Step 6: Monitor and evaluate results and review plan of action

What impacts have the capacity building steps had on your organisation? What went well, less well and, most importantly, why? Go back to step 1 and re-do the analysis: what has changed, what has not, and what can be done to enhance the impact?

For example, the organisation may have progressed substantially in analysing conflict and linking the analysis to conflict-sensitive planning through the development and adoption of an agency specific tool. But conflict-sensitive monitoring and evaluation may not have been conducted because it was not prioritised in the strategic plan, or because no specific resources were allocated. Therefore after re-doing your institutional analysis you may conclude that institutional commitment and resource allocation should be prioritised rather than further development or training in conflict related tools.

Just as in project or programme monitoring and evaluation, setting clear goals and objectives from the outset is critical to ensuring the ability to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the action plan in the future. Focal areas include:

• strengthening internal capacity. Evaluate the degree to which the process has enhanced your internal organisational capacity for conflict sensitivity. Review programmes planned and implemented within the organisation’s conflict-sensitive framework, and survey staff opinions on how the process has worked.
• working with partners and like-minded organisations. Possible approaches include evaluating how the process has strengthened external relationships in terms of partners’ capacity for conflict sensitivity. As previously mentioned, institutional capacity building for conflict sensitivity should not stop within the organisation. In order to impact on the context, the evaluation needs to also include partners (local and international). Monitoring and evaluating progress should therefore also include key external partners and could take place as part of joint review and learning sessions.

In formulating, implementing and evaluating the plan of action, it is important to be aware of – and avoid – the so-called ‘project trap’. Whereas conflict sensitising a project may have a beneficial impact on the organisation-wide commitment and ability to be conflict sensitive, it should not be confused with conflict sensitising an organisation. Indeed, going beyond project-level conflict sensitivity is a key objective of the mainstreaming process, as it ensures that all future projects and activities have an enabling institutional environment for conflict sensitivity.

Accountability

In many situations of structural or violent conflict, institutions that are charged with developing and implementing significant social, economic and judicial programmes and policies are not held directly accountable to the people affected by these interventions. International agencies are generally held accountable to their own governments for project outputs, but often not for operational approaches or impact. To enable staff and organisations to be responsible for actions related to conflict, they must have the skills, processes and procedures that support and reinforce such accountability. The skills and processes outlined in this chapter will help to create an environment conducive to mainstreaming conflict sensitivity, but will need to be combined with measures to enable accountability to conflict sensitivity at the individual, programmatic and institutional levels.

Conflict sensitivity requires support for the accountability of individuals and organisations to:

• beneficiaries and institutions who are being supported
• organisations and individuals that fund programmes
• national and international laws and principles applicable to the institution or individual.

A. Institutional accountability

Conflict sensitivity will be most effective and easiest to mainstream when it has institutional support across programmes. Means of strengthening institutional accountability include:

• developing a policy that confirms the organisation’s commitment to a conflict-sensitive approach
• making conflict-sensitive programming and support processes key criteria in decision-making by the institution’s senior management team (or other group that is responsible for approving programme strategies and large expenditures)
• establishing mutual accountability for conflict sensitivity through joint programming and co-ordination with other programmes and institutions
• supporting mutual capacity and accountability for implementing conflict-sensitive tools and processes through joint training and the development of tools and procedures for mainstreaming conflict sensitivity
• conducting regular external evaluations with conflict sensitivity as one of the criteria; involving partners, other institutions (governments, civil society, donors) and affected communities in regular reviews and final evaluations to help ensure that those impacted by the intervention have influence over it.

B. Programmatic accountability

At the programme level it is important to have an internal process that supports conflict-sensitive programming and allows for new approaches to be tested and mistakes reduced through joint problem solving. Projects should be approved and evaluated partially in terms of their conflict sensitivity and responsibility for conflict-sensitive programming should be shared within the institution. Programmatic accountability can be enhanced by:

• encouraging and reinforcing conflict-sensitive programming in the development and evaluation of programmes. Encourage joint problem solving and adjustment of programmes during internal and external meetings to make them more conflict sensitive
• establishing conflict-sensitive programming criteria and applying the criteria to each project or programme proposal. Criteria could include elements such as: analysis, capacity assessment, identification and participation of stakeholders, direct and indirect programme impact, coordination and co-operation with other actors, and participation of partners in programming
• enabling (and instituting mechanisms for) programmes to receive recognition and to document success stories in support of awareness raising
• involving partners, other institutions (governments, civil society, donors) and affected communities in the programming process to ensure the process remains attentive to both those who are involved in its implementation and those who are impacted by it
• (for funders) requesting conflict-sensitive programming in calls for proposals, and allocating sufficient resources and time, for the programme development and evaluation process necessary for conflict-sensitive programming

C. Individual accountability

Beyond the institutional and programmatic accountability measure, organisations need to ensure that all staff members understand their responsibility in a conflict environment; are provided with the resources and skills necessary to meet that responsibility; and are enabled to do so through incentives and support structures. Individual accountability thus requires:

• individuals who understand the role and objective of their organisation in relation to conflict. These can be communicated in a number of ways that will provide staff and partners with a justification for why they are mainstreaming conflict sensitivity: review of the mandate, founding principles, human rights law, humanitarian principles (see also section 6.2 on advocacy and awareness raising, above)
• staff who understand how to act in a conflict-sensitive manner. If reinforced throughout the organisation, the capacity and skills development opportunities outlined in this chapter will encourage them to change the way they do their programming
• staff who have the opportunity to implement a new conflict-sensitive idea or approach that will help them own and advocate for the approach within the organisation. When implementing a new concept or idea, individuals need to receive support and reinforcement throughout the programming process. As they learn, they will be able to adjust the programme and avoid doing harm during this learning process
• conflict-sensitive skills to be included in job descriptions for new staff. These skills include: conflict analysis and reporting, facilitation of participatory processes, qualitative programme development, monitoring and evaluation, conflict resolution or negotiating, coordination and relationship building (see section 6.1 on skills development, above)
• elements of conflict-sensitive programming, relating to the position of the staff member, to be included in staff appraisal and evaluations, but only at the point where the individual’s learning and work is demonstrably fully supported by the organisation.