Key Words

SDF: Sustainable Development Foundation

MEAL: Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability, and Learning

CFM: Complaints and Feedback Mechanism

HAP: Humanitarian Accountability Partnership

PSEA: Protection against Sexual Exploitation and Abuse

FGDs: Focus Group Discussions

Contents

Key words…........................................................................................................... 2

Introduction............................................................................................................ 4

Definition of Accountability..................................................................................... 4

Purpose of this policy.............................................................................................. 5

Accountability principles......................................................................................... 5

Parts of Accountability............................................................................................. 6

The importance of accountability.............................................................................. 6

Accountability and Program set up........................................................................... 7

Program implementation.......................................................................................... 8

Regularly Listening to People.................................................................................. 9

Program exit........................................................................................................... 9

Participation............................................................................................................ 9

Program Setup Steps.............................................................................................. 10

Planning Participation............................................................................................ 10

Program Setup....................................................................................................... 11

Program Implementation Steps............................................................................... 11

MEAL Steps......................................................................................................... 12

Program Exit Steps................................................................................................ 12

Sharing Information............................................................................................... 12

Handling Feedback and Complaints........................................................................ 14

Complaints and Feedback Mechanism.................................................................... 15

Annexes................................................................................................................ 18

Introduction

The Sustainable Development Foundation (SDF) is committed to contributing to achieving sustainable human development goals and community development, alleviating poverty and improving the living conditions of the most vulnerable groups by providing basic services for protection and assistance to affected people. This accountability policy is a statement of the Sustainable Development Foundation's commitment to accountability at all stages and activities of projects and a commitment from Project staff to demonstrate the highest standards of quality and accountability.

Accountability will be promoted by ensuring that target communities have access to information about projects, partners, planned activities, and by creating opportunities for those communities to participate in programming decisions and provide us with feedback on project interventions.

In the project development phase, SDF will hold consultations with groups of adults in the target communities, where possible, to determine the most appropriate ways to share information and solicit feedback.

This will help us develop our own information sharing tools with different audiences as well as set up feedback mechanisms. MEAL team will ensure that projects, employees and partners can comfortably communicate about our projects and details of our activities, as well as our Code of Conduct. MEAL team will also plan with different target groups for their participation in the different elements of the projects. We will seek their input on what the success of the projects will look like and in developing our own monitoring and evaluation indicators and explore the possibility of this working with community members to monitor the projects. Also, during the setup phase, we will discuss project closures with partners and communities to clarify goals, timeframe, and who might take over project components after we leave.

While implementing projects, we commit to regularly listening to communities in our daily programming activities, through regular project monitoring and through complaints and feedback mechanisms. During community visits, our staff use complaint and feedback forms to record any issues that require a response.

Complaints and feedback mechanism (CFM) is established in all SDF projects in order to enable us to solicit feedback and complaints, particularly on the most serious grievances. MEAL team regularly review feedback data resulted from monitoring as well as from complaints and feedback mechanism, to make necessary changes to our projects. Our oversight plan will include accountability indicators to monitor the effectiveness of our information sharing, engagement and feedback mechanisms.

Definition of Accountability

SDF defines accountability as the means by which we fulfil our responsibilities to our stakeholders and the ways in which they may hold us to account for our decisions, actions and impacts. We commit to hold ourselves accountable to all of our stakeholders, but first and foremost we hold ourselves accountable to disaster affected women, men, boys and girls.

Definition from the Good Enough Guide (2007): “Accountability means making sure that the women, men, and children affected by an emergency are involved in planning, implementing, and judging our response to their emergency too. This helps ensure that a project will have the impact they want to see”.

Definition from HAP Standard in Accountability (2010): “Accountability is the means through which power is used responsibly. It is a process of taking into account the views of, and being held accountable by, different stakeholders, and primarily the people affected by authority or power.

Purpose of this policy

Our Policy draws together the existing internal and interagency standards and codes for humanitarian quality and accountability that SDF has committed to. This includes:

·     SDF’s Program Framework

·     SDF’s Humanitarian Mandate

·     SDF’s Code of Conduct

·     The Sphere Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards for Disaster Relief

All SDF staff are responsible for implementing our work in accordance with this accountability Policy, including who we are working with and through partners. SDF managers have a specific responsibility to ensure that roles and responsibilities are clear within and between teams. This Policy is designed for humanitarian contexts, but may also be useful in improving accountability for SDF’s longer-term work.

This Policy reflects the important lessons that SDF and other humanitarian agencies have learned through years of experience about what it takes to ensure that our assistance is appropriate, timely, effective and accountable to the people we assist

In setting out SDF Humanitarian Accountability Policy, SDF’s aim is not to create a new set of standards. Its intention is to draw together those issues of quality and accountability about which SDF has made commitments. By doing this, SDF wants to:

·     Help ensure that these issues remain visible throughout SDF

·     Help provide clarity for senior and projects managers who need to know what SDF’s commitments mean for them and their teams.

·     Help SDF staff, particularly those working with disaster-affected communities and put accountability into practice throughout their work

·     Help SDF staff at all levels fulfil our commitments to our primary stakeholders.

·     The Policy is intended as a common point of reference which will help us to relate the commitments, we have made to the reality of our day-to-day work.

Accountability principles:

Humanitarian accountability is concerned with ethics, rights and responsibilities, agreed standards and benchmarks. Men, women and community affected by disasters\conflicts have a right to assistance and protection. They also have a right to information, to participation, to be heard, and to redress.

·     Respect and promote the rights of legitimate humanitarian claimants.

·     State the standards that apply in their humanitarian assistance work.

·     Inform beneficiaries about these standards, and their right to be heard.

·     Meaningfully involve beneficiaries in project planning, implementation, evaluation and reporting.

·     Demonstrate compliance with the standards that apply in their humanitarian assistance work through monitoring and reporting.

·     Enable beneficiaries and staff to make complaints and to seek redress in safety.

·     Implement these principles when working through partner agencies.

·     They may safely and legitimately report concerns and complaints and get redress where appropriate.

Parts of Accountability:

·     Regular, timely and accessible information sharing on who we are, our projects, what behavior people can expect of our staff and representatives (in line with Code of Conduct), and how people can be involved and provide feedback and complaints. This involves looking at the way we currently share information, making it more systematic and standardized, and producing varied tools for various stakeholders.

·     Participation – discussing together, deciding together and working Together with communities and partners. This involves looking at how we work with our key stakeholders across the program cycle, moving from consultation to collaboration, and improving quality and inclusiveness of participation where necessary.

·     Proactively seeking feedback from communities and handling their complaints. This involves systematic listening, and setting up formal mechanisms in our projects for people to express views and concerns on our approach, activities and impact, as well as on safety issues and the behavior of our staff. From our complaints and feedback mechanisms to inform changes in implementation, and ensuring evaluation data informs future project design, thus building a culture of learning and continual improvements.

·     Building staff competencies for accountable programming – this involves ensuring that our staff have the technical and behavioral competencies to deliver our commitments to communities. It also involves working with program and partner staff to ensure they understand: what accountability looks like in practice; how to implement transparent, participatory programs; how to set up and manage complaints mechanisms.

The importance of accountability:

An accountable and participatory approach brings important practical advantages, including:

·     Improving the quality of our program design and implementation, making our work more relevant

·     Improving our relationship with and acceptance by the communities, helping us move towards working in true partnership with communities.

·     Reducing the risk of fraud or of funds being used inefficiently

·     Reducing the risk of harm to beneficiaries that might be caused by the conduct of our own staff or by the design of the intervention itself.

 

Accountability and Program set up

·     Ensure SDF staff is well informed about:

o   SDF’s vision and mission

o   All aspects of the project

o   Practice Standards for communities' Participation

o   The Code of Conduct.

 

·     Share information with communities in accessible formats about the project details and how people can be involved.

 

·     Set-up meetings with communities:

As you hold project set-up meetings with communities, it is critical to ask How they would like to receive information (Verbally? In writing? How often? From whom? How they would like to share feedback and complaints about the project.

 

·     Planning participation:

In what ways will communities participate at each stage of the project cycle? What opportunities have you created for communities to work with you as you plan for their involvement? Consider mapping how you currently meet our Practice Standards on Participation. You can then plan to address gaps and ensure quality and safety.

 

·     Identify appropriate representatives

Who adequately represent the interests of different vulnerable groups? Have you considered how inclusive your approach is? What can you do to ensure the most marginalized people can participate?

 

·     Invite local communities, village committees, and local authorities:

to take part in developing criteria for selection of those to participate in or benefit from the project.

 

·     Partner agreements need to include expectations on:

o   Information-sharing with communities and between partners

o   Enabling communities’ participation

o   How complaints will be handled between partners and with communities

o   Project monitoring and evaluation.

·     Capacity building needs

Discuss with SDF and partner staff their capacity building needs around accountability, participation, and make a plan.

 

·     Staff work-plans

need to reflect the amount of staff time required to carry out all the aspects of accountability to communities. Setting a performance objective on accountability for program staff will help make it happen.

 

·     Set up a MEAL system:

consider including in the MEAL system indicators to help monitor our accountability to communities, looking at how good we are at information-sharing, participation and complaints handling, and upholding our commitment to keep vulnerable community members safe from harm.

 

·     Exit planning:

Considering when and how we will close a program at the outset helps to ensure true ownership of the program by its stakeholders, helps to reduce dependency on SDF, and helps to avoid uncertainty and misunderstandings.

 

Program implementation

We will make it easy for community, especially from marginalized groups, to be involved in the project by carefully considering activity places, times and formats.

We will Involve people in making decisions about the project, such as deciding on the beneficiary selection criteria, the kinds of activities, and the timing and place of the activities we will be implementing.

regularly share information – based on the community’s preferences, A plan will be making with partners for regular information-sharing (which tools to use with which audiences, who will update, how often, visibility in the community, etc.).

 

Setup complaints and feedback mechanism (CFM):

·     Consult with communities on the most appropriate way they would like to share complaints and feedback

·     Establish a call center in country/main office for receiving complaints and feedback from Affected population.

·     Design a process and a system for recording and responding – ensuring it includes a process for fast- tracking urgent or sensitive complaints, such as abuse or exploitation

·     Assign roles and responsibilities

·     Train staff and, possibly, community volunteers

·     Inform adults about the CFM – this should be part of our larger social mobilization

·     Record complaints and responses

·     Provide proper feedback for each complaint received.

·     Review CFM database/records to inform program improvements – present complaints analysis to program team on a monthly basis.

 

Regularly listen to people

·     Regularly monitor the program – ask adults involved in the program their impression of progress and the impact of the project; ask them how well are we sharing information, handling complaints, working with them in partnership and upholding the commitments of our Code of Conduct

·     Invite community members to take part in project Monitoring

·     Take time to reflect on program implementation with partners and staff

·     Based on community feedback, make necessary changes

·     Provide regular reports on performance and project finances to the community

·     Share results of project evaluations with the community in accessible formats.

 

Program exit

Key things to consider during closure of program are:

·     Communicating with stakeholders about when, why and how you will be closing your program, and who they should contact once SDF has left

·     Handing over to communities, partners or government some aspects of the program that might continue.

·     Handing over assets to SDF or key stakeholders.

·     Managing program staff towards the end of their contracts.

·     Accounting and reporting.

·     Identifying, documenting and sharing lessons learned.

 

Participation

Participation is a fundamental principle of accountability. The HAP standard benchmark on participation says that it is our responsibility to enable communities and other key stakeholders to participate meaningfully at all stages of the program cycle, right from the start, when we plan and design activities, as well as during implementation, and in monitoring and evaluation

Participation takes different forms: community/community-led, collaborative, consultative and nonparticipation. Programs may not consist of just one type of participation but may naturally involve a combination of the above.

Non-participation is negative and may be tokenistic or manipulative. However, the other three types are all equally as valid and are suited to different projects and stages of the program cycle.

Consultative participation involves seeking the views of adults in order to increase their knowledge and understanding of their lives and the issues affecting them. It recognizes their beliefs as well as their expertise, but is led and managed by us or our partners. Consultations may be used in project design and in monitoring and evaluation through the FGDs. Refer to Annex B.

Collaboration involves adults partnering with our staff in some capacity, through which adults and community work in partnership to make decisions and implement projects. adults may collaborate in the research phase of a project or during project implementation in initiatives such as school-based clubs.

Community/community-led participation is when adults are empowered to lead their own projects or initiatives, either individually or as part of their own organizations, clubs or parliaments. In this case, our role is about facilitation, offering advice and support.

 

In terms of our work on participation, we are looking at two issues: firstly, improving the scope of participation across the program cycle; and secondly, improving the quality of participation.

 

The following sections are designed to help you with tackling these issues.

 

Program setup Steps:

Ensure that our staff and partners are well informed about the following organizational information, so that they are able to share it with communities using appropriate formats/methods:

·     SDF vision and mission

·     All aspects of the project

·     Basic Requirements for community’s Participation

·     Code of Conduct

 

Planning participation

·     How will communities participate at each stage of the project? What opportunities have you created for communities to work with you as you plan for their involvement? b) Gain informed consent from community.

·     Identify appropriate representatives that adequately represent the interests of different vulnerable groups. Consider how inclusive your approach is. What can you do to ensure that the most marginalized can participate?

·     Invite the local community, village committee, and local authorities to take part in developing criteria to select those participating in or benefiting from the project.

·     Prepare parents, teachers and other adults who regularly interact with community by recognizing and addressing any negative attitudes towards community participation, and respond to concerns. Gain parental consent.

 

·        Partner agreements need to include expectations on:

o   Enabling community’s and adults’ participation

o   Code of Conduct

o   Project monitoring and evaluation

·     Map how you currently meet the Basic Requirements on communities Participation, then plan to address gaps.

 

Program set up:

·     Discuss with staff and partners their capacity building needs around participation and make a plan.

·     Staff work plans need to reflect the amount of staff time required to carry out all participation-related activities. Setting a performance objective on participation for program staff will make this happen.

 

Exit planning involves meeting with key stakeholders (particularly community, communities, partners, and, where appropriate, local government) to agree together on expected outcomes of the program and the timeframe for SDF’s withdrawal. How the capacity of local partners, community members will be developed throughout the program so that they are able to take over responsibility when Save the Community withdraws. Who will take over key elements of the program when SDF withdraws and what assets will be transferred with this responsibility?

 

Program implementation Steps:

·     Make it easy for community, especially those from marginalized groups, to be involved in the project – consider activity places, times and formats.

·     Involve community in making decisions by working in consultation and/or collaboration with community’s groups/clubs.

·     Regularly listen to community:

o   Monitor the program – ask adults their impression of progress and impact of the project.

o   Facilitate community’s involvement in monitoring.

o   Take time to reflect on program implementation with partners and staff.

o   Based on your consultations, make necessary changes.

 

Program implementation

Set up a Complaints and Feedback Mechanism (CFM) based on the community’s preferences. You will need to:

·     Design a process and a system for recording and responding, ensuring it includes a process for fast- tracking urgent or sensitive complaints such as abuse or exploitation.

·     Assign roles and responsibilities.

·     Train staff and possibly community volunteers.

·     Inform community about the CFM.

·     Record complaints and responses.

·     Monitor trends and make changes to program, as necessary.

 

Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning Steps:

·     Ensure that the project M&E system has indicators on monitoring community participation.

·     Regularly monitor the program – ask adults involved in the program their impression of progress and impact of the project. Be sure to ask questions about how safe the community feel in the program – eg, whether there is anything about the program interventions that might be putting them at risk of abuse or harm; and whether the conduct of staff, other adults or even other community is causing them any concern.

·     Invite community members to take part in project monitoring.

·     Take time to reflect on program implementation with partners and staff. Based on community feedback, make necessary changes.

·     Provide regular reports on performance and project finances to the community. Share results of project evaluations with the community in accessible formats.

 

Program exit Steps:

Key things to consider when closing your program:

·     Communicating to community about when, why, and how you will be closing your program, and who they should contact once you’ve left.

·     Work with community to decide on how they want to approach the end of the program – for example, do they want to form a community’s club which can continue or are there community-led initiatives they can take forward?

·     Handing over to communities, partners, or government some aspects of the program that might continue. Share program evaluations with communities.

 

Sharing information

Our principles

We are committed to providing timely, relevant and clear information about our organization and the work we do with communities, and partner organizations. We need to make sure we share this information in languages, formats and media that can be easily understood by communities we work with. When we work with partners, we first need to share this information with them and make clear to them our expectations on information-sharing with communities in our partnership agreements.

 

 

Sharing information with communities

Things you need to think about

·     How can you make sure that information is available and accessible to all members of the? community?

·     How will you give information? Verbally, in meetings and/or in written form?

·     How will you display information? Using maps, pictures, pie charts (for project finances) and photos is a good way of presenting information to people who may not be able to read.

·     How will you update the information, and how regularly?

·     How will you make information community friendly?

·     There are lots of examples of fun, innovative ways to involve communities in preparing and presenting information to others in their communities. They can also learn valuable skills through being involved.

·     How can you help communities to understand why it’s important that we share information with them? How

·     Can you make the term ‘accountability’ relevant and engaging for communities?

·     How can you encourage communities to ask questions about the information we give, or to give us feedback?

Remember – in order to be able to share this information with partners and communities, our staff will need answers to the questions. Therefore, we need to make sure that they have access to this information and can comfortably communicate about it with partners, communities.

Remember – the communities we work with have a right to this information.

Sharing Information on project budget

SDF wants to help people understand what we have spent on their behalf. So, the information we share should be relevant to local people about the activities we are carrying out in their village or area. SDF only shares the projects’ budgets with local authorities in the targeted areas before the start of implementation. Also, SDF provides information on the allocated budget for intervention during the coordination phase with targeted communities. This is implemented through the introductory workshops and meetings.

 

Importance of sharing information on budgets

·     It increases ownership of the project: if communities know how much things cost, they are more likely to get involved with activities and even help us protect project assets.

·     It challenges notions of dependency, as it allows us to say: “This is how much we bring. What will you, the community, contribute?”

·     It increases the quality of our work: by being transparent, we involve communities and partners more.

·     It increases our credibility and trust with the community.

·     It promotes citizens’ rights and a culture of transparency: if we can share information regularly about our budgets and expenditure, it will encourage citizens to exercise their right to ask other public institutions to do the same, including national and local government, churches and schools

·     It promotes value for money: publishing or sharing information on project.

·     It helps to prevent fraud: if we know we are sharing budget information, we will be more careful about our financial processes.

·     It increases our competitiveness: donors increasingly encourage financial transparency.

·     It helps us meet international quality standards as set out by SPHERE, HAP (Humanitarian Accountability Partnership) International.

 

Handling Feedback and Complaints

Definitions and key issues

A complaint is an expression of dissatisfaction. It is a specific grievance of anyone who believes that the organization has failed to meet a stated commitment, or of anyone who has been negatively affected by SDF programs or its staff. A complaint primarily includes concerns about the standards of service, actions or lack of action by SDF or its staff and representatives, which include partner staff, volunteers, contractors/consultants, community committee members or anybody directly involved in the delivery of our work. A complaint to which we can respond has to be about an action for which SDF is responsible, or one which is within our sphere of influence.

 

Feedback is a positive or negative statement of opinion about our programs and the behavior of our staff and representatives shared for information or action but not with the intention of lodging a formal complaint. Depending on the nature or seriousness of the feedback, however, the organization itself may need to take the same action as if the feedback were a complaint.

 

Non-sensitive and sensitive complaints: A non-sensitive complaint concerns implementation of activities or program decisions taken by SDF that can be handled with knowledge of the program and common sense.

 

A sensitive complaint includes issues related to:

·     Corruption, misuse of project funds or materials

·     Any violation of the Community Safeguarding Policy or serious violation of the Code of Conduct, such as any form of SEA exploitation, abuse or harassment (including sexual, physical and verbal) of beneficiaries by staff

·     Discrimination of beneficiaries on the basis of race, gender, creed, religion, sexual orientation, age, etc. Other complaints judged as serious by SDF program/complaint handling staff, such as violation of local laws, concerns around safety or harm of beneficiaries arising from the way the organization is carrying out its work.

Most of the sensitive complaints will need to be handled according to relevant existing policies and their reporting mechanisms, such as the Fraud and Deception policy and PSEA policy, so that confidentiality and fast-tracking can be undertaken.

Complaints and feedback mechanism*

A complaints and feedback mechanism (CFM) is a set of clear, transparent procedures that provide communities with access to a safe, confidential means of voicing complaints on issues within the control of SDF.

A complaints and feedback mechanism may incorporate multiple entry points – i.e., ways in which the complaints can be submitted.

The sub-offices will likely have multiple entry points (mechanisms to submit complaints) in place to enable soliciting of feedback and complaints from various community groups. The feedback and complaints mechanism should complement regular program monitoring and evaluation activities, and be appropriate to the local context, building on respected local ways of giving feedback. For example, in communities where oral communication is prioritized, SDF staff may take oral feedback and later document it within the SDF system.

 

Who can complain?

Communities involved or not involved in our programs. Everyone affected by our programs or program decisions can submit complaints and feedback.

 

Can partner staff use the complaints and feedback mechanism?

It is critical that our partner staff also have a means to communicate their feedback and complaints about our partnership and program management-related issues to us. The program and its partners should agree on a mechanism for sharing feedback and complaints with each other, and should stipulate this in their partnership agreement. This should be separate from the mechanism set up for use by communities. In communities where we implement programs through partners, we will need to support our partners to set up and manage complaints and feedback mechanisms, and ensure feedback data is shared on a regular basis with relevant SDF staff. This will enable us to take action where appropriate, make changes and communicate learnings.

 

How to set up a complaints and feedback mechanism

 

We are committed to give our concerned communities the chance to raise concerns or complaints, and to respond to them appropriately. Here are ten steps to help you set up a complaints and feedback mechanism (CFM).

·      Secure organizational commitment and resources

Senior management and field staff must support the idea of a CFM. Staff responsible for handling complaints must dedicate time for the task, and may need training. In addition, some financial resources will need to be made available to set up the CFM. SDF has successfully established a call center to receive all beneficiaries\ communities’ complainers and feedback.

 

md5-8c67f7fab213e8046aa7b24feda7bbcb  

*Refer to Annex A

·      Consult communities, donors and partners

Ask communities, and our partner organizations for their views about how we should get feedback and handle complaints. Find out about the traditional mechanisms for handling complaints that already exist and explore the possibility of using them in the project.

 

Make sure the community know what they can complain about. We can deal with complaints about: the project (what we do and how we do it) the behavior of our staff and representatives (including partner staff, contractors/consultants, and community committee members).

Here are some mechanisms (entry points) communities may prefer: a suggestions box, help desks, freeline

/Hotline ...etc. to receive feedback and complaints.

 

·      Design the process for complaints handling and agree who will do what, when and how.

Process: the project team need to agree how the CFM will work in practice. This will mean thinking about the scope of the mechanism, how to ensure the safety of the complainant, how to handle allegations of abuse, and the referral (cases outside of our mandate that we will need to refer to local authorities or other agencies) and appeals processes (what happens if the person making the complaint is not happy with the outcome). CFM must include principles of confidentiality and non-retaliation. Confidentiality means the name of the complainant and the person they complain about will be kept confidential by those involved in handling the complaint. The principle of non-retaliation means that the person will not lose access to our services as a result of complaining about our program or staff.

 

Roles: The team also needs to decide on roles – who will receive and register complaints, who will investigate and how, who will respond, and by when.

 

·     Set up the complaints -handling infrastructure in the community and train staff Make access to the complaints processes as easy and safe as possible:

o   Make it possible for communities in remote locations to be able to complain. Receive complaints both verbally and in writing.

o   Make it possible to file a complaint on behalf of somebody else (whether owing to illiteracy, fears for personal safety, inability to travel, etc.

o   Ensure that all staff know about and are trained to implement the CFM.

o   Ensure that staff are aware of SDF’s staff Code of Conduct, and local procedures.

o   Remember – the process you design must protect communities and others who may complain.

o   Remember – if you’re using a complaints box, put our logo on it (security permitting), the project name, and the scope of the mechanism (what people can complain about).

 

 

·     Make sure people know how the CFM works communities need to know how to use the CFM.

CFM posters should be p u t up on community noticeboards, or hold a meeting to let people know how to complain. Clearly state what people can complain about. Tell people how long each stage of the process should take. How often will the complaints box be checked? How many days before we will give an initial response to a complaint? And describe the appeals process.

 

·      Record the complaint

Complaints should be recorded on a complaints form, in a logbook, or on a database. After recording the complaint, a member of staff should complete the relevant forms (e.g., community safeguarding or fraud incident), as appropriate. As you record the complaints, it is good practice to categories them in order to make it easy to analyze trends afterwards. Consider using the categories outlined.

 

Keep complaint files confidential. Only those responsible for dealing with complaints should have access to these files. It is vital that complainants have complete trust in the process, and that their right to confidentiality is respected at all times.

 

·      Acknowledge the complaint, verbally or in writing

Let the person who made the complaint know that you have received it. Your verbal or written acknowledgement should include the date the complaint was made, the person to whom the complaint was made, a brief outline of the nature of the complaint, the date by which the person can expect a response, and how to appeal against the outcome of the complaint.

 

·      Resolve the complaint

Resolve informally: most complaints can be resolved quickly and informally with common sense and knowledge of the program. Staff must be encouraged and supported to do this wherever possible. Even if a complaint is resolved immediately, it is still good practice to record the complaint in the complaint database or logbook, and to note the outcome.

 

Resolve formally: some complaints, especially where they allege staff misconduct, cannot be resolved quickly or easily. Misconduct includes behavior that is not in line with our staff code of conduct and community safeguarding policy. It is good practice to involve staff (or partners or community members) not directly linked to the project to carry out a formal investigation. Some complaints may need to be ‘escalated’, so that they are investigated at a more senior level or by those with specialist expertise.

 

If a complaint concerns possible abuse or exploitation of a community or other beneficiary by a staff member or representative of SDF or another organization, immediately report as per your local internal reporting procedures.

 

Do not try to investigate the concern yourself, do not try to find evidence, and do not discuss it with others. Simply report it.

If a complaint concerns serious community abuse by a member of the community, or professional abuse such as sexual exploitation by staff from another NGO, report this to your local community safeguarding focal point, who should then proceed as per your internal local procedures, such as referring the case to relevant local or agency authorities (again, as soon as possible).

 

·      Respond to the person who complained

Try to respond to the person or people who made the complaint within ten working days of it being received (or within your agreed timeframe, if this is different). If you are unable to do so, you must let them know why. You should update them on the status of the complaint, and let them know when they can expect to receive a response.

 

Maintain oversight of how the complaints process is working. Always inform communities and partner organizations of their right to appeal to the Direct responsible or other appointed person. Remember: Appeals will be considered when the complainant is highly dissatisfied with the complaint-handling process, or the response, or when the complainant has produced new evidence which s/he previously could not access or was not available.

 

A review committee (ideally different from the investigation committee) will decide to accept or reject the appeal. If accepted, it might ask for a reinvestigation by the existing investigation committee, or it may reconstitute one.

 

The response will be communicated to the complainant; more than three appeals from the same complainant/s would not be entertained.

 

·      Record the response into your database, monitor your CFM and share learning

The program officer should monitor the number and type of complaints that are being received. If you are not getting complaints, you should evaluate whether the community found the CFM easy to use, and whether your efforts to inform them about it worked well (and if not, why not).

 

Tracking the number and types of complaints you get will help you make changes in your current

and future programs, so that you do not keep getting similar complaints from the community. You should also share learning as appropriate with colleagues within your region or more broadly across the organization.

 

Annexes

Annex A- CFM SOP

Annex B- Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) template