Conflict Sensitivity Tip Sheet During the CHF First Standard Allocation process the Protection Cluster’s Conflict Adviser will be made available to support any cluster with specific cluster focused conflict sensitivity advice, as required and requested. 1
This Guidance Note is developed to support humanitarian actors integrate ‘Do No Harm’/Conflict Sensitivity into their 2015 programming, including when developing their funding applications to the CHF. Inclusion of ‘Do No Harm’/Conflict Sensitivity elements into the project design will be one criteria against which proposals will be assessed. This tip sheet has been developed to support partners in including ‘Do No Harm’/Conflict Sensitivity elements in their proposals. It is structured in two sections: -­‐
Section 1 provides an overview of what is understood by adopting a conflict sensitive approach in delivering humanitarian programming in an emergency setting. -­‐
Section 2 gives tips about where Do No Harm/Conflict Sensitivity can be concretely incorporated into CHF proposals. 1. Why is it important to deliver conflict sensitive humanitarian programming in South Sudan? The imperative to save lives, ensure the safety and dignity of populations, and provide needs based assistance can often be a challenge in complex conflicts, such as the one in South Sudan. South Sudan is experiencing violent political conflict, resulting in massive humanitarian needs and a crisis in which civilians are exposed to high levels of violence, coercion and deprivation. The humanitarian community remains concerned that in 2015 the conflict will protract and entrench further, despite progress at a political level, and this will cause and exacerbate displacement, food insecurity, the need for critical life-­‐saving assistance, and protection risks already faced by the civilian population. It is also expected that the access environment (as it relates to the physical context, regulatory environment and security) will remain challenging. Humanitarian assistance itself, often provided in the absence of other interventions, may also be at risk of becoming an instrument for maintaining or exacerbating conflict. Conflict sensitivity and ‘do no harm’ approaches can help humanitarian organisations to manage risk both at the local and national levels and improve the quality of the response. These approaches require organisations and humanitarian decision makers at all levels to: a.
2
Analyse the context in which the humanitarian response will take place A simple context analysis is a first step in delivering conflict sensitive humanitarian programming. In an emergency setting a study of the background, history, root causes, key actors, and dynamics of the conflict, and any other factors that contribute to violence, vulnerabilities in the populations, protection and humanitarian need. Within this, understanding what divides people and where the points of tension are is critical to understanding how humanitarian projects may feed into, or lessen, these forces. A conflict analysis should be developed as part of the development of a humanitarian program and be updated frequently ideally involving local stakeholders. In simple terms, a conflict analysis is a regular review and update of the context, and the relevant dynamics attached to it, in which the project is operating. 1
2
This is the first version of the CHF TS guidance note on how to include conflict-­‐sensitivity in proposals submitted to CHF funding. Feedback from partners and other CHF stakeholders is most welcome to further improve this note. Comments can be sent at ‘chfsouthsudan @un.org’. The word context is more appropriate than “conflict” as it covers broader socio-­‐political, root cause, structural and other factors that have the potential to become violent. 1 b.
Understand the ways in which humanitarian response interacts with the context and vice versa, specifically the interactions and interconnections among programming decisions (where to work, with whom, how to set criteria for assistance recipients, who to hire, how to relate to local authorities etc.) Each aspect of a response project (e.g. activities, budget, human resources, means of operation etc.) must be scrutinized from the perspective of what impact (positive and negative) it has on the overall conflict context, in terms of the major dividers, tensions and also connections and positive change that could emerge from the project. Partners should therefore analyse all major aspects of their project that is being planned, answering the following questions: what type of assistance is being provided, where, to whom and why? Who are the staff, how are they hired, what are the dynamics between them and the context? Who are the intended recipients of the assistance and their connection to the conflict? By what criteria are they included or excluded? How is assistance delivered, warehoused and distributed? Is the project going to have a positive or negative impact on the conflict, inter-­‐
group relations resource allocation, power balance etc? Who gains and loses? What resources are we bringing into the conflict and what is the impact of our resource transfer? Are we effectively communicating the intentions of our work? For instance in South Sudan context, this could mean taking into account whether the project will be implemented in a Government-­‐held or non-­‐Government held area and what this entails, or whether the project will be implemented inside or outside a PoC site, or across fault lines that local communities draw. c.
Mitigate the negative impact of responses for the beneficiary population through response adaptation and better risk management, with a view to not exacerbating conflict dynamics, vulnerabilities or forms and modes of violence.. Reducing any negative impacts of any aspect of the planned project requires generating as many options as possible to undertake the project in ways that strengthen community coping strategies and positive interactions between groups. Be aware that sometimes options chosen will still carry risks. Be prepared to monitor throughout and adjust during project implementation, including mitigation measures. Be sure to have a good risk management strategy in place for all aspects of the project, to ensure staff safety and security, beneficiary dignity and safety as well as accountability, and greatest positive impact on the rest of the context. 2. Where to incorporate conflict-­‐sensitive/Do No Harm elements in your CHF project proposal? This section contains key indicative questions to ask when designing a project to ensure a conflict-­‐sensitive approach is incorporated. The guidance below is based on numerous sources (e.g. Sphere standards) and follows the key sections in the templates for concept notes and full proposals. a.
ü
ü
b.
ü
Humanitarian context analysis (concept note stage) Have you taken local operating environment where the project will be implemented into account (e.g. social, economic, political and institutional context, dynamics and actors)? Have you broadly determined that the proposed project is suitable, appropriate and does not exacerbate conflict dynamics, negative coping strategies of the affected population, or create or exacerbate risks and vulnerabilities? Needs assessments (project proposal stage) Is the project based on an impartial assessment of needs, context, the risks faced and the capacity of the affected population? Does it take adequate stock of existing assessments and needs analysis? 2 ü
ü
c.
ü
ü
How has information on stakeholder groups been collected and analysed in order to identify specific needs and interests and power dynamics to ensure protection, and meaningful participation? How have stakeholders and beneficiaries, especially vulnerable groups been involved/taken into consideration in the project design? Logical Framework (concept note stage) Does the logical framework identify the risks to project failure, assessing for each the “Likelihood’ of occurrence, the ‘Potential Impact’ on the project and ‘Mitigating Measures’ to reduce / avoid the risk? Are the activities for monitoring these risks clearly identified and planned for? d.
ü
ü
ü
e.
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
f.
ü
ü
ü
Monitoring and reporting details (concept note stage) and work plan (project proposal stage) Does the proposal have a clear and concrete plan for monitoring the implementation of the project? Does the monitoring and reporting plan include regular monitoring of the situation, and explain how the project will adjust to a changing context to reflecting changes in risks and people’s needs and capacities? Does the monitoring and reporting plan include gender and age disaggregated data and analysis of the ways in which the project will address the different individuals and populations to meet their particular needs? Accountability to Affected Populations (project proposal stage) Does the project explain why and how the beneficiaries were chosen; have they been involved in the project design; will they be involved in project implementation; will benefit from the intervention? Does the project include specific mechanisms to ensure beneficiaries are involved in the project design and can provide feedback on the project implementation? Do the activities of the project take into consideration possible protection threats facing the affected population? Might they undermine people’s own efforts to protect themselves? Do the activities discriminate against any group or might they be perceived as doing so? Does the project design ensure that vulnerable people have full access to assistance and protection services where relevant? Does the project have systems in place to guarantee that sensitive data related to beneficiaries will be safeguarded? Does the project takes into account the impact of the other communities not directly targeted by the project. What are their preferences and views? Are they reflected in the proposal? Will the project increase tensions or supports connections between communities? How?)
Does the project have system in place to avoid placing people and communities at greater risk of violence, and reduces the vulnerability of people and communities to violence? Implementation mechanism Does the implementing partner have clear policies and procedures in place to guide its staff on how to respond if they become aware of, or witness, abuses, and on the confidential management of related information? Staff should be briefed on appropriate reporting of witnessed incidents or allegations. Does the proposal explain the process and criteria of selecting other implementing partners and justify how these are relevant and appropriate in relation to the project strategy, conflict analysis and geographical scope? Does the proposal explain how sub-­‐grant to other implementing partners will be monitored? 3