ICRC Consultancy – Study on Participation & Co-Creation with people affected by conflict

Summary:

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is an impartial, neutral, and independent organization whose exclusively humanitarian mission is to protect the lives and dignity of victims of armed conflict and other situations of violence and to provide them with assistance. The ICRC also endeavors to prevent suffering by promoting and strengthening humanitarian law and universal humanitarian principles.

The ICRC is launching a study on Participation & Co-Creation of interventions with people affected by crisis. This study will contribute towards ICRC’s efforts to improve the inclusion and participation of affected people throughout the programme lifecycle. This study will take stock of current practices within the ICRC, identify best practices, and propose a concrete way forward that is adapted to ICRC operations. To undertake this study, ICRC is seeking proposals from consultants with relevant experience in the following areas:

• Participation and co-creation of humanitarian programmes with affected people
• Participation in emergencies, through remote management, in partnerships
• Candidates with prior knowledge of ICRC programmes are strongly encouraged to apply

The study will seek to answer the following key questions:

1. Why should Participation & Co-Creation with affected people matter to the ICRC?
2. Where does ICRC currently stand with regards to participative programming?
3. How does the ICRC compare to external humanitarian efforts?
4. What is blocking ICRC from doing participative programming?
5. What should participation look like for the ICRC (Recommendations)

The study should be based on extensive internal and external consultations, as well as desk reviews.

Duration of the study: Approximately 35 working days (Q3-Q4 2022)

Terms of Reference:

Context & Problem Statement

The ICRC Strategy (2019-2024) states that “People and their needs [are] at the center of the ICRC’s humanitarian action”, and that “People are at the heart of our mission”, requiring the meaningful participation of affected people who would otherwise risk being excluded or falling with a “protection gap”. This is further detailed under the objectives of Strategic Orientation 2 as essential to ensuring the “relevance and sustainability of its humanitarian response” and to “strengthen the resilience of people affected”.

These concepts of participation and co-creation are further reflected in ICRC Accountability to Affected People (AAP) Institutional Framework, both as a dedicated principle and as something cross cutting that relates to all aspects of AAP. Principle #4 (Enabling Participation), highlights the need to engage with affected people on the relevance, design, implementation, and review of humanitarian activities. Principle #5 (Inclusive & Accessible Programmes), emphasizes how diversity and power dynamics can create barriers to participation, and how understanding these can lead to greater inclusion in ICRC operations. This reflects our commitment to “making the invisible visible” and upholding the principle of Impartiality; and also emphasizes ‘Inclusion as an experience’ as the operationalization of ICRC’s commitment to “people-centric programming”. A lack of participation and co-creation of intervention risks negatively impacting the accessibility of affected people to ICRC services – especially those most affected or marginalized.

Internally, several institutional and programme-specific efforts have already taken place or are underway to promote greater participation of affected people. Externally, participation remains at the forefront of discussions in the humanitarian sector.

Despite an existing normative framework for participation and co-creation and dedicated efforts within the ICRC and in the humanitarian sector, operational experience and several internal and external assessments show that participation and co-creation is not yet systematic.

To address the disconnect between where ICRC aspires to be and where it seems to be, in 2022, the ICRC Accountability to Affected People Unit is launching this study.

Purpose & Scope of the Study

This study will contribute towards ICRC’s efforts to improve the inclusion and participation of affected people throughout the programme lifecycle. This study will take stock of current practices within the ICRC, identify best practices, and propose a concrete way forward that is adapted to ICRC operations.

The purpose of this study will be:

• to identify and propose best practices for participation and co-creation in ICRC programmes
• to nuance how these practices should be applied within different ICRC operations
• to establish a way forward for ICRC to make these practices a reality

Given these objectives, the scope and deliverables should be focused on ICRC operations, though these should also be informed from external/sector practice.

Key Study Questions

The following questions reflect ongoing internal reflections. Question 1-4 are focused on better understand the current context. Question 5 reflects the main/practical output of this study

1. Why should Participation & Co-Creation matter to the ICRC?
   • What is the purpose and what are the benefits?
   • What are the risks of not doing participative programming?
2. Where does the ICRC currently stand with regards to participative programming?
   • Normative Framework o Institutional Capacity.
   • Are approaches coherent between Métiers/different levels of hierarchy? Who participates? Who is more likely to be excluded and why?
   • Institutional opportunities to promote participative programming
3. How does the ICRC compare to external humanitarian sector efforts to promote participative programming?
   • E.g. IFRC efforts and tools, Inter-Agency Approaches / Grand Bargain Minimum Standards
4. What is blocking ICRC from doing participative programming?
   • Lack of Motivation/Incentives? Capacity? Opportunities?
5. What should participation look like for the ICRC? (Recommendations)
   • How “participative” should/can ICRC be?
   • When and where is participation necessary? Who decides this?
   • How does participation differ by Métier, target population, diversity, context?
   • How does participation differ by level of intervention? (i.e. Persuasion, Support, Substitution, Mobilization, Denunciation)
   • What is the role of Partners?
   • Should we and how do we monitor level of participation?
   • What are minimum / “good enough” standards for participation in the programme lifecycle?

Key Outputs

1. A Report, including:
   1. Description and Analysis of current context (Questions 1-4)
   2. Recommendations for the ICRC (Question 5)
   3. Description of changes needed for recommendations to take effect
2. An executive summary of the report which can be used as a briefing note.
3. Short case studies identified during the report preparation and writing (appendix to report): Extracting good practices from internal/external experiences
4. Presentation of findings to key stakeholders in one webinar, prior to finalization of the report.

Methodology:

• The consultant will lead the study through desk reviews and interviews, internally and externally.
• The consultant will be supported by a research team that will provide direction, strategic oversight, and will facilitate internal consultations.
• A close relationship and periodic meetings between the consultant and the research team is expected, so that deliverables already have a certain level of buy-in and reflect the position of the research team.

Qualifications

• Demonstrated experience in conducting similar consultancies or related work.
• Experience in participatory approaches
• Experience in humanitarian programming and project cycle management
• ICRC experience or knowledge of ICRC ways of working is an advantage
• Understanding of Accountability to Affected People

Timeframe

• Approximately 35 working days (Q3-Q4 2022)

End of ToR