The Core Humanitarian Standard was first published in 2014 — itself the product of a decade-long sector dialogue about accountability principles. A decade on, the world has changed. The humanitarian sector has changed. And the CHS is being revised to reflect those changes.
HQAI has been deeply engaged in the revision process, contributing technical expertise on auditability — the question of whether the standard's requirements can be meaningfully verified through external audit. Here is our assessment of the most significant proposed changes.
A New Commitment on Environmental Sustainability
The proposed revision includes, for the first time, explicit commitments around environmental responsibility — minimising the environmental footprint of humanitarian operations and considering environmental impacts in programme design. This reflects a growing recognition that humanitarian action itself can cause environmental harm, and that accountability to affected communities must include accountability for that harm.
From an auditability perspective, this new commitment is a positive development — provided it is accompanied by clear, measurable indicators. We have provided technical input on what "environmental accountability" looks like in practice at the programme level.
Strengthened Language on Localisation
The revised CHS proposes significantly stronger language on localisation — the transfer of resources, decision-making authority, and recognition to local and national actors. The current CHS references "complementarity" with local responders; the revision pushes toward genuine local leadership.
We welcome this direction. Our audit data consistently shows that the organisations best at Commitment 4 (accountability to affected populations) are those with the strongest local relationships and the most genuine transfer of power to community structures. Stronger CHS language on localisation creates an auditable expectation, not just an aspiration.
Clarified Indicators for Accountability Commitments
The revision proposes clearer, more specific quality criteria and key actions for the accountability-related commitments (particularly Commitments 4, 5, and 6). For HQAI auditors, this is practically significant: clearer indicators mean more consistent, more comparable audit findings across different organisations and contexts.
Our Overall Assessment
The proposed revision strengthens the CHS without fundamentally restructuring it. It responds to real gaps in the current version and reflects genuine learning from a decade of application. Our primary technical concern — which we have raised formally — is ensuring that new commitments are accompanied by guidance on evidence and auditability. A commitment that cannot be meaningfully assessed is of limited value in an accountability framework.
The revised CHS is expected to be formally adopted in mid-2025. HQAI will update its audit methodology accordingly and provide transition guidance for all organisations currently in audit cycles.