Safeguarding in Grant Management

• Module is designed for Oak Programme Officers to help them integrate safeguarding into grant management.

Oak's Approach to Safeguarding

• Since 2018, Oak has been integrating child safeguarding into grant making to align with safeguarding policy commitments.
• Programme officers play a crucial role in implementing safeguarding.

Grantmaking Cycle and Safeguarding

• Pre-application phase: Involves investigating how the potential grantee integrates safeguarding.
• Application phase: Grantees must complete the CSSA and share documents showing support for a safe environment.
  • CSSA is reviewed to integrate specific support into the grant and consider dedicated objectives or conditions.
• Grant recommendation phase: Programme officers review the CSSA to integrate specific support, with dedicated objectives or conditions added to the grant.
• Grant monitoring phase: Safeguarding discussions occur during check-ins and site visits, especially when additional support or funding is provided.

Child Safeguarding Self-Assessment

• Key element of safeguarding in Oak's processes.
• The process has been reviewed and made more efficient for analyzing internal and external safeguarding systems.
• All grantee organizations must complete a child safeguarding self-assessment on the grantee portal, valid for three years.
• The self-assessment helps identify organizations with higher child safeguarding risks and supports partners in evaluating their safeguards.
• Program officers need to review the self-assessments to determine if the grantee needs to undertake strengthening work.
• Partners can also receive support for this work.

Reviewing Child Safeguarding Self-Assessment

• A helpful resource is available to refer to when reviewing a safeguarding self-assessment.
• When a grantee submits their child safeguarding self-assessment, the risk score is automatically calculated.
• Risk score is determined based on initial questions.
• Whether the grantee works in different countries and has expatriate staff, and the various legal frameworks, including child protection systems and regulations, need to be integrated by partners.
• The level of contact with children will determine the level of risk.
• The use of personal data and images of children will refer to data and image protection and needs to be aligned with relevant frameworks and best practices.
• The type of interventions the organization carries out, such as research, direct implementation, intermediary/regranting, etc., and whether activities are conducted online, are all components of risk assessment.
• The helpful risk assessment is only useful information for partners and Oak to identify which organizations need the stronger safeguarding systems.
• The review is more extensive for organizations with a higher risk score.
• The risk score is not an assessment conclusion of the level of systems the organization has in place.
• Grants who work directly with children in several countries and use their data and images will always have a high risk score, independently of the strength of the safeguards they have put in place.
• Reviewing the responses provided by partners in their self-assessment is key.
• It confirms the grantee has sufficient safeguards to meet and mitigate their level of safeguarding risks.

Self-Assessment Expectations

• Low-risk grantees usually answer three safeguarding expectations.
• Having someone with sufficient seniority appointed for dealing with safeguarding matters within their organization
• Ensuring a clear process to inform authorities in a case of a safeguarding concern
• Organizations need to be ready to encompass to vulnerable groups and be prepared for this contingency.
• Outlining the role and responsibility of these actors.
• Having sufficient seniority to make the correct decisions in regards to safeguarding.
• Oak can provide feedback to strengthen their approach and job description templates.
• Ensure information is communicated to staff and that staff knows who to tell of their concerns.
• It is important to define who is in charge of referring a case to authorities and social services.
• Referrals need to be made with an eye on risks and legal responsibilities.
• Medium and high risk grantees are subjected to a higher number of expectations.

Salesforce Organization Page

• Self-assessments can be accessed and reviewed on the organization's page.
• Once reviewed, the reviewer should mark their name, select the appropriate tier, insert comments, with areas requiring safeguarding strengthening work.

Open Hub Page

• The review guide is one of the several resources to support child safeguarding.
• Child safeguarding Policy: The latest version displays internal reporting and response mechanisms, and the external version is available on the website.
• The page reminds of roles and responsibilities with regards to safeguarding, as detailed in policy, Oak's code of conduct.
• Support & guidance for programme staff – the second most important and useful page for POS.
• The page should initiate dialogue with grantees, and potential grantees on child safeguarding.
• This page also provides more details on approach of safeguarding with grantees.
• Nonprofit Builder or OD grants via SPF secures safeguarding support to grantees.
• There are options to directly integrate support into the grant.

Role Advice

• There is a guide with actions to take and even guidance on questions to ask to have illuminating or conversations to have with your grantees.
• There is also reporting information, by reporting concerns to the Safeguarding Adviser within 24 hours, in Annex 1 of the policy.

Helpful resources include:

• A safeguarding checklist.
• A process of referral for service providers and referral.
• A safeguarding script.
• An email template to suggest support to a grantee.

Focal Groups

• One page is dedicated to the child safeguarding focal group within Oak, and contains more information in the group's TORs.
• A dedicated resource page saves all the useful resources.