> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://urd.gitbook.io/compass/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://urd.gitbook.io/compass/implementing/implementing-a-quality-project.md). # Implementing a quality project How to use the Core Humanitarian Standard to implement a project Quality and accountability are not add-on activities or compliance exercises for donors and other partners, but it is embedded in everyday operational decisions, organisational behaviours, and power relations during implementation. *** ### Why using the Core Humanitarian Standard to implement a project? #### Implementing the best possible intervention **Projects almost always have to change** to remain relevant and effective. These changes are normal in project management as long as a flexible decision-making mechanism is established to manage them. The **responsibility** for anticipating, analysing, and managing these changes lies primarily with the Head of Project / Project Manager, supported by technical, operational, and MEAL staff. This role requires, in particular, four key and complementary competencies:

Critical analysis

Taking a step back to assess whether the intervention still meets the priority needs, capacities and preferences of communities and people affected by crisis, while avoiding harm and exclusion

Proactivity and initiative

Based on knowledge of the context, the project and the stakeholders, anticipate potential obstacles and propose adjustments to the project to ensure the relevance of the proposed activities

Organisation and prioritisation

Managing time and resources in constrained environments, and ensuring coherence between activities, support functions and quality commitments

Communication and facilitation

Interacting positively with communities, partners, authorities, donors, and internal teams, and facilitating dialogue, feedback and shared understanding

Decisions related to project adaptations are generally based on contractual commitments that define essential areas such as the scope, the budget and the duration of the intervention. However, they cannot cover all the dimensions of a **“good intervention”**, particularly those related to accountability, participation, learning and the ethical use of power. The CHS can then be used as a **complement to contractual and institutional requirements**, as a structured reference framework enabling teams to carry out a more holistic analysis of the intervention, beyond technical delivery alone. #### Sharing a common language Project managers, Logisticians, Administrators, Technical Advisors, Operational Coordinators, MEAL Officers, Heads of Communication, Community Liaison Officers, among others, contribute, directly or indirectly, to the implementation of high-quality, accountable projects. While the project manager plays the central role in steering the project, they **cannot do everything**. Their role as a **conductor** is essential to ensure that different functions contribute actively to the project steering processes. Having a shared vision of the expected quality and accountability commitments can help to establish dialogue and share a common language. Having a shared reference framework and a common language helps teams to clarify expectations and responsibilities, facilitate dialogue across different functions and levels, reduce misunderstandings linked to, for example, professional cultures, and even anchor operational decisions in shared principles rather than individual interpretations. #### Meeting growing quality and accountability demands Most organisations already have internal policies, guidelines, or tools to promote quality and accountability, but in practice, it is often challenging for them to: • Navigate and reconcile multiple standards, frameworks and donor requirements that are not always aligned; • Translate what accountability means into concrete, context-appropriate and feasible practices, particularly in resource-constrained, highly changing or high-risk environments. . The CHS helps address these challenges by being based on humanitarian principles and ensuring consistency with other international standards (Humanitarian Standards Partnership). The standard is recognised by most international donors as a framework for quality and accountability. The CHS can be used as a foundation to structure a quality and accountability framework that connects existing standards and clarify actions and organisational responsibilities throughout project implementation. For interested organisations, the CHS standard also has a voluntary, non-mandatory verification framework to demonstrate compliance with or adherence to the standard *** ### How can you use the Core Humanitarian Standard to implement a project? Managing projects is always challenging. While there is no single formula for success, experience shows that much can be gained by having a clear understanding of processes that support quality and accountability during the project cycle. The COMPASS method uses a **“process-oriented” approach** to better understand key components of project cycle management. Project processes are interrelated activities and checks that conduct to specific outputs (services, products, documentation, decisions, etc.)\[1] at different stages of the project. There are usually three categories of processes \[2]:

Implementation processes

Activities that directly contribute to delivering assistance and achieving outcomes

Support processes

Functions that enable implementation (human resources, technical, logistics, etc.)

Steering processes

Processes that guide, monitor, analyse and adjust the project

The COMPASS method focuses primarily on steering processes through the articulation of project quality assurance and project quality control.

			Cover image
Project Quality Assurance	Do we have the necessary procedures in place to ensure quality and accountability in our project ?	Focus: Process	noun-quality-control-8298322.png
Project Quality Control	Do project deliverables (goods and services) and decisions meet agreed quality and accountability acceptance criteria?	Focus: Final deliverables	noun-quality-control-8295774.png

**Quality assurance & quality control** are organised around nine “quality and accountability control points” at key stages during the project cycle. For each project deliverable produced during the nine quality and accountability control points, the COMPASS method proposes a checklist of acceptance criteria. These nine checklists translate at field level the fifty requirements recommended by the Core Humanitarian Standard. The COMPASS is organised in a project cycle of six phases (flexible and adaptable): preliminary phase, initial assessment, design, launch, implementation and monitoring, closure. Each phase includes a practical CHS perspective of the why, what and how. *** \[1] Source: ISO 9001:2015. “A process is a *set of interrelated or interacting activities that use inputs to deliver an intended result”.* \[2] Adapted from: ISO/TC 176/SC 2/N 544R3