Minutes of Meeting
19.02.2016, Kramatorsk, UN compound
Agenda of the meeting
•
Cluster Structure
•
Food Security Cluster TOR
•
Review of gaps per rayon and Response Discussion
•
Cluster committee (members) selection
•
Challenges in general
•
Next step / Action points
•
AOB
1. Cluster Structure
Structure of the Cluster was introduced to attendees. It was explained that for the
purpose of decentralization of the cluster, sub-cluster would take place in Kiev and
Luhansk
Summary of discussion:
- In terms of improvement of coordination between humanitarian players and NGOs,
and in order to avoid duplication and gaps in humanitarian assistance by
exchanging information regarding areas where humanitarian action is mostly
needed, it was suggested to conduct Food Cluster Coordination meetings twice per
month each Wednesday, 14:00-16:00.
- It was suggested to consider meetings at Mariupol level as well.
Follow-up action and Responsibility:
- WFP to maintain meetings and circulation minutes, invitations, and information within
the Cluster partners, participants and observers.
- To follow up with sub-cluster meetings in Kiev and Luhansk to agree on TOR and
meetings.
- It was also suggested to invite ICRC as an observer (as the representatives of this
organization did not attend the meeting, this proposal will be sent separately)
2. Food Security Cluster TOR
Food Security Cluster was displayed as a platform for coordination and information
sharing to:
- ensure proportionate, appropriate, timely and effective responses to humanitarian
crisis situations
- support coordination for appropriate response design and strengthen preparedness
-
ensure adequate emergency preparedness and support cluster partners to provide
timely FS responses to populations of greatest need during emergencies
promote use of appropriate minimum acceptable humanitarian standards and best
practices in delivery of food security and livelihood service
build partnerships and promote exclusiveness in all aspects of the cluster
facilitate effective sharing of information and data among FCS cluster partners and
across other sectors/clusters
Summary of discussion: Participants acknowledged the TOR and agreed to
participate, coordinate and share within the structure:
- share the plans
- actuals before 10th of the following month to be sent to [email protected]
- each organization to appoint a Focal Point who will participate in the training by
conducted by a specialist.
- to inform about their activities to maintain rules, share with assessments.
- technical group composition still to be discussed.
- participants during the meeting gave their consent to have their names on the maps
to be circulated.
Follow-up action and Responsibility:
Participants take responsibilities upon themselves as per presented TOR;
3. Review of gaps per rayon and Response Discussion
The following tables were presented, and partners took responsibility upon themselves
to provide it within the following month:
-
Planning matrix;
Monthly updates;
Cluster member responses;
Rayon Level response: a) improved access to food activity breakdown; b) safety net
activity breakdown; c) livelihood investment activity breakdown.
Food Security Cluster Partners response Map;
Food assistance in Donetsk Oblast;
Cash and voucher Assistance in Donetsk Oblast;
Agricultural assistance in Donetsk oblast;
Summary of discussion:
-
-
-
The most vulnerable situations were reported to be in Zaitsevo, Zhovanka, and
Leninskoye. For example, bread was not delivered to Zhovanka for several weeks
before WFP food parcels reached it.
In current circumstances, relevancy of early recovery programs (food for work, school
feeding, etc) has increased tremendously. Introduction of these programs would help
avoid the effect of humanitarian assistance consumer behavior and help
beneficiaries to cope psychologically. For example, protestant churches and other
organisations have started to introduce food for social work. Food for education and
wet feeding for IDP children were met with great interest. This is especially crucial
for small cities, because the situation with budgets in such cities are deteriorated.
NB: also noted to focus on vouchers, so to support local businesses.
Follow-up action and Responsibility:
-
to summarize existing samples of/suggestions for early recovery activities based on
geolocations of the FSC members;
4. Challenges in general
The annexation of territories to areas (part of the liberated towns) led to the absence
of a complete picture of the population living in the area. The lack of documents
(residence permit often specified registration district, which is on the territory NGCA).
Humanitarian catastrophe – the grey area - the lack of transport, medicine, food (not
imported), education. And the lack of passes.
Task for FCS to prepare official communication with request to improve coordination with
CIMIC Military and to facilitate access for subcontractors who actually deliver aid to critical
locations where civilians are directly affected by military operations, and where access
during the operation can be affected.
Among main constrains are the following:
- Coordination: representatives stressed that gaps in humanitarian assistance can be
avoided when proper coordination is maintained by the key humanitarian actors,
especially important players such as RAF and ICRC.
- Access constrains: Access constrains due to the constantly-changing security situation
in the buffer zone also play a key role in reaching areas with the most vulnerable
populations. Normally, these areas are known to be at the very contact line or in the
buffer zone between Ukrainian and Russian block-posts. As some partners have
heard about the scope system, it was commented that SCOPE system will greatly
improve access to food for the most needed. PIN representatives supported an Idea
and introduced an example as the “Red rose” system of vouchers for corner shops.
- Criteria: Local population often needs help even more then IDP’s. Due to low income
and in many cases absence of possibility to receive payments from government.
WFP has approved criteria that involve local populations in October 2015.
- Information about the programs is usually not displayed at the TV or radio, thus the
beneficiaries do not know the about possible programs and possibility to apply.
5. Next step / Action points
- Reporting Focal Points to be identified and communicated by participants
- To circulate minutes and presentation materials
- Technical group establishment
- 3W information provision by participants;
- Summary on potential early recovery programs/ suggestions/ideas