A/HRC/8/5 page 26 currently publicize information about their business-related work should do so. The Special Representative welcomes plans on the part of the International Coordinating Committee of NHRIs, supported by OHCHR, to address the issue of how this work might be further strengthened. 98. The 40 States adhering to the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises must provide a National Contact Point (NCP) whose tasks include handling grievances. OECD provides procedural guidance, with individual NCPs having flexibility in the application of the Guidelines. The NCPs are potentially an important vehicle for providing remedy. However, with a few exceptions, experience suggests that in practice they have too often failed to meet this potential. The housing of some NCPs primarily or wholly within government departments tasked with promoting business, trade and investment raises questions about conflicts of interest. NCPs often lack the resources to undertake adequate investigation of complaints and the training to provide effective mediation. There are typically no time frames for the commencement or completion of the process, and outcomes are often not publicly reported. In sum, many NCP processes appear to come up short when measured against the minimum principles set out in paragraph 92 above. 99. Certain NCPs, recognizing such shortfalls, have sought innovative solutions. Several have involved multiple government departments and created multi-stakeholder advisory groups. Perhaps most interesting is the decision of the Dutch Government to reorganize its NCP such that a four-person multi-stakeholder group handles grievances independent of, though supported administratively by, the Government. Alternative suggestions have included placing NCPs under the legislative branch or within a NHRI. OECD and adhering States should consider these and other options for addressing current deficits, while preserving the important role of governments in raising awareness of the Guidelines and providing incentives for corporate compliance and learning. E. Multi-stakeholder or industry initiatives and financiers 100. For multi-stakeholder or industry initiatives aiming to advance human rights standards in the practices of their corporate members, a grievance mechanism provides an important check on performance. The same is true for financial institutions seeking to ensure compliance with human rights standards in the conduct of the projects they support. In the absence of an effective grievance mechanism, the credibility of such initiatives and institutions may be questioned. The Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights recently faced this challenge, and the Special Representative knows of calls for other initiatives, including the Equator Principles, to develop a grievance process. Furthermore, while many of these mechanisms require their corporate members or clients to have their own grievance processes as a first port of call, few set clear process standards for them. This risks encouraging tokenistic rather than effective processes at the operational level. 101. As the number of initiatives aimed at promoting standards increases, collaborative models for their grievance mechanisms will likely become more important. These could facilitate access for complainants by providing a single avenue for recourse to multiple organizations; marshal