4: Planning

Access strategy

What is it?

An access strategy should articulate how the humanitarian community intends to address the most serious access challenges, operational dilemmas and/or compromises to humanitarian principles present in the country or area of operations.

It is not an internal HAWG document. An access strategy is HCT-endorsed and owned, and informs an HAWG’s work.

Why is it important?

An access strategy is important because it provides both a common picture of the access challenges the humanitarian community faces and how they will be collectively and systematically addressed.

Without a strategy or with a poor strategy, access challenges risk being addressed in ad-hoc and reactive ways by individual organisations or not addressed at all.

Role of co-chairs and members

The co-chairs should play a key role in securing the HCT’s mandate to develop or update a strategy and be closely involved in organising the consultation, drafting and feedback process. OCHA should lead the process, but the co-chairs should be heavily involved and ensure that operational partners’ views are reflected in the strategy.

Members should contribute to the methodology, consultations and feedback processes.

The active participation of all HAWG members is crucial to ensure buy-in during the implementation phase.

Guidance

Securing a mandate

The mandate for creating an access strategy should come from the HCT, with the Humanitarian Coordinator's (HC’s) support. An HAWG should not spend time developing one without this clear mandate. 

If an HAWG feels there should be an access strategy or an update to an existing version, but there is no mandate from the HCT then the co-chair and members might consider lobbying influential HCT members, donors and others to call for a strategy to be developed.

The issuing of a mandate should not be seen as the HCT’s only input until a draft is ready for review. It should be involved throughout the development process. Consider also having the HCT sign off on a strategy format and methodology. Such a step-by-step approach is likely to make the final endorsement process easier. 

Consultation

Once a mandate to develop a strategy is secured, co-chairs can choose to pursue a more informal consultation process of bi-lateral meetings with key stakeholders or a more structured and time-consuming process.

For the latter, they might consider forming a steering committee with a Terms of Reference (ToR) to lead the strategy development in consultation with HAWG members. Such a committee should include influential and well-informed individuals from across the humanitarian community. Engaging these stakeholders lends further credibility to the process and eases the sign-off process. Consider developing a workplan for the consultations and brief the HCT on findings as they emerge, whether in writing or through briefings. This feedback and the reaction to it will give an early indication of how easy or difficult the sign-off process is likely to be.

Regardless of the method chosen to conduct the consultations, there should also be a diversity of geographical input, ideally from all regions the strategy intends to cover. Consultations should not only involve stakeholders based in the capital. Area-based coordination structures, such as local HAWGs, can be forums to work through to gather input.

Nor should strategy just represent UN and international non-governmental organisation (NGO) perspectives. National NGOs should have a strong voice in the process too, given they will be implementing most of the programmes. 

Identify organisations that could be spoilers for the strategy development process, and rather than sidestep them try to involve them early on. Giving them a voice as part of the formal process will avoid having them “shouting from the side lines”. This is particularly important for stakeholders who have influence over the HCT’s endorsement of the strategy.

It is also important to include stakeholders who have influence over others more generally. United Nations Department for Safety and Security (UNDSS), for example, has a significant say in deciding which areas UN agencies will be allowed to access. 

The consultations should broadly cover the following areas: 

• What are the most serious access issues, dilemmas or compromises to principles that partners face?
• Which stakeholders have most influence over these issues? Who has influence over those stakeholders?
• Which practical changes in policy, practice or law might help to mitigate or avoid the issues identified? This could also include changes within the humanitarian system.
• Which activities, interventions and stakeholders could bring about these changes?
• How should activities be sequenced, and who will lead on them?
• What resources can organisations dedicate to implementation?

This information should be gathered in a number of ways, from existing sources such as the AMRF and the collection of new data through interviews, focus groups or surveys.

Regardless of the data collection method, participants and interviewers should have a common understanding of what an access strategy is and is not.

Identifying gaps and needs

An access strategy and workplan should be informed by data on humanitarian needs and a gap analysis. If such data does not exist, the HAWG should recommend to the HCT that the cluster coordination structure collect it as part of the strategy. This will subsequently inform the HAWG about which areas and impediments to focus on to address the most urgent needs.

Drafting

Once feedback from the consultations has been gathered, the co-chairs should work with the chair and maybe the steering committee members to analyse and distil key insights. 

Depending on the breadth of the consultations conducted it might be helpful to use analysis software to code the consultation notes. This is not a requirement, but it could help to identify the following: 

• Most common access issues raised
• Priority issues per type of organisation or area
• Preferred approaches and activities
• Areas of disagreement or contradiction
• Needs and gaps

This kind of structured sorting and analysis can help to show that the consultations are not a tick-box exercise by ensuring the draft accurately reflects the inputs provided.

Articulating the strategy’s objectives can be a difficult step in the process. They are often worded as activities and do not explain the change the strategy intends to bring about. This should be avoided. Providing training, monitoring access constraints and negotiating with armed groups, for example, are activities not objectives. Many strategies, however, fail to make this differentiation.

In wording objectives, it is also important that they are realistic. They should be ambitious, but they also need to reflect the influence the humanitarian community can bring to bear on an issue. Here it is important to understand the internal dynamics and context of the humanitarian response. 

If an issue has been raised during the consultations for which there is no clear solution or measurable objective, then consult HAWG members, the steering committee and those who raised it again to help articulate it.

The draft should be of manageable length to increase the chances of it being read and understood. It should be between five and eight pages long. More than that and it risks being too long and may ultimately be ignored. Removing or annexing sections that regularly appear in other coordination documents is one way of reducing length if necessary. The main body of the strategy should be concise and focus on unique information.

An access strategy should also have an action/workplan. Proposed activities should be as specific as possible and time-bound. It should also be clear which individual and coordination structure is accountable for delivering the proposed activity. That individual might delegate work to others, but one person or position should be specified. Nor should someone be made responsible for an activity unless they understand what is expected of them and agree to take it on. 

A commitment to monitor and evaluate the strategy’s implementation should be included in the workplan, including periodic check-ins with the HCT to keep it informed of progress. Clear accountability moments such as these are needed to ensure an endorsed access strategy is implemented as agreed. 

Sign-off/endorsement

The foundations of the endorsement process should be laid at the very start of the strategy development process. 

By the time the draft reaches the HCT, all key stakeholders should be aware of what is coming their way. At that point it should have already addressed whatever issues people may have raised to the greatest degree possible.