The results of a few mid-term audits have been published on HQAI website, those of the Church of Sweden, Tearfund, Naba’a, and Christian Aid (a new organization, TPO Uganda, has also been audited, but the results are not available on the website). I updated the results of the initial audit with the scores of the mid-term audit, for the first three, while I added Christian Aid, whose scores for the initial audit were not available.

As usual, I publish here the graphs with the results and the link to the repository with the R code. The overall patterns identified previously seem to be still in place, with commitment 5 (complaint mechanism) being the most difficult to achieve and commitment 6 the one with the best results. Church of Sweder emerges after the mid-term audit as one of the strongest performers, in particular against commitment 7 (learning).

Something interesting can be noticed when comparing the results for mid term and initial audit: the Church of Sweden and Naba’a overall improve or confirm the scores achieved in the first audit, whereas Tearfund, despite having addressed the minor non-conformities flagged in the previous audit and hence having maintained the certification, in the mid-term audit achieved lower scores across all the commitments (apart from commitment 3, strengthening of local capacity).

This is probably a consequence of having been audited in missions (Ethiopia and Kenya) arguably in more challenging environments than the one of the inital audit (Philippines). It is nevertheless an interesting aspect, and could open the discussion about how much organizations with several missions manage internally their knowledge, share best practices and overall manage to communicate.