Consultation process on CHS Draft1 closed
At the end of September 2023, the consultation process for CHS Draft1 was closed. We extend our sincere thanks to all who have taken the time to fill in the consultation survey, sent their comments in any other way or participated in one of the consultation webinars, country case studies or regional events. Your insightful feedback will help us further improve the CHS draft and bring it to finalisation by the end of this year.
Additional resources including an analysis report of the first round consultation's feedback, a comparison table and a short overview of the main changes and elements are also available to provide more background.
If you wish to contact the revision managers directly, please write to email@example.com.
- 1st Consultation Round: Feedback on the current CHS (May-Dec 2022)
- Feedback analysis and Drafting of Draft 1 of the updated standard (Jan-May 2023)
- 2nd Consultation Round on Draft 1, including webinars, country pilots, and regional workshops (June-Sep 2023)
- Analysis of feedback from consultation incorporated into draft text (Oct – Nov 2023)
- Final draft of the updated CHS shared with stakeholders
- Official launch on 21 March 2024 – please mark your calendars!
More about the revision process
Please find the full revision governance structure (Steering Committee and Management Group) under "About us"
Scope and expected outcomes
It is important to underline that the CHS revision process does not aim to replace the existing standard but to update and improve it. This means building on what works and adjusting the existing content and presentation to make it more relevant, accessible and user friendly for different stakeholders – particularly by the people vulnerable to and affected by crisis. It also means ensuring international best practices on standard development and revision are followed so that the CHS continues to enjoy trust and credibility as a global standard grounded in local realities.
The revision process prioritises listening to and understanding what vulnerable people need and value. It includes the perspectives of community-based and civil society actors working with vulnerable people and communities. It is also be an opportunity to explore how the updated standard can support system-wide changes in the aid sector and beyond, building on the achievements and lessons learned so far. This includes wider take-up of the standard by UN agencies, donors and policymakers, and strengthening links to emerging issues facing the aid sector.
The outcome of the process should be a widely used improved standard that supports more effective and accountable relationships between vulnerable people and communities, and local, national and international actors.
Approach and Methodology
The process maximises participation and engagement of different actors and stakeholders. To do this, Groupe URD, CHS Alliance and Sphere are leveraging their respective networks and partners to reach as many individuals and organisations as possible. Over 3000 comments were collected during the 2022 consultation phase!
The revision team has set up different methods and tools for stakeholders to engage, including key informant interviews, focus group discussions and community meetings, surveys, online and in-person meetings, and country and regional level consultation workshops.
The revision will also reach out to non-traditional humanitarian actors and other stakeholder groups operating in the humanitarian space to gain insights on how the standard can complement and support their work. Examples include domestic civil protection agencies and social assistance programmes, climate change adaption, resilience, poverty reduction and development efforts, and other initiatives supporting civil engagement, equity, diversity and inclusion, and accountability outside of the humanitarian sector.
The following six criteria will orient decisions on potential changes to the CHS:
- Do proposed changes reaffirm and reinforce the standard as a people-centred framework for quality and accountability?
- Do proposed changes address the most important issues that affect quality and accountability?
- Do proposed changes clarify concepts, simplify language, and make it more accessible for users and stakeholders?
- Do proposed changes reinforce the measurability of the Standard?
- Do proposed changes reinforce coherence and alignment with existing quality and technical standards and good accountability practices?
- Do proposed changes have the potential to increase adoption and use of the Standard by a wider number of stakeholders, particularly local and national actors?