CHS verification data

CHS Alliance has built the CHS Verification Scheme to offer different stand-alone options for organisations to measure their performance against the CHS.  On this page we are sharing and updating on a regular basis the results coming out of the verifications conducted through one of the options of the Verification Scheme; either third-party verifications[1] (independent verification or certification, conducted by our partner HQAI), or self-assessment and peer reviews[2].

The data published here was updated on 27 May 2019. It shows results coming from 74 verification conducted, which can be disaggregated as follows:

  • 19 certifications
  • 6 independent verifications
  • 1 peer review
  • 48 self-assessments

Comments & analysis

At the commitment level, these are the trends we can observe:

  • Only one commitment is reaching the score of 3 showing that the requirement is fulfilled: commitment 6 on the coordination of the response.
  • Seven of the nine commitments stand between 2.4 and 2.7.
  • At the other end of the spectrum, one single commitment is scoring below 2.0: commitment five on Complaints mechanisms, showing a more significant weakness.

Looking at the same results disaggregated by indicators type (dashboard below), a clear trend appears that in seven out of nine commitments, and including for commitment 5 on complaints & feedback mechanisms the score of the Key Actions (KA) is lower than the one for Organisational Responsibilities (OR). This indicates that the challenge and weakness lie with the implementation of the existing guidance & policies more than with a potential lack of them. As an illustration, the KA score for commitment 5 is lowest of all: 1.8, when the OR score is 2.0, significantly higher. Efforts should be put on staff training and support for implementation of the tools organisations have at their disposal.

The index scores illustrate the performance of organisations on transversal issues present in the CHS and calculated by several indicators within the nine commitments (see details below). These index scores are: Gender & diversity, Localisation, and PSEA.

Collectively, organisations show weaknesses on the three index scores, although it’s primarily on PSEA that the weakness is more important.


[1] For those options, it’s the scores of the initial audits that are taken into account here.

[2] The CHS Alliance conducts a sanity-check of the self-assessments and peer reviews conducted. Only the validated scores (coming out of verifications conducted in line with the suggested methodology) are taken into the calculation for the average scores advertised here.