Report
The ̽»¨¾«Ñ¡'s Client Voice and Choice initiative and Ground Truth Solutions are piloting an approach to better understand and strengthen how humanitarian assistance incorporates the preferences, aspirations, and expectations of the people at the focus of aid. This document details the methodology and findings of the pilot examining the health program being delivered in Kakuma camp in Kenya.
The case study documents a number of lessons learned about how to implement an effective feedback mechanism. Two of the most important lessons learned in the Kenya pilot were as follows:
Summary of Key Learning from this Pilot:
Identify appropriate division of responsibilities and accountabilities: The ̽»¨¾«Ñ¡ in ̽»¨¾«Ñ¡ Kenya’s Safe Programming team played a leading role in the implementation of the feedback mechanism tested under this pilot. Whilst this team drove the process and drew upon their learning and experience of implementing feedback mechanisms, their eagerness to manage the process perhaps undermined the sense of responsibility which the Health team had over the feedback process and findings. In order for client feedback to systematically inform the decisions made by programme teams, it is important that it is the programme leads themselves who have accountability for and a sense of ownership over the feedback mechanism.
Verify internally administered feedback mechanisms: In Kenya the pilot employed ̽»¨¾«Ñ¡ staff to administer the survey and focus group discussions. Whilst this was a cost efficient option and benefitted from the close relationship which the teams have developed through routine interaction between staff and clients in the camp, sensitive issues perhaps were not able to surface. When an external consultant was brought in to accompany the surveying process and administer the focus group discussions in round 3, feedback around perceived lack of fairness in treatment and cultural sensitivity was raised. This highlights the importance of verifying internally collected feedback data on a periodic basis to check for a courtesy bias.
