes the manifestation of a culture of care.*** Measurement Means of Comment tool Verification
Organogram (number and composition) Annual report and/or program report Documents related to the eligibility testing of staff and volunteers (during recruitment) Job description Interview and FGD Document review
26
Part Four
YEU: Peer Review to Hone Competency

Ensuring competent and ethical personnel is a challenge for YEU as an accountable humanitarian agency. This refers to all personnel, both at the management and operational levels. YEU has made encouraging progress with regard to nurturing an accountable organizational culture as indicated in a survey conducted by members of the Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response (SCHR) shown in the Peer Review on Accountability to Affected Population (PRAAP) in 2009. One of the survey findings describes that YEU in many respects can be considered as a model NGO that has succeeded in demonstrating good practices in promoting accountability to affected populations. Hence, organizational culture plays an important role as are its policies and guidelines. YEUs internal policies and procedures are as similarly important as ACT policies and procedures.
The foregoing finding is presented in the Peer Review on Accountability to Affected Population Report, 2009, published by ACT Alliance.***
27
Part Four
Principle No. 4: Non-Discrimination

Indicator
1. Clear information on the selection procedure of targeted beneficiaries. 2. Clear information on the staff and volunteer recruitment procedure. 3. Representation of all beneficiary groups in the implementation of activities / projects. 4. Availability of infrastructure to support the engagement of all groups and categories.

Document on the recruitment procedure and criteria for prospective beneficiaries Document on the recruitment procedure and criteria for staff and volunteers Minutes of meeting and attendance list Interview and FGD Document review Indicator no.3 refer to Principle No. 9 Indicator No. 2: concerning the active involvement of all parties in decision making
YEU: Upholding Humanitarian Principles

Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU) is a humanitarian agency that abides by universal humanitarian principles. One of the initiatives aimed at integrating humanitarian principles is realized through the formulation of the YEU Code of Conduct, primarily Article 2 which reads working with victim/survivor communities, ethics, and common attitudes in which Clause G asserts that there shall be no discrimination against those receiving assistance.
28
Part Four
Aside from the consistent internalization of humanitarian principles among staff members, efforts are also being made to build the awareness of affected communities concerning these principles in order to engender common understanding. This is reflected in a statement made by Ustadz Nazarudin, a respondent participating in the research on YEU Accountability of Humanitarian Work in Padang Pariaman, West Sumatra, who mentioned: with regard to aid, differences in religion is not an issue. If someone is willing to give, (we) accept. On the other hand, when someone is in need, even if the person is a Christian, we will reciprocate. This is in accordance with the teachings of Muhammad, our revered prophet.
Source: Hairus Salim and Firdaus. 2011. Akuntabilitas Kegiatan Kemanusiaan YEU di Padang Pariaman, Sumatera Barat. Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU).
29
Part Four
Principle No. 5: Participation

Indicator
1. Participation of men, women and children in program planning, implementation and evaluation (identification of needs) 2. Participation of beneficiaries (men, women and children) in meeting needs 3. Actively engaged in coordination with other stakeholders

Activity report containing: * process and mechanism for identifying needs * coordination pattern and organizational structure of program implementer Minutes of meeting and attendance list Interview and FGD Document review
YEU: Survivor Participation in Disaster Response

The eruption of Mount Merapi in 2010 was an opportune time for Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU) to reassess its internal mechanism for the development of a community-based disaster risk reduction system. One of the distinct characteristics of YEU intervention program is the continual development of appropriate systems and the strengthening of the capacity of affected communities in facing the threat of disasters.
30
Part Four
We must not underestimate the role of survivors, and must keep in mind that YEU is simply helping survivors develop their many potentials, which need to be explored further, particularly in managing disasters, explained Arshinta, Director of YEU. Arshinta gave the example of the volcanic eruption in 2010 where young adults, housewives, and survivors from all elements of society were forced to take refuge in temporary shelters in which Salam, a villager from Ganden, Srumbung Sub-district was afforded with the opportunity to be involved in making decisions on how to best manage the refugee barracks. A similar situation was also observed in Boyong Hamlet of Harjobinangun, Sleman where disaster survivors had worked in concert with YEU from October to December 2010. Village officials together with local housewives and youths had joined forces to manage evacuations. Nevertheless, organizations such as YEU also have its limitations. In view of this, knowledge transfer on disaster management from the organization to the community should immediately be realized. Certain circumstances, such as the Merapi disaster have provided the opportunity to systematize public knowledge on disaster handling in order to develop a more sustainable community-based disaster management system.
All of these can only be attained if we fully recognize that survivors have the potential to empower themselves, which can be developed in a participatory manner, added Arshinta.***
31
Part Four
Principle No. 6: Transparency

Indicator
1. Availability of information which can be easily understood and accessed (funding, duration, implementation method, type of aid/program). Example: the construction of temporary settlement should also take into account the local environment. 2. Availability of publications and other information media on activity processes and financial details (including the amount of donation and name of donor) accessible to the public, in particular recipient communities and other stakeholders. 3. Availability of periodic reports on the utilization of resources in developing projects accessible to the public and mainly for recipient communities and other stakeholders.

Annual report Website and/ or publications of the organization SOP / guidelines on information dissemination or program reporting Interview and FGD Document review Indicator No. 3 refers to Principle No. 8 Indicator No. 2: Periodic planning and evaluation mechanism on aid management through briefings, periodic reviews
32
Part Four
WVI: I Now Know How My Opinions can be Heard

I now know how my opinions and complaints can be heard, admitted Imran, 47 years old.
The foregoing comment was made during a focus group discussion (FGD). Imran is a survivor who benefited from the placement of a public information board initiated by WVI. WVI has thus far repeatedly made use of information boards strategically positioned in busy public places to disseminate information on WVI activities in a given area. As was the case for an emergency response during the earthquake that shook West Sumatera in 2009, WVI erected a number of information boards at village head offices, puskesmas (community health centers), and local government offices in locations where WVI undertook humanitarian work. These boards provide information on hotline services and suggestion boxes to help affected communities put across their inputs, criticisms and ideas concerning WVI-run programs. Apart from WVI, the government has also availed itself to these public information boards to deliver information on government-initiated programs and activities. Information boards are the selected medium because of their simplified form and easy accessibility to affected communities.***
33
Part Four
Principle No. 7: Coordination

Indicator
1. Coordination is established with the local government or authorities (relevant local offices and departments) 2. Involved in routine coordination or information sharing with other relevant stakeholders. 3. Fills the gap for humanitarian responses.

SOP Organizational values Program report and/or situation report Interview and FGD Minutes of meeting and attendance list Document review
HFI: Progress through Partnership

Humanitarian Forum Indonesia (HFI) consists of eight member institutions, seven of which are agencies normally involved in disaster response. One of the key functions of HFI Secretariat is to build and develop a coordination mechanism among institutional members as well as between members and the government in ensuring the effective implementation of humanitarian work. One of the outputs of coordination activities undertaken by HFI Secretariat is the situation report on humanitarian actions organized by HFI members. As a representative of civil society organizations in the Humanitarian Country Team, HFI releases situation reports
34
Part Four
to not only serve as a medium for sharing information with members, but also as reference for UN-OCHA and UN agencies operating in Indonesia. HFI-facilitated coordination is also aimed at both local and national government agencies. An example is the emergency response for the Mount Lokon eruption in North Sulawesi where HFI Secretariat began work on formulating a coordination mechanism between HFI members and the Local Disaster Management Agency ( Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah, BPBD) of North Sulawesi. This was necessary to orchestrate responses undertaken by HFI members to meet local needs through the respective local government agencies.
This will not only bring benefit to members, but also the government.***
35
Part Four
Principle No. 8: Lessons Learnt and Improvements

Indicator
1. Availability of structured and scheduled field reports (not only on agreeable progress, but also disclose obstacles faced on the ground) 2. A periodic planning and evaluation mechanism on aid management is in place through briefings and periodic reviews 3. Availability of capacity building programs on aid management

Field reports Documents on the monitoring and evaluation mechanism, and the follow-up plan Research report (good practices and lessons learnt) Interview Document review
Karina: Turning Learning Reviews into a Culture

Since the Padang earthquake, Karina has held learning reviews which refer to reflections on emergency responses. Learning reviews involve the field team, management team and partner institutions. Outcomes of learning reviews can help improve actions in the future. For example, after conducting a learning review of the Padang disaster, the Emergency Response SOP was improved and the Volunteer Handbook approved. Learning reviews should become common practice, thus the need to conduct such reviews for the Wasior and Merapi disasters.
36
Part Four
Principle No. 9: Partnership

Indicator
1. Establishment of a written agreement between aid provider and implementing partner by paying heed to the principle of equality 2. Active involvement of all parties in decision making 3. Beneficiaries are provided with more opportunities and time in program implementation

MOU or cooperation agreement Reference for equal partnership Interview and FGD Minutes of meeting and attendance list Document review A sample of reference on equal partnership is provided in App
PKPU and Muhammadiyah: Complementary Partnership

After aid was distributed and a needs assessment conducted for communities affected by the tsunami in Mentawai in 2010, the PKPU team held a meeting with Australian-based organization, Shelter Box. At the meeting, a cooperation agreement was reached between PKPU and Shelter Box Australia for the delivery of aid. Based on findings of the needs assessment performed by PKPU, Shelter Box Australia and PKPU had agreed to the assignment of roles. PKPU provided the dome tents, while Shelter Box prepared temporary shelters for evacuees, tools and equipment, school supplies, cooking utensils,
37
Part Four
sleeping bags, and mattresses, explained Suharjoni, PKPU Emergency Response Team. A similar situation was also experienced by LPB Muham madiyah. When responding to the earthquake in Yogyakarta in 2006, LPB Muhammadiyah partnered with Direct Relief International (DRI) to provide the necessary services for disaster victims in refugee camps. DRI made available essential medicines and an ambulance, while LPB Muhammadiyah made arrangements for the availability of physicians and paramedics, as well as medicines and 30 ambulances obtained from Muhammadiyah-run hospitals. In dealing with the West Sumatera earthquake in 2009, LPB Muhammadiyah pooled resources with AusAID to undertake several rehabilitation programs, and provided medical services, child counseling and sanitation. Emergency responses were made possible through financial support from AusAID, LAZIS Muhammadiyah and public funds raised by several Muhammadiyah regional executives. Partnership for each program was jointly financed from external sources and Muhammadiyahs independent funds. The partnership strategy employed by PKPU and Muhammadiyah was aimed at making optimal use of the advantages and limitations of the respective parties. As such, responses would both be effectively and efficiently implemented.***
38
Part Four
Principle No. 10: Non-Proselytizing

Indicator
1. Every individual or personnel involved in programs and activities agree to an internal pact. 2. All parties are involved in decision making.

Willingness and commitment sheets completed by volunteers and staff that upholds human rights Interview and FGD Minutes of meeting and attendance list Sample of volunteer application form from Karina (provided in Appendix 3)
HFI: Inter-Faith Emergency Response
Soon after Padang was struck by an earthquake in December 2009, member institutions under HFI had initiated emergency responses. The people of West Sumatera, known for being a religious society deeply rooted in Islamic values, at the time rejected assistance from non-Islamic agencies. This was prompted by allegations on the Christianization of local residents that was fast circulating among the local people.
39
Part Four
HFI took stock of the situation before convening an internal meeting in Jakarta and later organized two meetings with the West Sumatera-branch of MUI (Indonesian Ulama Council) to reach common understanding and perception of such issues and ways to resolve them. An inter-faith dialogue was also held in West Sumatera attended by various humanitarian agencies in open discussions with the common goal of understanding the situation and engaging in reciprocal humanitarian actions regardless of race and religion. An output of this agreement was an MoU between HFI and several agencies in West Sumatera for inter-faith emergency response. This was later followed by a workshop on creating synergy between faith-based organizations and traditional institutions in rehabilitation and reconstruction.
40
Part Four
Principle No. 11: Feedback Mechanism

Indicator
1. A mechanism is established for beneficiaries to make inquiries, and give suggestions and feedback 2. The delivery of structured and scheduled field reports (not only on agreeable progress, but also disclose obstacles faced on the ground) 3. Follow-up on reports, inquiries and feedback

Documents on procedures (feedback and followup plan) Field report Filing on the handling of feedback Interview and FGD Document review Interview with field staff and beneficiaries on the adequacy of procedures in place
CRS: Testimony of a Beneficiary

Mrs. Desmaiti, a 44 year old woman from Pauh Kambar Hilir Village, Padang Pariaman: Me and people in my community are aware of the availability of a 24-hour complaint service with clearly written telephone numbers to contact and visible from our village roads. If nobody contacted CRS, this means that they have no problems. Many local residents have come to speak to me or others in the village committee each time they face a problem or have a question to ask about the program. Most questions are related to the actual date for cash disbursements. As CRS has often paid us a visit, it has made it possible for us to communicate with them. I am involved in the selection of
41
Part Four
beneficiaries and also during operational oversight. (Humanitarian response for the earthquake in West Sumatera in 2009 cash distribution to 11,000 disaster victims in temporary shelters).***
Principle No. 12: Self-reliance

Indicator
1. Sustainable availability of resources (material and nonmaterial) 2. Involvement of local capacities (material and non-material resources) in program implementation 3. Active involvement of all stakeholders in determining programs

Organizational profile Annual report and/or other periodic reports Minutes of meeting and attendance list Interview and FGD Document review Special care should be given to ensure that aid does not increase vulnerability
PKPU: Mobilizing potential of survivors of the Tasikmalaya earthquake

As PKPU was assisting earthquake victims in the village of Cigorowong, Suka Mukti, Cisayong Sub-district, Tasikmalaya in 2009, local villagers of their own accord had established a relief collection center, albeit in a somewhat disorganized manner Together with PKPU it was agreed that a common kitchen be set up, providing that the facility be self-reliantly managed and PKPU shall transfer the
42
Part Four
necessary management knowhow. PKPU provided the necessary funding on a daily basis for the first two weeks. The common kitchen carried on for a month as local residents managed to organize themselves and coordinate daily meal preparations by establishing a roster for women who take turns cooking and mobilizing the potential of the local people. In the beginning we were doubtful that we could ever manage the aid, but after management briefings from the PKPU team the local people and I together ran the common kitchen, managed incoming aid for distribution to the local people in an equitable and orderly fashion. Women took turns cooking according to the agreed menu schedule, while the men distributed the prepared meals to all residents. Thankfully our relief collection center could survive longer than expected because we had all participated, said Budi, coordinator of the relief post in the village of Cigorowong, Suka Mukti.
43
Part Four
Principle No. 13: In Favor of Vulnerable Groups

Indicator
1. Availability of policies and programs oriented to vulnerable groups (groups considered as vulnerable are provided in Part Three on Basic Definitions) 2. The majority of direct program beneficiaries are vulnerable groups 3. Policies on the protection of beneficiaries are adopted

Policy documents Annual report or other periodic reports Documentation on program beneficiaries Interview and FGD Document review Documentation on beneficiaries include information on whether they are considered as vulnerable
WVI: Prioritizing Childrens Interest

As an organization that focuses on childrens welfare, Wahana Visi Indonesia (WVI) places priority on the best interest of children as a vulnerable group by making available pre-positioning items, such as children kits and also ensuring the fulfillment of childrens needs during emergency situations. Disaster response programs in West Sumatera were built on the results of a rapid assessment and in-depth study conducted two months following the disaster response period. Study results helped guide the selection of the most appropriate type of intervention and identification of beneficiary groups.
44
Part Four
As an organization dedicated to the wellbeing of children, WVI awards undivided attention to children as one of the most vulnerable groups during times of emergency. Nevertheless, WVI does not only provide direct aid to children, but also assists schools and parents to achieve the overriding purpose of ensuring that children live and grow naturally within an enabling environment and school setting. Children targeted as beneficiaries are those living in areas worst affected by the 2009 earthquake. Although WVI did not specifically focused on children with special needs (disabled children, children living with HIV/AIDS, or street children), WVI had consistently contributed in empowering existing institutions, such as KPA (Commission for Child Protection) of West Sumatera and Forum Anak which in the long term can spearhead efforts to better protect the children of West Sumatera. WVI has also helped rebuild permanent schools and ensured that disabled children have access to available facilities (sitting toilets or sloping aisles for wheelchairs).***
45
Part Four
46
PART FIVE
Assessment Sheet on the Application of Humanitarian Accountability Guidelines
The following presents the appraisal sheet for institutions on the application of humanitarian accountability guidelines. This sheet assists in the assessment of humanitarian agencies with regard to accountability, both through self-regulatory and external regulatory appraisals. A scoring system is applied during the assessment process based on the following scoring scale: 1. = Organizational policies for this indicator are not documented (written and official), and are not put into practice. 2. = Organizational policies for this indicator are documented, but are not put into practice.
Part Five
3. =
4. =
5. =
Organizational policies for this indicator are not documented, but several good practices have become the organizational consensus, or are put into practice but are not embedded in internal policies. Organizational policies for this indicator are documented, but inconsistently implemented, or are consistently implemented, but several practices are not documented in organizational policies. Organizational policies for this indicator are documented and put into practice, and are even been adapted in accordance with developments in the organizations situation.
48
ASSESSMENT SHEET APPLICATION OF HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY GUIDELINES
Name of Organization: ______________ Facilitator: ______________ Date: _______________
Assessment Result or Scoring Notes
NO
ASSESSMENT COMPONENT
Facilitator
Independence
Adoption of a policy that prohibits the holding of concurrent positions as decision-maker and/or an equivalent interest between humanitarian agencies and government bodies, private corporations, executives and members of political parties, or other organizations affiliated with practical politics
Organizational programs and activities are independent and open in nature
II
Organizational Commitment
Availability of a written and official document on the organizational vision and mission
Part Five
Implementation of humanitarian response programs, and strategic programs and activities
49
Part Five
50
Assessment Facilitator Notes Result or Scoring
NO
Procedures or mechanisms (SOP) are in place within the organization for the implementation of activities
Adoption of policies that protect staff and beneficiaries
III Competence
Adequate personnel
Sufficient knowledge and skills among staff responsible for program implementation
Availability of management standards, the ability to manage aid, personnel and their distribution (human resource, systems and operational support such as logistics, administration and finances)
A security and rescue procedure is in place for field staff and volunteers
NO
IV
Non Discrimination
Clear information on the selection procedure of targeted beneficiaries
Clear information on the staff and volunteer recruitment procedure
Representation of all beneficiary groups in the implementation of activities / projects
Availability of infrastructure to support the engagement of all groups and categories
Participation
Participation of men, women and children in program planning, implementation and evaluation (identification of needs)
Part Five
Participation of beneficiaries (men, women and children) in meeting needs
51
Part Five
52
NO
Actively engaged in coordination with other stakeholders
VI
Transparency
Availability of information which can be easily understood and accessed (funding, duration, implementation method, type of aid/program) Example: the construction of temporary settlement should also take into account the local environment
Availability of publications and other information media on activity processes and financial details (including the amount of donation and name of donor) accessible to the public, in particular recipient communities and other stakeholders
Availability of periodic reports on the utilization of resources in developing projects accessible to the public and mainly for recipient communities and other stakeholders
NO
VII
Coordination
Coordination is established with the local government or authorities (relevant local offices and departments)
Involved in routine coordination or information sharing with other relevant stakeholders
Fills the gap for humanitarian responses
VIII Lessons learnt and improvement
Availability of structured and scheduled field reports (not only on agreeable progress, but also disclose obstacles faced on the ground)
A periodic planning and evaluation mechanism on aid management is in place through briefings and periodic reviews
Part Five
Availability of capacity building programs on aid management
53
Part Five
54
NO
IX
Partnership
Establishment of a written agreement between aid provider and implementing partner by paying heed to the principle of equality
Active involvement of all parties in decision making
Beneficiaries are provided with more opportunities and time in program implementation
Non-Proselytizing
Every individual or personnel involved in programs and activities agrees to an internal pact
All parties are involved in decision making
XI
Feedback Mechanism
A mechanism is established for beneficiaries to make inquiries, and give suggestions and feedback
The delivery of structured and scheduled field reports (not only on agreeable progress, but also disclose obstacles faced on the ground)
NO
Follow-up on reports, inquiries and feedback
XII Self-Reliance
Sustainable availability of resources (material and non-material)
Involvement of local capacities (material and nonmaterial resources) in program implementation
Active involvement of all stakeholders in determining programs
XII In Favor of Vulnerable Groups
Availability of policies and programs oriented to vulnerable groups (groups considered as vulnerable are provided in Part Three on Basic Definitions)
The majority of direct program beneficiaries are vulnerable groups
Part Five
Policies on the protection of beneficiaries are adopted
55
Part Five
56
APPENDIX 1 Basic Definitions

Guidelines
Fundamental guiding principles by which to determine or implement a course of action.
Accountability (Humanitarian)
The obligation of an individual or institution responsible for managing public resources to be accountable for the finances, management and implementation of activities related to the delivery of assistance, logistical or material, human resource, and other forms of aid. This obligation is part of the response toward a humanitarian crisis for the main purpose of saving lives, alleviating sufferings and preserving human dignity.
Accountability Guidelines
Fundamental guiding principles by which to determine or implement the obligations attached to an individual or institution responsible for managing public resources and be accountable for the finances, management and implementation of activities related to the delivery of humanitarian assistance.
Appendix 1
Basic Definitions
Principle
A fundamental statement or basic and individual truth by which a person or group accepts as guidance and the basis for reasoning and conduct. Humanitarian aid organizations/ institutions that engage in a series of efforts to seek, provide, distribute, and be accountable for resources (facilities, personnel, funds and other forms) mobilized from various parties for delivery to those in need of aid or assistance as part of a response to a humanitarian crisis for the main purpose of saving lives, alleviating sufferings and preserving human dignity.
Humanitarian Aid
Resources (facilities, personnel, funds and other forms) mobilized from various parties for delivery to those in need of aid or assistance as part of a response to a humanitarian crisis for the main purpose of saving lives, alleviating sufferings and preserving human dignity.
Disaster Management
A series of efforts encompassing the establishment of development policies by taking into account disaster risks, disaster prevention, emergency response and rehabilitation.5
Disaster Emergency Response

A series of prompt actions mounted immediately at the time of disaster in order to tackle the resultant harmful consequences,
5
58
Appendix 1
Basic Definitions
which covers the rescuing and evacuation of victims and material possessions, fulfillment of basic needs, protection, making the necessary arrangement for refugees, as well as the salvaging and rehabilitation of facilities and infrastructure.6
Disaster Mitigation
A series of efforts to reduce disaster risks, either through physical development or awareness building and strengthening the capacity to deal with the threat of disaster.7
Disaster Rehabilitation
The repair and rehabilitation of all aspects related to public or community services to an adequate level in affected areas during the post-disaster period with the primary intent of normalizing or restoring all aspects related to state administration and community life disaster-stricken areas.8
Disaster Reconstruction
The post-disaster rebuilding of all facilities and infrastructure, as well as the institutional structures of disaster-affected areas at the government and community levels for the primary purpose of ensuring the growth and development of the economic, social and cultural sectors, law enforcement and public order, and the revival of public engagement in all aspects of community life in disaster-hit areas.9
6 7 8 9
Ibid Ibid Ibid Ibid
59
Appendix 1
Basic Definitions
Vulnerability
The characteristics and circumstances of a given community, system or asset which render them more susceptible to harmful consequences arising from a threat.10
Stakeholder
An individual or a group of individuals, either directly or indirectly affected by a project or program, with an interest or concern in the said project/program and/or the capacity to positively or negatively influence impact. Stakeholders may include affected individuals or communities at the local level, and their formal and informal representatives, local and national governments, politicians, religious leaders, civil society organizations and interest groups, the academic circle or other business communities.
Donor
An individual or institution that provides aid in the form of goods, money, or services distributed directly to affected communities or through an intermediary.
Disaster
An event or a succession of events that pose a threat to and disrupt the lives and livelihoods of the community, arising from natural and/or non-natural and human factors resulting in
United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction Terminology on DRR, www.unisdr.org/we/inform/terminology
10
60
Appendix 1
Basic Definitions
the loss of human lives, environmental destruction, material loss and psychological impact.11
Capacity
The combination of all strengths, inherent traits, and available resources in a community, society or organization which can be utilized for attaining agreed objectives.
Affected community
A community affected by a disaster which results in the loss of lives, as well as physical and material damage.
Beneficiary
An individual or community group that receives benefit from the delivery of humanitarian aid.
Response
1. The ability to fulfill needs and address accountability issues concerning the management of humanitarian aid. 2. Opening up access and establishing a claims mechanism for affected communities and stakeholders, enabling them to file complaints, make inquiries, offer criticisms and suggestions, or lodge grievances related to disaster intervention programs.
11
61
Appendix 1
Basic Definitions
Engagement
1. The involvement of stakeholders in the implementation of humanitarian actions. 2. The engagement of women, children, men and vulnerable groups in every program phase beginning from the planning, implementation and oversight of aid management.
Reporting
1. Written and verbal accountability of what has been observed, heard, implemented and analyzed, and substantiated by definitive and reliable proof. 2. Delivery of information and information access related to disaster intervention and regular activities which must be reported to donors, government, and beneficiaries.
Resource Mobilization
An activity that covers the mobilization, management, and utilization of public resources for humanitarian purposes.
62
APPENDIX 2 IFRC Code of Conduct

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR THE INTERNATONAL RED CROSS AND RED CRESCENT MOVEMENT and NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS in DISASTER RELIEF 1
There has been heightened urgency for effective and highquality humanitarian actions which have become increasingly complex, challenging and perilous. A miscalculated relief response may bring fatal consequences. In view of this, a code of ethics or code of conduct is crucial for humanitarian workers. The Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement serves as an instrument to assess the standards of behavior of humanitarian agencies, particularly those involved in disaster handling. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the International Committee of the Red Cross/ICRC have jointly prepared the Code of Conduct in 1994 with support from eight international humanitarian organizations.
12
Translation of the Code of Conduct keeps to the translation of Sphere for the 2004
edition
Appendix 2
IFRC Code of Conduct
The Code of Conduct is intended to maintain the high standards of independence, effectiveness and impact of humanitarian aid. It puts forward universal humanitarian values and practical lessons drawn from years of implementing humanitarian work, and is not about operational details. Appendices to the Code of Conduct present three key recommendations for the governments of disaster-affected countries, donor governments and inter-governmental organizations. All three recommendations are non-legally binding guidelines and present an ideal form of relationship. Due to its voluntary nature, enforcement of the Code of Conduct depends on the willingness and awareness of organizations which have accepted and signed the Code of Conduct. To date, more than 400 humanitarian agencies worldwide have signed the Code of Conduct and declared their commitment to comply with the Code.
Principles of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NonGovernmental Organizations in Disaster Response Programs (*)
1. The humanitarian imperative comes first. 2. Aid is given regardless of the race, creed or nationality of the recipients and without adverse distinction of any kind. Aid priorities are calculated on the basis of need alone. 3. Aid will not be used to further a particular political or religious standpoint.
64
Appendix 2
4. We shall endeavor not to act as instruments of government foreign policy. 5. We shall respect culture and custom. 6. We shall attempt to build disaster response on local capacities. 7. Ways shall be found to involve program beneficiaries in the management of relief aid. 8. Relief aid must strive to reduce future vulnerabilities to disaster as well as meeting basic needs. 9. We hold ourselves accountable to both those we seek to assist and those from whom we accept resources. 10. In our information, publicity and advertising activities, we shall recognize disaster victims as dignified humans, not hopeless objects.
Appendix I: Recommendations to the Governments of Disaster-Affected Countries (*)

1. Governments should recognize and respect the independent, humanitarian and impartial actions of NGHAs (Non-Governmental Humanitarian Agencies). 2. Host governments should facilitate rapid access to disaster victims for NGHAs. 3. Governments should facilitate the timely flow of relief goods and information during disasters. 4. Governments should seek to provide coordinated disaster information and planning services. 5. Disaster relief in the event of armed conflict.
65
Appendix 2
Appendix II: Recommendations to Donor Governments (*)

1. Governments should recognize and respect the independent, humanitarian and impartial actions of NGHAs (Non-Governmental Humanitarian Agencies). 2. Donor governments should provide funding with a guarantee of operational independence. 3. Donor governments should use their good offices to assist NGHAs in obtaining access to disaster victims.
Appendix III: Recommendations to Inter-Governmental Organizations (*)

1. IGOs (Inter-Governmental Organizations) should recognize NGHAs, local and foreign, as valuable partners. 2. IGOs should assist host governments in providing an overall coordinating framework for international and local disaster relief. 3. IGOs should extend security protection provided by UN organizations, to NGHAs. 4. IGOs should provide NGHAs with the same access to relevant information as is granted to UN organizations.Translation of the Code of Conduct keeps to the translation of Sphere for the 2004 edition
66
APPENDIX 3 Karinas Volunteer Application Form

B.4. Sample Cooperation Agreement Form with Volunteers
This form is prepared by the Karina Network Institution. Volunteers must sign the agreement before the commencement of duties with Karina Network. The agreement is morally binding, and not legally binding (no need to have a seal affixed).
Agreement between Karina Network and Volunteer

I, .......................... (full name of volunteer), hereby voluntarily sign on as ...................... (volunteers position e.g., SAR team member) for the duration of........... (length of duty). As a volunteer, I am willing to: 1. comply with existing procedures and rules applicable at ...... (name of organization)
Appendix 3
Karinas Volunteer Application Form
2. perform duties as laid out in the job description 3. conduct in a manner consistent with the volunteers code of ethics In the discharging of duties, ..................................... (name of organization) shall: 1. provide a well-defined job description 2. provide orientation and relevant capacity building 3. oversee duties performed by the volunteer 4. provide protection and allowances ........ (e.g., transport, meals, etc.) This agreement shall be applicable for...................... (mention the volunteers length of duty). This agreement hereby is signed at .......... (location), ................ (date)
......................... (Name of volunteer)
............................. (Name of volunteer coordinator)
......................... (Name of the organizations director)
68
Appendix 3
Appendix:
Job description ( mention the duties assigned to the volunteer) and the volunteer Code of Ethics for Karina Network 1. Do not select beneficiaries based on their ethnicity, religion, race or grouping, but on humanitarian grounds 2. Ensure each others safety among team members 3. Uphold the good reputation of the organization 4. Assume responsibility for assigned duties 5. Do not demand for reward from beneficiaries 6. Give priority to settling disputes through dialogues 7. Refrain from advancing personal or group interest, either political, economic or religious interests 8. Show respect to local culture and custom
69
Appendix 3
70
APPENDIX 4 Reference on Equal Partnership between Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU) and Lutheran World Relief (LWR)
1.2.1 Accompaniment
30 September, 2008 - 05:34 rghuma
LWR defines accompaniment as a dynamic relationship among diverse partners with complementary resources and skills working together to empower poor communities to improve their lives. This partnership is based on shared values and objectives, and uses a jointly-developed strategy with flexibility and openness to achieve sustainable results. Characterized by mutual trust, respect, accountability, and transparency, the relationship contributes to the growth and learning of each partner while carrying out its primary goal of improving the well being of the poor.
Appendix 4
Reference on Equal Partnership Between Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU) and Lutheran World Relief (LWR)
Accompaniment involves much more than grant making. Unlike the traditional donor-recipient model, accompaniment values relationships over resources. It assumes that all parties have something to give and to receive and does not prioritize the difference in gifts. As a process and methodology, accompaniment means establishing a relationship based on mutual trust, transparency and learning between three parties; LWR, the partner we fund and the impoverished community that both organizations exist to serve. The tools of accompaniment focus both on organizational and programmatic issues. They include, but are not limited to: Open dialogue between LWR and the partner from the beginning of the relationship; Working with the partner to assess what each brings to the relationship; Helping the partners to assess its capacity in specific areas and to address its capacity-strengthening needs; Carefully reviewing the progress, financial, audit and evaluation reports submitted by the partner; Walking with the partner by providing support and advice throughout project implementation and after; Providing training and hosting conferences and workshops; Making periodic visits to the partner to document and share lessons learned. To assist staff with the process of accompaniment, LWR has developed the Accompaniment Tool Kit, to be used in conjunction with the project cycle.
72
Appendix 4
The LWR Project Cycle and the Accompaniment Tool Kit needed to facilitate the process is discussed in greater detail in the next section.
73
Appendix 4
74
APPENDIX 5 Organizational Profile of Contributors

1. Humanitarian Forum Indonesia
Address : Jl. KH. Wahid Hasyim No.2 Jakarta Pusat 10340 Phone : 021-3928756 Facsimile : 021-39837302 Website : www.humanitarianforumindonesia.org Email : secretariat@humanitarianforumindonesia.org Twitter : @HF_Indonesia
Humanitarian Forum Indonesia (HFI) is an inter-faith forum for eight humanitarian agencies, namely Lembaga Penanggulangan Bencana (LPB) Muhammadiyah, Karina, Wahana Visi Indonesia (WVI), Dompet Dhuafa, Yayasan Tanggul Bencana in Indonesia (YTBI), Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU), Perhimpunan Peningkatan Keberdayaan Masyarakat (PPKM), and PKPU. In performing its duties, HFI focuses more on coordination and takes on activities that promote humanitarian values, norms and principles. In addition, HFI is involved in advocacy work, platform development, capacity building, information and communication system development, and program facilitation.
Appendix 5
Organizational Profile of Contributors
2. Public Interest Research and Advocacy Center (PIRAC)

Address : Jl. M. Ali No.2 RT 003/RW 04 Kel. Tanah Baru, Beji,Depok 16426 Phone : 021-7756071 Facsimile : 021-7756071 Website : www.pirac.org, www.sekolahfundraising.com Email : pirac@cbn.net.id
Public Interest Research and Advocacy Center (PIRAC) is an organization that offers a range of services, including research, training, advocacy and information dissemination on philanthropy, resource mobilization and the capacity building of civil society in Indonesia.
3.
Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana

: : : : : Jl. Ir.H.Juanda No. 36 021-3442734, 3442985, 3443079 021-3505075 contact@bnpb.go.id www.bnpb.go.id
Address Phone Facsimile Email Website
Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana (BNPB) or the National Agency for Disaster Management is a non-departmental institution under the Government of Indonesia comparable to the ministerial level and assumes the task of assisting the President of the Republic of Indonesia in the administration of disaster management, before, during and after a disaster, which covers preventive measures, mitigation, preparedness, emergency response handling, rehabilitation and reconstruction. BNPB was established in accordance with Presidential
76
Appendix 5
Regulation No. 8/2008. The agencys organizational structure consists of the Head and Directors.
4. Muhammadiyah
Address : Gedung Dakwah Muhammadiyah, Jl. Menteng Raya No.62 Jakarta 10340 Jl. Cik Ditiro No.23 Yogyakarta 55262 Phone : 021-3903021, 0274-553132 Facsimile : 021-3903024, 0274-553137 Website : www.muhammadiyah.or.id Email : pp_muhammadiyah@yahoo.com Twitter : @muhammadiyah
The administrators and directors in charge of disaster management total 19 people, comprising of 10 echelon 1 government officials or the equivalent, proposed by the head of state bodies (Coordinating Ministry for Peoples Welfare, Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Social Affairs, Ministry of Public Works, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resource, National Police Force and Indonesian Armed Forces), and 9 professional members. The administration of disaster management consists of several elements including the main secretariat; division deputies for prevention and preparedness, disaster handling, rehabilitation and reconstruction, equipment and logistics; main inspectorate; central unit and; technical implementing units. Since 2008, BNPB has been under the leadership of Dr. Syamsul Maarif, S.IP, M.Si. The linguistic meaning of Muhammadiyah is the followers of Prophet Muhammad. Founded by K. H. Ahmad Dahlan in 1912, Muhammadiyah emerged from the spirit of the socio-religious movement. Muhammadiyah is dedicated to various key issues, including religious propagation, education, health care, social services
77
Appendix 5
with more than 85 hospitals and 300 health facilities, 375 social care institutions, 197 universities and thousands of primary and secondary schools, including religious-oriented educational institutions. With regard to disaster handling, through the Muhammadiyah Disaster Management Centre (MDMC) which later developed into the Disaster Management Agency, Muhammadiyah coordinates health deployment teams, childrencenter teams, psychosocial services, and aid mobilization from the public through LAZISMU for disaster relief programs.
5. Lazis Muhammadiyah
Address : Gedung Dakwah Muhammadiyah Jl. Menteng Raya No.62 Jakarta 10340 Phone : 021-3150400 Facsimile : 021-3143230 Website : www.lazismu.org Email : info@lazismu.org Twitter : @lazismu
As an institution under Muhammadiyahs Central Executive Board, Lembaga Amil Zakat Infaq dan Shodaqoh (LAZIS) better known for its abbreviation LazisMU, is a national non-profit organization dedicated to community empowerment through the productive utilization of zakat (obligatory alms), infaq (donations), wakaf (charitable trust), and other philanthropic fund from individuals, organizations, corporations, and other institutions. LazisMU is established to manage zakat through a modern management approach. In implementing its programs, LazisMU is supported by the Multi-Line Network, a consolidated network of zakat agencies spread across provinces which enables LazisMU empowerment programs to reach all areas in a rapid, focused and well-targeted manner. The strategic policy of LazisMU programs for 2010-2011 is focused on the
78
Appendix 5
productive utilization of resources for micro-economic empowerment, agricultural and livestock development and empowerment, educational development, as well as social services and religious propagation.
6. FORUM ZAKAT (FOZ)

Address : Jl. Lenteng Agung No. 60 Jagakarsa, Jakarta Selatan Phone : 021-78883889 Facsimili : Email : sekretariat@forumzakat.net Website : www.forumzakat.net
Forum Zakat, abbreviated to FOZ, is an association of zakat agencies which brings together various institutions that manages the collection and distribution of zakat (Badan Amil Zakat/BAZ and Lembaga Amil Zakat /LAZ) across Indonesia. This association was established on Friday, 19 September 1997 by 11 institutions namely Dompet Dhuafa Republika, Bazis DKI Jakarta, Baitul Mal Pupuk Kujang, Baitul Mal PT. Pupuk Kaltim, Baitul Mal Pertamina, Telkom Jakarta, Bapekis Bank Bumi Daya, Lembaga Keuangan Syariah Bank Muamalat Indonesia, PT. Internusa Hasta Buana and Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi Indonesia (STIE) Jakarta. At its inception, Forum Zakat was initially a foundation, but since the first National Deliberative Meeting held on 7-9 January 1999, its legal status changed to an association, whereby its general chairman was Drs. Eri Sudewo. The change from foundation to an association was legalized by the Notary. To date, the legal status of Forum Zakat remains as an association, and registered as such in the State Gazette.
79
Appendix 5
7. PKPU
Address : Jl. Raya Condet No.27-G Batu Ampar Jakarta Timur 13520 Phone : 0804 100 2000 Facsimile : 021-87780013 Website : www.pkpu.or.id Email : welcome@pkpu.or.id Twitter : @pkpu
PKPU is a national humanitarian aid agency, whose presence is unmistakably felt through active partnerships with existing international NGOs dealing with disaster emergency response, and in the rehabilitation and reconstruction of disaster-affected areas in Indonesia. PKPU was accepted as an NGO in Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations on 21 July 2008, which calls for the periodic accountability of humanitarian work as a consequence of being conferred the status.
8. Catholic Relief Services (CRS)

Address : Jl. Wijaya 1 No.35 Kebayoran Baru Jakarta Selatan 12170 Phone : 021-7253339 Facsimile : 021-7251566 Email : crs-id@id.seapro.crs.org
Catholic Relief Services (CRS) is a humanitarian agency with 60 years of experience in emergency response worldwide. In carrying out its relief aid programs, CRS consistently complies with international standards to guarantee that disaster-affected communities are capable of meeting their basic needs and lead a dignified existence. CRS works directly with the public and local partners to assist in the recovery process and building the
80
Appendix 5
capacity of the local people in order to restore their previous living conditions. Learning from the tsunami response in Aceh and given the increased frequency and scale of disasters in Indonesia, at the end of 2007, CRS Indonesia has formed a permanent emergency response team aimed at improving the quality and speed of organizational capacities in responding to disasters. CRS Indonesia also works with more than 10 local partners in Sumatera, Java, East Nusa Tenggara, West Nusa Tenggara and Sulawesi in implementing efforts aimed at lowering disaster risks. To achieve all program objectives and strategies, CRS Indonesia shall strengthen and increase the capacity of local partners and communities with regard to preparedness, mitigation, emergency response and disaster risk reduction.
9. Karina (Caritas Indonesia)

Address : Jl. Matraman No.31 Kel. Kebon Manggis, Kec. Matraman, Jakarta Timur 13150 Phone : 021-85906534, 85906540 Facsimile : 021-85906763 Website : www.karina.or.id Email : karina@kawali.org
Karina-Konferensi Waligereja Indonesia (KWI) is a humanitarian foundation owned by the KWI ( Konferensi Waligereja Indonesia or the Indonesian Conference of Bishops). This foundation serves as the central coordinating body of the Catholic church, initiating response and delivering aid through ministry in dealing with all types of disasters, both man-made and natural, as well as various issues related to human rights abuses, conflict, gender, social injustices, while building the capacity of all 37 dioceses in Indonesia.
81
Appendix 5
10. Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU)

Address : Jl. Kaliurang Km 12, Dusun Candi III No. 34 Rt/Rw 03/06 Yogyakarta - INDONESIA 55223 Phone/Fax : +6274-882477 Email : yeu@yeu.or.id Website : www.yeu.or.id
Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU) is a humanitarian agency in Indonesia created out of a deep concern shown by YAKKUM ( Yayasan Kristen untuk Kesehatan Umum or Christian Foundation for Health) over the lack of effective emergency response, while still maintaining its focus on community development. Concerning disaster handling, YEU concentrates on three key areas: responding to environmental disasters through effective planning and long-term development strategy, assisting conflict victims followed by peace-building efforts within the community, and protecting the rights and preserving the dignity of victims. YEU intervention programs are focused on six key issues: medical health care, disaster preparedness and environmental protection, environmental sanitation, economic empowerment, psychosocial counseling and information services, including the link between the media and fund raising.
11. Masyarakat Penanggulangan Bencana Indonesia (MPBI)

Address : Jl. Cempaka Putih Tengah No.13 Jakarta Pusat Phone : 021-44588079 Facsimile : 021-44588079 Website : www.mpbi.org Email : info@mpbi.org
82
Appendix 5
MPBI (Indonesian Society for Disaster Management) is a non-profit organization established on 3 March 2003 in Jakarta. MPBI was founded based on the awareness of Indonesias vulnerability to disasters which thus far have not been managed effectively, leading to information gaps, weak coordination, poorly targeted relief aid and incoherent policies for various sectors. Based on its mission statement which seeks to create communities that are safe and protected from disasters, MPBI has initiated disaster management programs, mainly pre-disaster initiatives involving stakeholders to ensure the better handling of disasters and guarantee public safety and protection, as the basic rights of the people.
12. Wahana Visi Indonesia (WVI)

Address : Gedung 33, Jl. KH. Wahid Hasyim No.33 Jakarta Pusat 10340 Phone : 021-31927467 Facsimile : 021-3107846 Website : www.worldvision.or.id Email : Comms_Indonesia@wvi.org
Wahana Visi Indonesia is a Christian humanitarian organization dedicated to efforts aimed at bringing sustainable changes in the lives of children, families and communities living in poverty. Wahana Visi as the partner of World Vision Indonesia, a humanitarian organization implements most World Vision programs. Based on Christian values, Wahana Visi devotes itself to working together with communities most in need of assistance. Wahana Visi serves all individuals regardless of religion, race, ethnicity or gender.
83
Appendix 5
13. Perhimpunan Peningkatan Keberdayaan Masyarakat

Address : (Main office) Jl. H. Umaidi No. 39 A, Rawa Bambu 2 RT 010/ RW 007 Pasar Minggu, Jakarta Selatan (for PNPM Peduli) Jl. Saleh Abud No.6 Otista Jakarta Timur 13330 (Main office) 021-78834309 (for PNPM Peduli) 021-85912945, 85912967 (for PNPM Peduli) 021-8520483 www.indoace.or.id indoace@indoace.or.id
Phone
Facsimile : Website : Email :
Perhimpunan Peningkatan Keberdayaan Masyarakat or the Association for Community Empowerment (ACE) is a non-profit organization working through strategic partnerships and alliances to facilitate poor and vulnerable communities in meeting their basic needs and basic social requirements. ACE membership consists of 27 (twenty seven) civil society organizations at the national level.
14. Kompas
Address : Gedung Kompas-Gramedia Jl. Palmerah Selatan No.26-28 Jakarta 10270 Phone : 021-5347710, 5302200, 5347720 Facsimile : 021-5488085, 5483581 Website : www.kompas.com www.kompas.co.id Twitter : @hariankompas Facebook : www.facebook.com/kompasfb
Kompas, a national newspaper that consistently upholds humanitarian values, has now forayed into alternative media platforms, such as online media (Kompas.com) and television. In order to expand its humanitarian programs, Yayasan Dana Kemanusiaan Kompas (DKK) or the Kompas Humanitarian Foundation functions as the field implementation agency for mounting humanitarian actions and relief responses.
84
REFERENCES
Act Alliance. 2009. Peer Review on Accountability to Affected Population Report. ALPS (Accountability, Learning and Planning System of ActionAid International). Code of Conduct IFRC Cosgrave, J (2007). Synthesis Report: Expanded Summary. Joint evaluation of the international response to the Indian Ocean tsunami. London: Tsunami Evaluation Coalition. http://www.ifrc.org.id.mk.gd/en/publications-and-reports/ code-of-conduct/, accessed on 11 August 2011 Hairus Salim and Firdaus. 2011. Akuntabilitas Kegiatan Kemanusiaan YEU di Padang Pariaman, Sumatera Barat. Yakkum Emergency Unit (YEU) Humanitarian Accountability and Quality Management Standard 2007 (the 2010 version is now available). Panduan Peninjauan Kapasitas dan Kinerja OMS (Organizational Capacity and Performance Assessment Tools OCPAT), compiled by Yappika
References
People in Aid The Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action. The Good Enough Guide The SPHERE Project. Law No. 24/2007 on Disaster Management, Republic of Indonesia United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction Terminology on DRR, www.unisdr.org/we/inform/terminology, accessed on 11 August 2011
86

Guidlines 4haii, Final

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Guidlines 4haii, Final

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Author First edition ISBN Editor Design & Layout Publisher

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

Hamid Abidin Director, PIRAC

Hening Parlan Director HFI

Law No. 24/2007 on Disaster Management

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Humanitarian Charter in SPHERE Edition 2004.

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

PART TWO How to Use these Guidelines?

This document essentially functions as:

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

2. As an Accountability Measurement Tool

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

a) Review of Organizational Documents

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

c) FGD (Focus Group Discussion) for Self-Assessment

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Calculation of Assessment Results

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Final Score = Total Score / Total Indicators

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

PART THREE Principles and Definitions

The 13 (thirteen) principles are as follows:

8. Lessons learnt and improvement

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

11. Feedback mechanism

13. In favor of vulnerable groups

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Measurement Means of Comment tool Verification

PKPU: Sorry Teungku, its impossible!

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Principle No. 2: Organizational Commitment

Measurement Means of Comment tool Verification

PKPU: The Commitment Keepers Manual

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Principle No. 3: Competence

YEU: Peer Review to Hone Competency

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Principle No. 4: Non-Discrimination

Measurement Means of Comment tool Verification

YEU: Upholding Humanitarian Principles

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Principle No. 5: Participation

Measurement Means of Comment tool Verification

YEU: Survivor Participation in Disaster Response

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Principle No. 6: Transparency

Measurement Means of Comment tool Verification

WVI: I Now Know How My Opinions can be Heard

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Principle No. 7: Coordination

Measurement Means of Comment tool Verification

HFI: Progress through Partnership

GUIDELINES FOR HUMANITARIAN ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA

Name of Organization: Facilitator: Date: ___