Actions are ordered by their approximate urgency, recognising that urgency may vary depending on sectors and organisations. For recommended actions by organisations and projects, it is for them to decide how to take these forward and who will be responsible for each (e.g. senior leadership and decision makers, PSEAH, project or operational leads, but will vary depending on the type and size of the organisation). Updates on PSEAH resourcing will be built into PSEAH coordination bodies (e.g. the Safeguarding Cross Sector Steering Group, the Donor Technical Working Group, and the DAC Reference Group on SEAH) to keep track of organisational progress and to take forward collective actions.
A. For organisations and projects they help deliver
- Integrate SEAH into existing organisational and project-level risk management mechanisms. For example, update risk registers and/or risk appetite statements to include the risk of SEAH. This will help assess if you’re operating within appetite and are comfortable with levels of SEAH risk exposure, both for protecting your personnel from harm and ensuring they don’t cause harm.
- Calculate how much and what % of administrative and programme budgets is currently spent on PSEAH and for what activities. Are there obvious gaps or overlaps? If it is not possible to calculate, make an estimate based on current PSEAH activities and explore options for tracking budgets in future.
- On the basis of points 1-2 above, quantify the resources needed for PSEAH in the next 12/24 months. This could include: internal (e.g. training, investigations, risk management, communications); victim-survivor support; projects (which might also include community engagement); accountability mechanisms, risk management); and global spend (if you decide to fund global tools). You could use broad ‘minimum’, ‘medium’ and ‘maximum’ scenarios to allow for adjustment for different circumstances linked to funding and risk exposure.
- Ensure resourcing for safe programming and PSEAH risk mitigation in operational and project budgets all along the delivery chain. Prioritise and systematically and intentionally discuss safe programming and PSEAH resourcing and risk management with funders and downstream delivery partners. Include and encourage PSEAH-specific budget lines in project proposals and update any templates to reflect this.
- Pay particular attention to SEAH risk and pressures on the front line i.e. target and prioritise SEAH risk analysis and mitigations where there is most contact with those most vulnerable to SEAH. The risks of SEAH may increase as organisations and their programmes contract, so we need to do all we can to ensure national front-line responders are sufficiently resourced, especially in high-risk humanitarian operations:
- where possible, protect/extend fixed award agreements with local organisations that are providing support services, leading community engagement or otherwise have a track record of being proactive and effective in tackling SEAH.
- prioritise and/or integrate CSO capacity strengthening activities into projects and aim for “risk sharing” not “risk transferring”;
- exiting projects early can increase SEAH risks. Larger international organisations in particular should do that in a way which minimises SEAH risk and doesn’t shift the burden of responsibility unduly onto local organizations. BOND have issued guidance.
- Advocate for and prioritise safe and responsive reporting of SEAH. Be clear internally and externally that the reporting of SEAH is encouraged and that failing to act to prevent, report and respond to SEAH is more likely to weaken assurance and affect funding.
- Identify where planned PSEAH work can be streamlined or done jointly e.g. using existing multistakeholder tools and networks (see Annex C and CAPSEAH for options) to reduce costs. This will also help identify specific internal investment or funding needed in project proposals/budgets.
B. Collective action
Global and cross-cutting
- Keep PSEAH on the agenda. Consider joining the over 200 organisations and countries who have formally endorsed CAPSEAH. Endorsement is non-binding, but an important internal and external signal of commitment to PSEAH.
- Keep PSEAH resourcing on the agenda. Use existing collaborative networks to continue discussions about how to mitigate PSEAH risk and protect, prioritise, streamline resources. Feed into wider networks, thinking and action on gender, human rights, UN reform and other relevant fora.
- Maximise efficiency and shared learning through the use of multi-stakeholder tools.Use, invest in and monitor the impact of collective global tools which help improve, align and streamline common PSEAH approaches and enhance shared learning, data and evidence. A summary of these tools is available at Annex C.
- Protect vital local organisations. Join up with philanthropies and foundations, gender, GBV and feminist initiatives to support local organisations, women-led and women-focused organisations, mutual aid and self-help groups, which are key to SEAH response and prevention including, crucially, to support survivors and victims and need dedicated financial resources;
- Explore more strategic use of evidence, data and trends analysis:
- Use existing sources (Data Harmonization Scheme, iReport, SEA-RO, GBVIMS, Misconduct Disclosure Scheme, research etc) to inform advocacy, to build leadership engagement and to make the “business case” for the positive impact of PSEAH work, including prevention
- Establish a small working group to identify direct analysis and other data that can serve as “proxy” indicators of SEAH. Identify gaps in available data sets/indicators and work collectively to fill these gaps (ex. make public data on length of investigation and length of post-investigation processes; move beyond “was victim referred” to what services were unavailable etc.)
- Develop and circulate PSEAH spend, cost and budget models to build evidence and understanding of spend against need and to support the development of guidance on PSEAH budgeting in different contexts, focusing on meeting core PSEAH standards.
- Lighten internal and external administrative burdens including through alignment, harmonisation and streamlining of due diligence and reporting requirements (for example, the FCDO has recently agreed to passport HQAI CHS certification audits in their due diligence requirements).
- Explore and leverage new funding sources and initiatives in related sectors. For example:
- Explore innovative ideas e.g. insurance for PSEAH response; shift admin leave to “unpaid”; analyse differentials in money paid to perpetrators during admin leave compared to paid for survivor response or support.
- Explore, share and adopt ways to hold perpetrators accountable for costs incurred (e.g. using withheld salaries or benefits to finance support to victim-survivors).
- Leverage providers of non-financial resources e.g. international financial institutions can be strategic allies in dialogue with governments and the private sector and provide technical assistance in addition to any financial assistance.
Country level
- Ensure PSEA(H) technical capacity is retained with a focus on the highest-risk contexts when budgets are stretched, with due consideration given to sharing positions and functions across organisations and sectors.
- Proactively and systematically seek out efficiencies through reducing duplications and overlaps and strengthening the sharing (‘mutualisation’) of resources. Areas of efficiencies will depend on context, but might include joint country risk analysis, reporting mechanisms, joined up mechanisms for investigations, victim support, training and learning.
- Where country PSEA(H) action plans exist that are tailored, costed, based on inclusive consultation, joint data and risk analysis, and cross-sector coordination, a strategy to resource them should be embedded in wider country plans (e.g. humanitarian response plans and/or country development plans). Annual resourcing conversations should be held to mobilise and track financial, technical and human resources.
- Develop, support, and share good practice in forming strategic multi-stakeholder PSEAH coordination and partnerships at country/regional level. 2-3 countries will be identified to test implementation and learn from successful partnerships. These will factor in, but not be limited to, UN country coordination mechanisms and government actors.
- Strengthen engagement with national governments leveraging the best placed stakeholders depending on contexts e.g. international financial institutions, National Human Rights Institutions, CSOs. Support efforts such as joint risk analysis and the development and use of national strategies/plans as entry points. Look for lessons where national legislated budgetary appropriations can contribute to PSEAH.