Four resources regarding work in aid, development, and humanitarian response that caught my attention recently:<\/p>\n
(1)<\/p>\n
As of January 2011, at least 45 evaluations are known to have been done of various aspects of the international response to the Haiti earthquake. ALNAP’s latest report provides a mapping and analysis of these evaluations<\/a>, to help support the ongoing efforts by agencies working in Haiti. ALNAP has worked with the OECD-DAC Evaluation Network, the UN Evaluation Group to produce this paper and this blog<\/a> represents some of the key findings that may be of interest to ALNAP members.<\/p>\n (2)<\/p>\n ALNAP recently facilitatied a workshop on Supporting Innovation in Humanitarian Organisations<\/a>. A blog about the workshop is here<\/a>, along with an excellent comment that says, among other things: “I have seen a number of organisations not engaging their field staff so as to findout if their innovative ideas will apply on the ground.” What are your thoughts about how humanitarian organizations do or don’t encourage\/cultivate innovation? Join the discussion<\/a>. <\/p>\n (3)<\/p>\n OCHA’s has released its latest report: To Stay and Deliver: Good practice for humanitarians in complex security environments<\/a><\/p>\n Former U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator, Jan Egeland comments in the preface of the report, “The last 10 years represent one of the worst decades ever in terms of attacks on humanitarian workers and lack of humanitarian access. When people in need are deprived of assistance because relief workers are attacked or blocked, we are not faced with a political or diplomatic ‘problem’ – we are faced with an outrage and a criminal act under international and national laws.”<\/p>\n The report also includes a chapter on the opinions of national staff, working for International NGOs, which often remains a forgotten aspect of this debate. This article<\/a> from Reuters Alertnet discusses some of the issues raised by this chapter.<\/p>\n (4)<\/p>\n The 2010 Humanitarian Response Index (HRI)<\/strong> has been released by DARA<\/a>, “an independent organization committed to improving the quality and effectiveness of aid for vulnerable populations suffering from conflict, disasters and climate change.” The HRI aims to identify and promote good donor practice and contribute to greater transparency, accountability and impact in humanitarian action.<\/p>\n Among other things, the HRI 2010 report raises concerns about the politicisation of aid, where donor governments are undermining neutral, impartial and independent humanitarian assistance in order to meet political, economic or security interests. In Somalia, for example, some humanitarian workers were worried that anti-terrorism legislation of some donors like the US would mean they would be criminally liable for any aid delivered in areas controlled by the Al-Shabaab group. \u201cHumanitarian workers \u2013 including representatives from donors own aid agencies – are being placed in an awkward position, where other parts of government are pushing them to implement programmes that go against good practices and quality standards. In some crises this is causing significant stress for people trying to do their best in already difficult situations,\u201d sayssays Philip Tamminga, Head of the HRI initiative.<\/p>\n Read the People in Aid commentary about the latest HRI here<\/a>.<\/p>\n