Report 09 November 2016

The Use of Third-Party Monitoring in Insecure Contexts

by Elias Sagmeister, Julia Steets
Secure Access in Volatile Environments (SAVE) 

Background

Third-Party Monitoring (TPM) describes the practice of contracting third parties to collect and verify monitoring data. In insecure contexts, aid actors primarily use TPM to monitor the activities of partner organizations in places where their own staff faces access restrictions.

This paper summarizes the main findings and recommendations of the SAVE research program on TPM, based on interviews with commissioning agencies, TPM providers and donors as well as a review of literature.

Main Findings

Strengths of TPM

  • Provides independent ‘eyes and ears’ on the ground where own staff cannot go
  • Allows the validation of monitoring data from implementing partners where confidence in partner reporting is lacking
  • Can in some cases allow more cost-efficient field monitoring and thus more frequent missions 
  • Is most useful for verifying quantitative and physical outputs of aid projects

Risks of TPM 

  • Time and resources required to make TPM work are often underestimated by commissioning agencies
  • Quality of reporting is frequently seen as subpar by TPM users
  • Reputational risks from field monitors' actions need to be mitigated
  • There is significant risk transfer to field monitors, especially where TPM providers lack adequate security systems
  • TPM can negatively affect context understanding and acceptance where aid agencies use it as a substitute for regular internal monitoring

Conclusion

By strengthening compliance in places where access is limited, TPM can meaningfully contribute to the broader monitoring and evaluation toolbox, with benefits for both donors and aid agencies. For donors, TPM offers an option to verify monitoring information from partners. Ideally, this should complement rather than entirely substitute for monitoring conducted by an agency’s own staff.

For aid agencies, TPM can provide a source of primary field data to inform programming and help verify partner reporting. However, as with donors, agencies should aim to do as much of their own monitoring as possible. TPM is most useful as a last resort measure or as a complement to internal monitoring and verification approaches by the recipient agencies. With this in mind, aid agencies should limit their primary reliance on monitoring by third parties to exceptional areas with constrained access. The practice of TPM is far from fully established, too: it needs to be regularly reassessed, and options for internalizing monitoring should be regularly re-evaluated. To facilitate as much of their own monitoring as possible, Third-Party Monitoring should always be supported by acceptance-building measures and community feedback systems, as well as transparent communication with communities (beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries) overall.

...

The full paper is available for download.undefined 

The summary is also available for download in ArabicundefinedEnglishundefined, and Frenchundefined.

SAVE is a three-year research program that explores how to provide effective and accountable humanitarian aid in insecure contexts.

 

 

Report 26 July 2018

Harmonizing Reporting Pilot: Mid-Term Review

by Alexander Gaus
GPPi

Report 04 July 2018

Evaluation of WFP Policies on Humanitarian Principles and Access in Humanitarian Contexts

by Julia Steets, Alexander Gaus, Claudia Meier, Janika Spannagel, Mark Bui, Adele Harmer, Abby Stoddard
World Food Programme

Report 21 March 2018

Iraq After ISIL: Sub-State Actors, Local Forces, and the Micro-Politics of Control

by András Derzsi-Horváth, Erica Gaston
GPPi

Commentary 24 October 2017

The Micro-Politics of Territorial Control in Iraq

by Erica Gaston, András Derzsi-Horváth
War on The Rocks

Commentary 18 October 2017

Perception of NGOs in Afghanistan Isn’t Great. Here's How to Make It Better.

by Elias Sagmeister
Devex