I. Organisational Accountability
CARE has committed to a number of ways to ensure our accountability as an overall organisation, specifically by strengthening how we measure, capture learning, make progress towards global goals and openly share our results. We are focusing on embedding this into the regular, ongoing processes of the organisation and ensuring that governance and senior leadership bodies are actively engaged in identifying and taking steps for improvement. Below are some of the primary ways that we assess the accountability of our work.
1. Measuring the REACH and IMPACT of our work
The most critical mark of our performance, our value-add and our contribution at local, regional and global levels to sustainable development will be the extent to which we can explain the reach of our work and demonstrate our contribution to impact. Only by openly holding ourselves, and being held by others, to clear global targets and measuring outcomes and change, will we be able to justify our role in a global movement.
Global Indicators for measuring change
Please visit the CARE Global Wiki on Monitoring, Evaluation & Learning to access more details on the Global Indicators for measuring change
CARE has made important progress in transparency in this area by publishing the open Reach and Impact Map for CARE . The first tab on REACH data provides with information about participants in CARE's projects and initiatives worldwide. The second tab on IMPACT data shows the evidence of women, men, girls and boys who have experienced positive change in their lives and behaviours, facilitated by actions implemented by CARE and partners, in line with the CARE 2020 Program Strategy.
One of CARE's core MEL principles is that all MEL systems and practices should be conducive to accountability by generating solid and accessible evidence that clearly and transparently explains CARE’s reach (what we do, where we work and the people we reach) and tells CARE’s impact story (our contribution to impact and outcomes); and by deliberately engaging and involving multiple actors and incorporating the perspectives of women, men, girls and boys in decisions and actions throughout the life of a project or initiative. This includes accountability to participants, donors and other stakeholders. CARE has two key resources for supporting global monitoring, evaluation and learning and impact measurement:
1) The CARE Global Wiki on Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning give you access to resources and tools on different elements of the CARE International Agenda around Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL). It is a CI-wide collaboration space, created with the aim of providing regular updates on resources and tools for different elements of the CARE International agenda around Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning. It is also a space where CARE colleagues from around the world can provide input and exchange ideas and experiences. You can find:
2) TheMI Wiki page has been re-organized and re-launched. It gives an easy access to resources to meet different needs related to the MI goals of 1) Measuring the impact we are achieving; 2) Achieving more impact through better data usage, organizational learning and a better understanding of how to catalyze change. You will find these resouces on the page:
2. Assessing the extent to which we incorporate the CARE Approach in our actions - The CARE Markers
The CARE Gender Marker is a simple, easy-to-use tool that grades, on a 0-4 scale, whether or not CARE’s humanitarian and development work is prepared for, designed, and implemented in a way that ensures women, men, boys and girls benefit equally; and if it will contribute to increasing gender equality. It aims to improve learning and accountability on our Gender Equality and Women’s Voice Approach throughout the organisation. Since it was introduced last year, just over three-quarters of CARE’s projects were graded and reviewed using the Gender Marker within PIIRs. But PIIRs is only one way the Gender Marker is being used. The Gender Marker Learning Paper from CARE Australia collected eight case studies that show how the Gender Marker Superstars are finding creative ways to use the tool to advance our collective gender agenda.
CARE Gender Marker Learning Paper
More guidance and examples of the application of the marker can be found in the CARE Gender Wiki
The CARE Governance Marker is a tool that allows teams to self-assess the integration of inclusive governance into programming, and aims to support country teams at project level to assess where they are on a continuum of governance integration. This process aims to encourage engagement with, and particularly learning around, ways to improve and support more effective integration of governance into all our programming, in accordance with contextual constraints and opportunities.
CARE Inclusive Governance Marker Guidance Note
More information and examples of the marker can be found in the CARE Governance Wiki.
The CARE Resilience Markeris a tool that allows teams to self-assess how well resilience has been integrated into their work. It supports CARE members, affiliates, country offices, and partners with assessing projects, programmes and the overall portfolio. This process encourages engagement and learning, in particular about ways in which we can improve and support the effective integration of resilience into all our programming in accordance with contextual constraints and opportunities.
3. Making our Governance systems conducive to Accountability
CI underwent a major governance reform effort in 2016 which included the creation of a two-tier governance system (CI Supervisory Board and CI Council) and global leadership bodies (the National Directors Committee, and 4 Strategic Leadership Teams). See the powerpoint below for an overview of CI Governance and Leadership.
CARE Global Governance and Leadership
CARE's governance reform also includes an update of the CI Statutes and a set of internal agreements (the CI Code) about how different parts of CARE work together. CARE is committed to being transparent about its governance processes, and the revised CI Code will be shared once it is approved by the CI Council in June 2018.
As a key part of its accountability and to strengthen its performance, the CARE International Supervisory Board is utilising a performance assessment process developed in FY16 (see below).
CARE's Board Assessment Tool
4. Promoting Accountability within CI Members
Members submit information on key performance data each year, which is consolidated, analysed and openly shared and discussed for improvement. This includes:
a) Contribution to Impact: CARE's data on program information and impact is disaggregated by CI member, so that members can see and improve their contribution to change goals; the level of integration of gender, governance and resilience; and level of partnership, innovation and scaling up strategies incorporated.
b) Financial Health and Fundraising Performance: The following 13 Key Performance Indicators also represent key mechanisms to assess CARE International achievements regarding its financial health and fundraising performance over the years and to measure progress against the Global Growth Strategy targets.
|Top 13 KPIs||Rational|
|1||Percent Total Revenue Achieved to Global Growth 2021 $1bn target||Achievement towards the Global Growth strategy (GGS)|
|2||Revenue Growth Year on Year||Monitor progress towards $1bn 2021 target|
|3||Unrestricted Revenue / Total Revenue||Monitor the % of unrestricted revenue|
|4||Donor dependence||Over reliance on a single donor could impact financial viability as well as independence|
|5||Program Spending / Total Revenue||Measure maximization of spend on CARE's work - (use 3 year rolling average)|
|6||Cost to raise $1 - Private Fundraising expenditure /Private Donor Revenue||Cost to raise a Dollar: Benchmark our success in fundraising|
|7||Program Expenses / Total Expenses (%)||Understand levels of investment|
|8||Humanitarian expenses / Program Expenses||Understand levels of investment|
|9||Administration Expenses / Total Expenses||Monitor administrative costs|
|10||Fundraising Expenses / Total Expenses||Monitor investing in fundraising|
|11||Total Internal Cost Recovery (ICR) / Total Indirect Costs||Measure optimisation of cost recovery from donors. Higher cost recovery increases unrestricted funding available for innovation & fundraising.|
|12||Unrestricted Reserves / Total Balance Sheet Assets||Organisational health - this is used by ECHO as “Financial independence” KPI|
|13||Continuity Ratio- Unrestricted Liquid Reserves / Expenses (# months)||Measure of overall financial health and ability to respond short-term operational fluctuations|
c) Member Standards: A set of member performance standards are under development and will be reported against starting in FY19, capturing member obligations and monitoring CI Code and core global policy compliance.
d) Feedback Surveys on Performance: The CI Engagement Survey has been sent out for the past 4 years to get CARE Offices feedback on CARE Members Partners performance. In FY16 we added two different categories: one to seek additional feedback on lead member performance and one to obtain feedback from both members and COs on the Secretariat’s performance.CI Feedback Surveys have been recognised as important accountability tools within our confederation. Staff, leadership and external experts in accountability practices have all pointed to the opportunity of building on the engagement surveys and using them as a way of capturing feedback, analysing patterns and identifying areas for improvement. This tool is currently under development.
CARE Lead Member Survey Results (FY16)
CARE Member Partners Survey Results (FY16)
CO Performance standards 2018
5. Institutionalising Accountability practice via Human Resources processes
Human Resources (HR) processes can serve as a mechanism for institutionalising accountability. From a management perspective, HR system establishes incentives, rewards, and sanctions to effectively institutionalise accountability practices. Accountability is best institutionalised and routinized when it is not assigned to one person or a single team to uphold. HR processes are helpful in setting expectations and performance standards related to accountability for all staff.
An example of internal team organization to address accountability from CARE Peru Accountability Guide. At CARE Peru, even with a dedicated position of Accountability Advisor in place, the country team clarified how each staff member’s job description relates to accountability.
Other practical management steps for embedding accountability through HR processes are:
* Core competencies: As CARE strives to hire and support competent staff, we want to pay equal attention to staff having the required technical skills and a shared set of values for accountability, transparency and respect. A concrete way in which this can be achieved is to embed questions related to accountability into job interviews and job descriptions.
* Incorporate accountability benchmarks into performance reviews and professional development plans.
* Ensure staff on-boarding processes for new team member orientation include an introduction to CARE's accountability framework, Code of Conduct, principles and values and policies core to our accountability.
Focus on Staff Conduct: How we behave with others speaks louder than any policy and guidance we may put in place to guide our intentions. The way our staff members interact with colleagues, partners and community members signals what we value. A person’s behavior is often a more trusted indicator for their intentions than their words. In addition to the Code of Conduct staff are required to sign, CDA’s Implicit Ethical Message Checklist for Staff is helpful in setting expectations for staff behavior and benchmarks for recognizing and addressing negative behavior. More guidance on how implicit ethical messages interact with the overall context and how to adapt accordingly can be found here.
6. Accountability practice in our own Management
Sustained accountability practice is often driven and maintained by personal commitment and leadership of senior management team.
Accountability of management to staff is often overlooked. Internal feedback loops are critical because they help internalize our external commitments to transparency, accountability, and responsiveness. If we are asking our staff to be accountable to communities, are they seeing the same values reflected within the walls of their CARE office? Staff feedback systems can be formal and structured (e.g. performance review) or informal relying on routine feedback conversations and communication of response.
In Rwanda, CARE has experimented by adapting CARE’s community scorecard method for staff to review the performance of management.
“…this move comes with both a demand for new systems and ways of doing business at CARE Rwanda and new competencies of our staff and partners. Internal accountability is emerging as a critical organizational driver, if the changes above, specifically working through partners are to be sustained”- CARE Rwanda management scorecard (MSC) framework”
A number of offices use staff councils or staff representatives to strengthen lines of communication and provide greater accountability between management and staff.
The CARE Staff Association provides a formal channel for inputting staff perspectives and ensuring staff participation in the CI Council, CARE's highest authority governance body.