View allAll Photos Tagged Accountable
Ousmane Ly, ANTIM, Mali
This session features some of the innovative ICT applications for RMNCH, and highlight efforts of international organizations to foster the use of ICT to better implement the recommendations of the Commission on Information and Accountability for Women’s and Children’s Health.
Day 2
14 May 2013
ITU/ J.M. Planche
Governor Phil Murphy alongside Commissioner Christine Norbut Beyer signs A-3707/S-2395 as a key part of the effort to implement the necessary accountability measures to exit from federal oversight of child protective services administered under the New Jersey Department of Children and Families on Tuesday, December 20, 2022 (Edwin J. Torres/NJ Governorâs Office).
20230217, MSC, Munich Security Conference, Bayerischer Hof: Main Stage I: Panel Discussion.Against Lawlessness: Ensuring Accountability.Conference Hall: Kaja Kallas Prime Minister, Republic of Estonia
Roland, one of Santa's accountants, finds it discouraging that Rudolph and the Flight Crew get all the attention. No one ever pays attention to the other support staff. Let the Rednose Reindeer try to balance the budget in this economy and see how much time he has for reindeer games.
Omar Alshogre, Syrian student and detention survivor, addresses the Security Council Arria-formula meeting on Accountability in the Syrian Arab Republic.
Security Council members Estonia, France, the United Kingdom and the United States, with additional co-sponsors Belgium, Canada, Germany, Georgia, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, Qatar, Sweden and Turkey holds an informal briefing on the need for increased efforts by the Council to establish full accountability for the most serious international crimes committed in the Syrian Arab Republic.
UN Photo/Manuel Elías
29 November 2021
New York, United States of America
Photo # UN7918177
Op 9 juni 2017 vond in de Tweede Kamer in Den Haag de tweede editie van Accountability Hack plaats, een hackathon waar met open data de prestaties van de overheid in kaart worden gebracht. Accountability Hack is een initiatief van de Algemene Rekenkamer en de Tweede Kamer samen met het CBS en de ministeries van Binnenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Zaken, Financiën en Infrastructuur en Milieu. De hackathon werd georganiseerd in samenwerking met Open State Foundation. Kijk voor meer informatie op accountabilityhack.nl/
Sgt. Maj. Joel Collins and 1st Sgt. Daniel Mangrum give a leadership and accountability brief to Marines with the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit (24th MEU), Battalion Landing Team, 1st Battalion, 2nd Marine Regiment, Headquarters and Services Company, aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7). Iwo Jima is part of the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group with the embarked 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit (24th MEU) and will support maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. 5th and 6th Fleet areas of responsibility. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Apprentice Scott Youngblood/Released)
120329-N-QM601-315
ATLANTIC OCEAN (March 29, 2012)
The CredibilityLab at Mishal Pakistan launched the Media Credibility Index (MCI), an initiative started in January 2013 in collaboration with Pakistan Coalition for Ethical Journalism, leading research and academic institutions, and media practitioners. The launch ceremony was held in Islamabad where prominent media professionals, representatives of regulatory bodies, media development organizations and members of the civil society participated. The Index focuses on the relative credibility and believability of various media channels through which content is created.
Addressing the participants, Founder and Director, Ethical Journalism Network, Aidan White said that launch of the Media Credibility Index is a landmark moment for media accountability in Pakistan. In a country where people are overwhelmed by a torrent of information on all sides, and where corruption lurks in all areas of public life, the greatest challenge facing journalists and media professionals is to produce information that is reliable, useful and above all truthful.
The MCI provides fundamentals for analyzing media discourse in the country. By using benchmarks provided by professionals at national and international level, the MCI provides an opportunity to examine how the news analysis and commentary of high profile news anchors contribute to better understanding of complex issues in Pakistan’s robust landscape of journalism and politics, he further added.
Speaking at on the occasion, Dr. Nazir Saeed, Federal Secretary for Information, Broadcasting and National Heritage said, “Television has an overwhelming impact on peoples’ decision-making power. The significance of the Media Credibility Index is in its use and ability to highlight content that can empower both the newsmakers and the information seekers; enabling them to create an effective knowledge ecosystem in the country. MCI has the potential of becoming the source for an informed decision making tool in public policy debate. MCI will promote ethical content practices in the country, information that tells stories not just about the powerful, but also about the powerless, and not just about the life of the decision makers, but also about issues concerning the masses”.
“I feel proud of the fact that the Media Credibility Index has been launched in Pakistan and can be a benchmark for other countries in the world for promoting, balanced, ethical and fair journalism practices”, said Dr. Nazir Saeed.
Center for International Media Ethics (CIME) Ambassador for Pakistan, Puruesh Chaudhary said that the index has been developed after an extensive examination of media laws, ethical principals drafted by different media groups, compliance regulations formulated by regulatory bodies and journalistic organizations. The MCI will explore the state of media in Pakistan against six indicators and 20 sub-indices. The results are currently being published on a weekly basis on the Media Credibility Index website as well.
Senior journalist and founder, Pakistan Coalition for Ethical Journalism, Muhammad Ziauddin said that Mishal has incorporated more than thirty code of conducts, principles of ethical journalism, which include currently prevalent seven national code of conducts and twenty four international code of ethics from international regulatory bodies, which have been agreed upon across the globe. He further said, that the codes of ethics framed by the Pakistani media groups have also being included within the index, these entail Jang group’s Geo Asool, Dunya’s code of ethics, Express group’s journalism code of conduct and Dawn Group’s principles and code of conduct.
After reviewing the principles of journalism and codes of ethics for journalists; six media credibility indicators with 20 sub-indices have been developed in order to assess the media discourse and credibility of current affairs anchors in Pakistan. This extensive study entails thirty-five current affairs programming of the mainstream Pakistani news channels. The Credibility of the anchors and content discourse is being assessed on; Professional Competence, Ethics, Accuracy, Balance, Timeliness and Fairness.
Chief Executive Officer, Mishal Pakistan, Amir Jahangir said the CredibilityLab, through its activities will further strengthen the Triple Helix concept, which relies on three main ideas: (1) a more prominent role for the University in creating new though and research processes, bringing them on par with the Industry and Government that form the basis of a Knowledge Society; (2) a movement toward collaborative relationships among the three major institutional spheres, in which information and knowledge policy is increasingly an outcome of interaction rather than a prescription from the Government; (3) in addition to fulfilling their traditional functions, each institutional sphere also “takes the role of the ‘other’ performing new roles as well as their traditional function.
The CredibilityLab at Mishal will be publishing its research on the state of media and competitiveness in Pakistan in collaboration with its partners. The MCI research has been one of the few initiatives in Pakistan, where research work has been collaborated with eleven academic partners in the country, including University of the Punjab, International Islamic University, Fatima Jinnah Women University, Lahore College for Women University, University of Gujrat, Government College University Faisalabad, Islamia University Bhawalpur, University of Balouchistan, Greenwich University and Bharia University.
Mishal Pakistan is the partner institute of the Global Competitiveness and Benchmarking Networks, World Economic Forum. Mishal assists the forum in creating the soft-data on Pakistan, identifying Pakistan’s competitiveness challenges. Mishal has also launched Pakistan’s first journalism awards “AGAHI Awards” on the framework designed jointly with the Center for International Media Ethics and UNESCO’s Media Development Indicators.
As a partner institute Mishal has been working closely with the World Economic Forum on measuring Pakistan’s performance on multiple international indices and reports i.e. Global Competitiveness Index, Global Gender Gap Index, Global Enabling Trade Index, Global Information Technology Report – Network Readiness Index, Financial Development Index and the Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Index.
For more information on the Media Credibility Index (MCI) please visit: www.mediacredibilityindex.com
European Commissioner for Justice Didier Reynders, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court Karim A.A. Khan QC and Dutch Foreign Minister Wopke Hoekstra.
The Government of the Netherlands, the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court and the European Commission are hosting an Ukraine Accountability Conference at ministerial level at the World Forum in The Hague, The Netherlands, on 14 July 2022.
© Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2022
Jordi Serrano Pons, Universal Doctors
This session features some of the innovative ICT applications for RMNCH, and highlight efforts of international organizations to foster the use of ICT to better implement the recommendations of the Commission on Information and Accountability for Women’s and Children’s Health.
Day 2
14 May 2013
ITU/ J.M. Planche
The Inspection Panel is completing 25 years in its role, as an accountability mechanism of the World Bank. As you are aware, the Bank’s failure to comply with its operating policies was seen by the entire world in the Bank’s financing with the Sardar Sarovar Dam project on River Narmada. The tenacity of massive grass-roots uprisings from our communities in the 80’s and the sustained hard work of our social movements along with our resoluteness to link it with international coalitions to question the hegemony of the Bank, subsequently led the Bank, for the first time, to commission an independent review of its project. The Independent Review Committee (Morse Committee) constituted by the Bank in 1991 to review the social and environmental costs and benefits of the dam, after years of consistent struggle by Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) and its allies led to a demand from the civil society around the globe for the creation of a grievance redressal system for project-affected communities, which ultimately pressurized the Bank to constitute the Inspection Panel in 1993. We expected this might be a crucial backstop and an opportunity for us to raise our issues of livelihoods, economic loss, displacement from our lands, alienation from natural resources, destruction of environment and threat to our biodiversity and cultural hotspots, where Bank invested in large, supposedly ‘development’ projects like mega dams, energy and other infrastructure projects. Yet, the outcome we expected rarely delivered sufficient remedy for the harm and losses people have experienced over the years.
A number of accountability mechanisms over the next couple of decades in several development finance institutions were formed following the model of World Bank, commonly known as ‘Independent Accountability Mechanisms’[IAMs]. Each year the number of complaints rise which is an indication of the increasing number of grievous projects happening around the world. While IAMs of most MDBs are advertised to provide strong and just processes, many of our experiences imply that the banks are accommodating practices which suit their own needs and their clients, which are borrowing countries and agencies, and not the people for whom the IAMs were built to serve.
Many a time, we have been disappointed by these mechanisms, since these are designed by the banks who are lending for disastrous projects in our lands. And as a result, the already existing narrow mandate of IAMs is further restricted.
In our efforts to hold the lending bank accountable, the communities are always presented with the arduous process of learning the complex formalities and detailed procedures to initially approach the IAMs and get our grievances registered. Our many years’ time and energy then is channelised into seeing through the various cycles of these complaint handling mechanisms, that our entire efforts go into this process, and often our complaint gets dropped off in midst of the procedural rules of the IAMs. People are made to wait many months to clear procedural levels and our cases with the IAMs get highly unpredictable. Further, we face intimidation and reprisals from the state and project agencies for having contacted the IAMs who themselves do not possess any authority to address the violations hurled out to us when we seek dignity, fair treatment and justice from them. There are many of us who feel a loss of morale after long years of struggling with lenders when we fail to see concrete benefits or changes in our circumstances, by which time considerable irreplaceable harm is already done to our lives, environment and livelihoods.
In this manner, our immediate and larger goal of holding banks for their failure to consult with and obtain consent from communities before devising action plans for our lands, water and forests is deflected in the pretext of problem-solving and grievance hearing offered to us in the name of IAMs.
With over 50 registered complaints sent to different IAMS from India in the past 25 years, many more left unregistered due to technical reasons and only a few got investigated, assessed and monitored at different levels, we have a baggage of mixed experiences with the IAMs. A few of the prominent cases from India apart from Narmada project are Vishnugad Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project [WB’s IP], Tata Mega Ultra-01/Mundra and Anjar [IFC’s CAO & ADB’s CRP], India Infrastructure Fund-01/Dhenkanal District [IFC’s CAO], Allain Duhangan Hydro Power Limited-01/Himachal Pradesh [IFC’s CAO] and Mumbai Urban Transport Project (2009) [WB’s IP].
As we now know, what is being witnessed recently is an influx of approved and proposed investments majorly in energy, transport, steel, roads, urban projects, bullet trains, industrial zones/corridors, smart cities, water privatization and other mega projects in India. This has been financed from different multilateral and bilateral sources, foreign corporations, private banks as well as Export-Import Banks (ExIm Banks). It has become a brutal challenge for communities, social movements and CSOs, with lenders and governments constantly shutting their eyes and ears to us who demand accountability for their actions. A compelling and timely need has arisen among diverse groups amongst us to gather together and critically analyze the various trajectories of our engagements with accountability mechanisms of MDBs in order to bring together past 25 years’ learning, insights and reflections of various actors of this accountability process. This urging demand is also an attempt to define the collective experiences in India among our social movements, projected-affected communities and CSOs with IAMs and lending banks, especially appropriating the global political opportunity of Inspection Panel celebrating its 25 years this year.
Speakers:
Thomas Franco, Former General Secretary, AlI India Bank Officers’ Confederation
Arun Kumar, Eminent scholar, Former Professor Jawaharlal Nehru University
C.P. Chandrashekar, Economist, Professor Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor, Moneylife
Soumya Dutta, National Convener, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha
Dunu Roy, Hazards Center, New Delhi
Medha Patkar, Senior Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan
Tani Alex, Centre for Financial Accountability
M J Vijayan, Activist and Political commentator
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Anirudha Nagar, Accountability Counsel
Madhuresh Kumar, National Alliance of People’s Movements
A J Vijayan, Chairperson, Western Ghats and Coastal area Protection Forum
Meera Sanghamitra, National Aliance of People’s Movements
Vimal bhai, Matu Jan Sangathan, Uttarakhand
Daniel Adler, Senior Specialist, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Birgit Kuba, Operations Officer, Inspection Panel
Anuradha Munshi, Centre for Financial Accountability
Bharat Patel, General Secretary, Machimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan,Gujarat
Awadhesh Kumar, Srijan Lokhit Samiti
Amulya Kumar Nayak, Odisha Chas Parivesh Surekhsa Parishad, Odisha
Dr. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Scholar
Manshi Asher, Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report:
www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-243
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM: Potential Implications of Modifying the Capital Surplus Account and Stock Ownership Requirement
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report:
www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-500
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS: Better Data Needed on Water Storage Pricing
Note: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers civil works program, which is responsible for water resources projects, is organized into three tiers: a national headquarters in Washington, D.C.; eight regional divisions; and 38 districts nationwide. Alaska and Hawaii do not have U.S. Army Corps of Engineers projects with municipal and industrial water storage.
The Inspection Panel is completing 25 years in its role, as an accountability mechanism of the World Bank. As you are aware, the Bank’s failure to comply with its operating policies was seen by the entire world in the Bank’s financing with the Sardar Sarovar Dam project on River Narmada. The tenacity of massive grass-roots uprisings from our communities in the 80’s and the sustained hard work of our social movements along with our resoluteness to link it with international coalitions to question the hegemony of the Bank, subsequently led the Bank, for the first time, to commission an independent review of its project. The Independent Review Committee (Morse Committee) constituted by the Bank in 1991 to review the social and environmental costs and benefits of the dam, after years of consistent struggle by Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) and its allies led to a demand from the civil society around the globe for the creation of a grievance redressal system for project-affected communities, which ultimately pressurized the Bank to constitute the Inspection Panel in 1993. We expected this might be a crucial backstop and an opportunity for us to raise our issues of livelihoods, economic loss, displacement from our lands, alienation from natural resources, destruction of environment and threat to our biodiversity and cultural hotspots, where Bank invested in large, supposedly ‘development’ projects like mega dams, energy and other infrastructure projects. Yet, the outcome we expected rarely delivered sufficient remedy for the harm and losses people have experienced over the years.
A number of accountability mechanisms over the next couple of decades in several development finance institutions were formed following the model of World Bank, commonly known as ‘Independent Accountability Mechanisms’[IAMs]. Each year the number of complaints rise which is an indication of the increasing number of grievous projects happening around the world. While IAMs of most MDBs are advertised to provide strong and just processes, many of our experiences imply that the banks are accommodating practices which suit their own needs and their clients, which are borrowing countries and agencies, and not the people for whom the IAMs were built to serve.
Many a time, we have been disappointed by these mechanisms, since these are designed by the banks who are lending for disastrous projects in our lands. And as a result, the already existing narrow mandate of IAMs is further restricted.
In our efforts to hold the lending bank accountable, the communities are always presented with the arduous process of learning the complex formalities and detailed procedures to initially approach the IAMs and get our grievances registered. Our many years’ time and energy then is channelised into seeing through the various cycles of these complaint handling mechanisms, that our entire efforts go into this process, and often our complaint gets dropped off in midst of the procedural rules of the IAMs. People are made to wait many months to clear procedural levels and our cases with the IAMs get highly unpredictable. Further, we face intimidation and reprisals from the state and project agencies for having contacted the IAMs who themselves do not possess any authority to address the violations hurled out to us when we seek dignity, fair treatment and justice from them. There are many of us who feel a loss of morale after long years of struggling with lenders when we fail to see concrete benefits or changes in our circumstances, by which time considerable irreplaceable harm is already done to our lives, environment and livelihoods.
In this manner, our immediate and larger goal of holding banks for their failure to consult with and obtain consent from communities before devising action plans for our lands, water and forests is deflected in the pretext of problem-solving and grievance hearing offered to us in the name of IAMs.
With over 50 registered complaints sent to different IAMS from India in the past 25 years, many more left unregistered due to technical reasons and only a few got investigated, assessed and monitored at different levels, we have a baggage of mixed experiences with the IAMs. A few of the prominent cases from India apart from Narmada project are Vishnugad Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project [WB’s IP], Tata Mega Ultra-01/Mundra and Anjar [IFC’s CAO & ADB’s CRP], India Infrastructure Fund-01/Dhenkanal District [IFC’s CAO], Allain Duhangan Hydro Power Limited-01/Himachal Pradesh [IFC’s CAO] and Mumbai Urban Transport Project (2009) [WB’s IP].
As we now know, what is being witnessed recently is an influx of approved and proposed investments majorly in energy, transport, steel, roads, urban projects, bullet trains, industrial zones/corridors, smart cities, water privatization and other mega projects in India. This has been financed from different multilateral and bilateral sources, foreign corporations, private banks as well as Export-Import Banks (ExIm Banks). It has become a brutal challenge for communities, social movements and CSOs, with lenders and governments constantly shutting their eyes and ears to us who demand accountability for their actions. A compelling and timely need has arisen among diverse groups amongst us to gather together and critically analyze the various trajectories of our engagements with accountability mechanisms of MDBs in order to bring together past 25 years’ learning, insights and reflections of various actors of this accountability process. This urging demand is also an attempt to define the collective experiences in India among our social movements, projected-affected communities and CSOs with IAMs and lending banks, especially appropriating the global political opportunity of Inspection Panel celebrating its 25 years this year.
Speakers:
Thomas Franco, Former General Secretary, AlI India Bank Officers’ Confederation
Arun Kumar, Eminent scholar, Former Professor Jawaharlal Nehru University
C.P. Chandrashekar, Economist, Professor Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor, Moneylife
Soumya Dutta, National Convener, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha
Dunu Roy, Hazards Center, New Delhi
Medha Patkar, Senior Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan
Tani Alex, Centre for Financial Accountability
M J Vijayan, Activist and Political commentator
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Anirudha Nagar, Accountability Counsel
Madhuresh Kumar, National Alliance of People’s Movements
A J Vijayan, Chairperson, Western Ghats and Coastal area Protection Forum
Meera Sanghamitra, National Aliance of People’s Movements
Vimal bhai, Matu Jan Sangathan, Uttarakhand
Daniel Adler, Senior Specialist, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Birgit Kuba, Operations Officer, Inspection Panel
Anuradha Munshi, Centre for Financial Accountability
Bharat Patel, General Secretary, Machimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan,Gujarat
Awadhesh Kumar, Srijan Lokhit Samiti
Amulya Kumar Nayak, Odisha Chas Parivesh Surekhsa Parishad, Odisha
Dr. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Scholar
Manshi Asher, Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, left, shakes hands with Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador before a meeting Thursday, November 18, 2021 in Washington, D.C. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld
Op 9 juni 2017 vond in de Tweede Kamer in Den Haag de tweede editie van Accountability Hack plaats, een hackathon waar met open data de prestaties van de overheid in kaart worden gebracht. Accountability Hack is een initiatief van de Algemene Rekenkamer en de Tweede Kamer samen met het CBS en de ministeries van Binnenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Zaken, Financiën en Infrastructuur en Milieu. De hackathon werd georganiseerd in samenwerking met Open State Foundation. Kijk voor meer informatie op accountabilityhack.nl/
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report:
www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-29
JOINT INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS COMPLEX: DOD Needs to Fully Incorporate Best Practices into Future Cost Estimates
Note: Option 1 refers to the new cables that would be needed based on the April 2016 Office of the Secretary of Defense Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation review. Option 2 refers to the new cables that would be needed based on the September 2015 U.S. European Command review and the May 2016 Defense Information Systems Agency review.
Op 9 juni 2017 vond in de Tweede Kamer in Den Haag de tweede editie van Accountability Hack plaats, een hackathon waar met open data de prestaties van de overheid in kaart worden gebracht. Accountability Hack is een initiatief van de Algemene Rekenkamer en de Tweede Kamer samen met het CBS en de ministeries van Binnenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Zaken, Financiën en Infrastructuur en Milieu. De hackathon werd georganiseerd in samenwerking met Open State Foundation. Kijk voor meer informatie op accountabilityhack.nl/
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report:
www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16-717
COMBATING WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING: Agencies Are Taking a Range of Actions, but the Task Force Lacks Performance Targets for Assessing Progress
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report:
www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-422
TROUBLED ASSET RELIEF PROGRAM: Few Participants Remain as Treasury Continues to Wind Down Capital Purchase Program
a) When investments are restructured, Treasury receives cash or other securities that generally can be sold more easily than preferred stock, but Treasury's investments are sometimes sold at a discount.
This session features some of the innovative ICT applications for RMNCH, and highlight efforts of international organizations to foster the use of ICT to better implement the recommendations of the Commission on Information and Accountability for Women’s and Children’s Health.
Day 2
14 May 2013
ITU/ J.M. Planche
Op 9 juni 2017 vond in de Tweede Kamer in Den Haag de tweede editie van Accountability Hack plaats, een hackathon waar met open data de prestaties van de overheid in kaart worden gebracht. Accountability Hack is een initiatief van de Algemene Rekenkamer en de Tweede Kamer samen met het CBS en de ministeries van Binnenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Zaken, Financiën en Infrastructuur en Milieu. De hackathon werd georganiseerd in samenwerking met Open State Foundation. Kijk voor meer informatie op accountabilityhack.nl/
Op 9 juni 2017 vond in de Tweede Kamer in Den Haag de tweede editie van Accountability Hack plaats, een hackathon waar met open data de prestaties van de overheid in kaart worden gebracht. Accountability Hack is een initiatief van de Algemene Rekenkamer en de Tweede Kamer samen met het CBS en de ministeries van Binnenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Zaken, Financiën en Infrastructuur en Milieu. De hackathon werd georganiseerd in samenwerking met Open State Foundation. Kijk voor meer informatie op accountabilityhack.nl/
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report:
www.gao.gov/products/GAO-20-590G
AGILE ASSESSMENT GUIDE: Best Practices for Agile Adoption and Implementation
a) Contracting personnel typically includes a warranted contract officer, who has express authority to enter into and administer a contract on behalf of the government and a contract specialist who can act as a business advisor to program managers; contracting personnel typically assist in planning the acquisition of goods and services, help negotiated the terms of the contract and provide contract management and administration services.
b) The product owner is the "voice of the customer," and is accountable for ensuring business value is delivered by creating customer-centric items (typically user stories), ordering them, and maintaining them in the backlog. See appendix II: Key Terms for more about the definition of a product owner.
c) The contracting officer's representative (COR) is a technical expert designated by the contracting officer to perform specific technical and administrative functions. The COR may provide day-to-day oversight of the contractor and reviews deliverables to ensure that they meet government requirements for quality, completeness, and timeliness.
d) The program office refers to all other personnel who support the program. This can include legal support, program monitoring and control support, and program management support. It is important that all personnel who support the program are familiar with Agile processes.
e) As discussed in chapter 3, the development team consists of the software developers, team facilitator, and subject matter experts who code the features for the program.
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report: www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-615R
MILITARY TRAINING: Observations on Efforts to Prepare Personnel to Survive Helicopter Crashes into Water
A sign at George Floyd Square in Minneapolis reads "Justice accountability healing for George Floyd. Say His Name." The square, located at the intersection of 38th Street and Chicago Avenue, became a focal point for protests following the murder of George Floyd in May 2020.
This image is part of a continuing series following the unrest and events in Minneapolis following the May 25th, 2020 murder of George Floyd.
MFMD Mission:
Compassion
Accountability
Respect
Excellence
Run canceled, now the mission is to make a U-turn and head back to their stations.
1:64 Code 3 Collectibles:
Pierce Quantum
Mesa Fire and Medical Department
Engine 201 & Engine 203
City of Mesa
Maricopa County, State of Arizona, USA
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II
Olympus M.14-42mm F3.5-5.6 II R
For more info about the dioramas, check out the FAQ: 1stPix FAQ
I've heard that there are people who don't take kindly to oversight, measurement, record keeping, rules, accountability… I'm rather fond of these notions. They're our benchmarks, those things that, provided the trustees can be trusted, keep things all safe and sound.
After paying for my parking and heading out and away from where I was to where I wanted to be, I spotted this, embedded in the concrete.
Knowing where I am, I'm prepared to bet the farm that this concrete is anchored on the bedrock of Capital Hill. Deeper in, and there's a void that Guy Fawkes would yearn for. I can't show you that, hush, hush. I suppose this car park concrete went in early, before the whole lot was capped with the decorative and symbolic forecourt above, everything sitting on pillars of more concrete, and steel.
Those big things? They are all founded on little things, layer by layer. Neglect any one of those little things, or ignore them, layer by layer, and eventually the whole lot will come tumbling down. That's why I'm focussed on the little things, and getting out of this carpark…
Op 9 juni 2017 vond in de Tweede Kamer in Den Haag de tweede editie van Accountability Hack plaats, een hackathon waar met open data de prestaties van de overheid in kaart worden gebracht. Accountability Hack is een initiatief van de Algemene Rekenkamer en de Tweede Kamer samen met het CBS en de ministeries van Binnenlandse Zaken, Buitenlandse Zaken, Financiën en Infrastructuur en Milieu. De hackathon werd georganiseerd in samenwerking met Open State Foundation. Kijk voor meer informatie op accountabilityhack.nl/
Hani Eskandar, ITU
This session features some of the innovative ICT applications for RMNCH, and highlight efforts of international organizations to foster the use of ICT to better implement the recommendations of the Commission on Information and Accountability for Women’s and Children’s Health.
Day 2
14 May 2013
ITU/ J.M. Planche
Luis Falcon, GNU Solidario
This session features some of the innovative ICT applications for RMNCH, and highlight efforts of international organizations to foster the use of ICT to better implement the recommendations of the Commission on Information and Accountability for Women’s and Children’s Health.
Day 2
14 May 2013
ITU/ J.M. Planche
Misha Kay, WHO
This session features some of the innovative ICT applications for RMNCH, and highlight efforts of international organizations to foster the use of ICT to better implement the recommendations of the Commission on Information and Accountability for Women’s and Children’s Health.
Day 2
14 May 2013
ITU/ J.M. Planche
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report:
www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-452
DEPOT MAINTENANCE: DOD Should Adopt a Metric That Provides Quality Information on Funded Unfinished Work
Note: Carryover is funded work that has not been completed, and the amount of carryover may increase or decrease depending on the rate at which orders are completed by the depots and the amount of new orders accepted by the end of a fiscal year. This figure depicts the process for depots managed through the use of working capital funds that report carryover.
Milwaukee public school teachers, parents, students and supporters staged a large picket line outside MPS administration building on Vliet Street on Milwaukee's west side late Tuesday afternoon.
The purpose was to protest yet another round of funding cuts to K-12 schools in Milwaukee. Classrooms and students are already suffering the effects of previous cuts including desks that are falling apart and books with spines that need to be taped together. Currently, Milwaukee, a mainly African-American and Latino city, spends less money per pupil than other, richer suburbs like Wauwatosa and Shorewood. Milwaukee is the state's largest school district.
Governor Scott Walker shares at least part of the blame for the messy situation. Over the past few years he's cut $1BN from the state's education budget, including $792 million from K-12 schools. Supposedly, some of that will be restored this year due to a budget surplus. Of course, the teachers aren't holding their breath that this will actually happen. At the same time he was cutting funds for public education, Walker was using some of that money to pay for tuition to privately run charter schools.
Other proposals for dealing with the budget shortfall include ending busing programs thereby forcing students to take public transportation, shifting more health care costs onto employees, and closing schools altogether.
What's happening in Milwaukee is similar to what has been happening in school districts all across the country symbolized by teacher strikes and walk-outs in states like West Virginia, Oklahoma, Kentucky and lately Arizona. Public schools are being deprived of cash and devalued in favor of privately operated charter schools that are not accountable to the public. Our students are being reduced to mere commodities for someone else to make a profit off of. And a real education be damned.
So the priorities are obvious. Walker will give untold sums of money to Foxconn to build a plant in Racine County. Supposedly, this will create a lot of jobs; but that's what the politicians always say because they think that will win them votes come election time. There is some doubt that Foxconn can uphold its end of the bargain. In the meantime, money that went to Foxconn could be used to fund public education.
And then we have the city of Milwaukee. The owners of the Milwaukee Bucks cry poor mouth. Can't make money in the Bradley Center anymore. We need a new arena or we're moving the team to another city. So the city ponies up to placate the poor owners. I read it was $250 million in public funds for a private stadium. Think that $250 million wouldn't make a difference for Milwaukee public schools? And so it goes in this era of privatization and greed run rampant.
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report:
www.gao.gov/products/GAO-21-519SP
Artificial Intelligence: An Accountability Framework for Federal Agencies and Other Entities
The Inspection Panel is completing 25 years in its role, as an accountability mechanism of the World Bank. As you are aware, the Bank’s failure to comply with its operating policies was seen by the entire world in the Bank’s financing with the Sardar Sarovar Dam project on River Narmada. The tenacity of massive grass-roots uprisings from our communities in the 80’s and the sustained hard work of our social movements along with our resoluteness to link it with international coalitions to question the hegemony of the Bank, subsequently led the Bank, for the first time, to commission an independent review of its project. The Independent Review Committee (Morse Committee) constituted by the Bank in 1991 to review the social and environmental costs and benefits of the dam, after years of consistent struggle by Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) and its allies led to a demand from the civil society around the globe for the creation of a grievance redressal system for project-affected communities, which ultimately pressurized the Bank to constitute the Inspection Panel in 1993. We expected this might be a crucial backstop and an opportunity for us to raise our issues of livelihoods, economic loss, displacement from our lands, alienation from natural resources, destruction of environment and threat to our biodiversity and cultural hotspots, where Bank invested in large, supposedly ‘development’ projects like mega dams, energy and other infrastructure projects. Yet, the outcome we expected rarely delivered sufficient remedy for the harm and losses people have experienced over the years.
A number of accountability mechanisms over the next couple of decades in several development finance institutions were formed following the model of World Bank, commonly known as ‘Independent Accountability Mechanisms’[IAMs]. Each year the number of complaints rise which is an indication of the increasing number of grievous projects happening around the world. While IAMs of most MDBs are advertised to provide strong and just processes, many of our experiences imply that the banks are accommodating practices which suit their own needs and their clients, which are borrowing countries and agencies, and not the people for whom the IAMs were built to serve.
Many a time, we have been disappointed by these mechanisms, since these are designed by the banks who are lending for disastrous projects in our lands. And as a result, the already existing narrow mandate of IAMs is further restricted.
In our efforts to hold the lending bank accountable, the communities are always presented with the arduous process of learning the complex formalities and detailed procedures to initially approach the IAMs and get our grievances registered. Our many years’ time and energy then is channelised into seeing through the various cycles of these complaint handling mechanisms, that our entire efforts go into this process, and often our complaint gets dropped off in midst of the procedural rules of the IAMs. People are made to wait many months to clear procedural levels and our cases with the IAMs get highly unpredictable. Further, we face intimidation and reprisals from the state and project agencies for having contacted the IAMs who themselves do not possess any authority to address the violations hurled out to us when we seek dignity, fair treatment and justice from them. There are many of us who feel a loss of morale after long years of struggling with lenders when we fail to see concrete benefits or changes in our circumstances, by which time considerable irreplaceable harm is already done to our lives, environment and livelihoods.
In this manner, our immediate and larger goal of holding banks for their failure to consult with and obtain consent from communities before devising action plans for our lands, water and forests is deflected in the pretext of problem-solving and grievance hearing offered to us in the name of IAMs.
With over 50 registered complaints sent to different IAMS from India in the past 25 years, many more left unregistered due to technical reasons and only a few got investigated, assessed and monitored at different levels, we have a baggage of mixed experiences with the IAMs. A few of the prominent cases from India apart from Narmada project are Vishnugad Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project [WB’s IP], Tata Mega Ultra-01/Mundra and Anjar [IFC’s CAO & ADB’s CRP], India Infrastructure Fund-01/Dhenkanal District [IFC’s CAO], Allain Duhangan Hydro Power Limited-01/Himachal Pradesh [IFC’s CAO] and Mumbai Urban Transport Project (2009) [WB’s IP].
As we now know, what is being witnessed recently is an influx of approved and proposed investments majorly in energy, transport, steel, roads, urban projects, bullet trains, industrial zones/corridors, smart cities, water privatization and other mega projects in India. This has been financed from different multilateral and bilateral sources, foreign corporations, private banks as well as Export-Import Banks (ExIm Banks). It has become a brutal challenge for communities, social movements and CSOs, with lenders and governments constantly shutting their eyes and ears to us who demand accountability for their actions. A compelling and timely need has arisen among diverse groups amongst us to gather together and critically analyze the various trajectories of our engagements with accountability mechanisms of MDBs in order to bring together past 25 years’ learning, insights and reflections of various actors of this accountability process. This urging demand is also an attempt to define the collective experiences in India among our social movements, projected-affected communities and CSOs with IAMs and lending banks, especially appropriating the global political opportunity of Inspection Panel celebrating its 25 years this year.
Speakers:
Thomas Franco, Former General Secretary, AlI India Bank Officers’ Confederation
Arun Kumar, Eminent scholar, Former Professor Jawaharlal Nehru University
C.P. Chandrashekar, Economist, Professor Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor, Moneylife
Soumya Dutta, National Convener, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha
Dunu Roy, Hazards Center, New Delhi
Medha Patkar, Senior Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan
Tani Alex, Centre for Financial Accountability
M J Vijayan, Activist and Political commentator
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Anirudha Nagar, Accountability Counsel
Madhuresh Kumar, National Alliance of People’s Movements
A J Vijayan, Chairperson, Western Ghats and Coastal area Protection Forum
Meera Sanghamitra, National Aliance of People’s Movements
Vimal bhai, Matu Jan Sangathan, Uttarakhand
Daniel Adler, Senior Specialist, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Birgit Kuba, Operations Officer, Inspection Panel
Anuradha Munshi, Centre for Financial Accountability
Bharat Patel, General Secretary, Machimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan,Gujarat
Awadhesh Kumar, Srijan Lokhit Samiti
Amulya Kumar Nayak, Odisha Chas Parivesh Surekhsa Parishad, Odisha
Dr. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Scholar
Manshi Asher, Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
Peter A. Bruck, World Summit Award
This session features some of the innovative ICT applications for RMNCH, and highlight efforts of international organizations to foster the use of ICT to better implement the recommendations of the Commission on Information and Accountability for Women’s and Children’s Health.
Day 2
14 May 2013
ITU/ J.M. Planche
The Inspection Panel is completing 25 years in its role, as an accountability mechanism of the World Bank. As you are aware, the Bank’s failure to comply with its operating policies was seen by the entire world in the Bank’s financing with the Sardar Sarovar Dam project on River Narmada. The tenacity of massive grass-roots uprisings from our communities in the 80’s and the sustained hard work of our social movements along with our resoluteness to link it with international coalitions to question the hegemony of the Bank, subsequently led the Bank, for the first time, to commission an independent review of its project. The Independent Review Committee (Morse Committee) constituted by the Bank in 1991 to review the social and environmental costs and benefits of the dam, after years of consistent struggle by Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) and its allies led to a demand from the civil society around the globe for the creation of a grievance redressal system for project-affected communities, which ultimately pressurized the Bank to constitute the Inspection Panel in 1993. We expected this might be a crucial backstop and an opportunity for us to raise our issues of livelihoods, economic loss, displacement from our lands, alienation from natural resources, destruction of environment and threat to our biodiversity and cultural hotspots, where Bank invested in large, supposedly ‘development’ projects like mega dams, energy and other infrastructure projects. Yet, the outcome we expected rarely delivered sufficient remedy for the harm and losses people have experienced over the years.
A number of accountability mechanisms over the next couple of decades in several development finance institutions were formed following the model of World Bank, commonly known as ‘Independent Accountability Mechanisms’[IAMs]. Each year the number of complaints rise which is an indication of the increasing number of grievous projects happening around the world. While IAMs of most MDBs are advertised to provide strong and just processes, many of our experiences imply that the banks are accommodating practices which suit their own needs and their clients, which are borrowing countries and agencies, and not the people for whom the IAMs were built to serve.
Many a time, we have been disappointed by these mechanisms, since these are designed by the banks who are lending for disastrous projects in our lands. And as a result, the already existing narrow mandate of IAMs is further restricted.
In our efforts to hold the lending bank accountable, the communities are always presented with the arduous process of learning the complex formalities and detailed procedures to initially approach the IAMs and get our grievances registered. Our many years’ time and energy then is channelised into seeing through the various cycles of these complaint handling mechanisms, that our entire efforts go into this process, and often our complaint gets dropped off in midst of the procedural rules of the IAMs. People are made to wait many months to clear procedural levels and our cases with the IAMs get highly unpredictable. Further, we face intimidation and reprisals from the state and project agencies for having contacted the IAMs who themselves do not possess any authority to address the violations hurled out to us when we seek dignity, fair treatment and justice from them. There are many of us who feel a loss of morale after long years of struggling with lenders when we fail to see concrete benefits or changes in our circumstances, by which time considerable irreplaceable harm is already done to our lives, environment and livelihoods.
In this manner, our immediate and larger goal of holding banks for their failure to consult with and obtain consent from communities before devising action plans for our lands, water and forests is deflected in the pretext of problem-solving and grievance hearing offered to us in the name of IAMs.
With over 50 registered complaints sent to different IAMS from India in the past 25 years, many more left unregistered due to technical reasons and only a few got investigated, assessed and monitored at different levels, we have a baggage of mixed experiences with the IAMs. A few of the prominent cases from India apart from Narmada project are Vishnugad Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project [WB’s IP], Tata Mega Ultra-01/Mundra and Anjar [IFC’s CAO & ADB’s CRP], India Infrastructure Fund-01/Dhenkanal District [IFC’s CAO], Allain Duhangan Hydro Power Limited-01/Himachal Pradesh [IFC’s CAO] and Mumbai Urban Transport Project (2009) [WB’s IP].
As we now know, what is being witnessed recently is an influx of approved and proposed investments majorly in energy, transport, steel, roads, urban projects, bullet trains, industrial zones/corridors, smart cities, water privatization and other mega projects in India. This has been financed from different multilateral and bilateral sources, foreign corporations, private banks as well as Export-Import Banks (ExIm Banks). It has become a brutal challenge for communities, social movements and CSOs, with lenders and governments constantly shutting their eyes and ears to us who demand accountability for their actions. A compelling and timely need has arisen among diverse groups amongst us to gather together and critically analyze the various trajectories of our engagements with accountability mechanisms of MDBs in order to bring together past 25 years’ learning, insights and reflections of various actors of this accountability process. This urging demand is also an attempt to define the collective experiences in India among our social movements, projected-affected communities and CSOs with IAMs and lending banks, especially appropriating the global political opportunity of Inspection Panel celebrating its 25 years this year.
Speakers:
Thomas Franco, Former General Secretary, AlI India Bank Officers’ Confederation
Arun Kumar, Eminent scholar, Former Professor Jawaharlal Nehru University
C.P. Chandrashekar, Economist, Professor Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University
Sucheta Dalal, Managing Editor, Moneylife
Soumya Dutta, National Convener, Bharat Jan Vigyan Jatha
Dunu Roy, Hazards Center, New Delhi
Medha Patkar, Senior Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan
Tani Alex, Centre for Financial Accountability
M J Vijayan, Activist and Political commentator
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Anirudha Nagar, Accountability Counsel
Madhuresh Kumar, National Alliance of People’s Movements
A J Vijayan, Chairperson, Western Ghats and Coastal area Protection Forum
Meera Sanghamitra, National Aliance of People’s Movements
Vimal bhai, Matu Jan Sangathan, Uttarakhand
Daniel Adler, Senior Specialist, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman
Joe Athialy, Centre for Financial Accountability
Birgit Kuba, Operations Officer, Inspection Panel
Anuradha Munshi, Centre for Financial Accountability
Bharat Patel, General Secretary, Machimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan,Gujarat
Awadhesh Kumar, Srijan Lokhit Samiti
Amulya Kumar Nayak, Odisha Chas Parivesh Surekhsa Parishad, Odisha
Dr. Usha Ramanathan, Legal Scholar
Manshi Asher, Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh