REFERENCE MODULE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
HUMANITARIAN PROGRAMME CYCLE
Humanitarian Programme Cycle (HPC)
Needs Assessment
& Analysis
Operational
Review &
Evaluation
Implementation
& Monitoring
Strategic
Planning
Resource
Mobilization
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Will add page numbers when final
Introduction
Humanitarian Programme Cycle enablers:
1.
Coordination…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
2.
Information Management…………………………………………………………………………………
3.
Preparedness ...................................................................................................
The Humanitarian Programme Cycle:
4.
Coordinated Assessments and Needs Analysis ..................................................
5.
Strategic Planning ............................................................................................
6.
Resource Mobilisation ......................................................................................
7.
Implementation & Monitoring…………………………………………………………………………..
8.
Operational Peer Review……………………………………………………………………………………
9.
Evaluation....................................................................................................... .
Annexes..................................................................................................................
Acronyms and Abbreviations……………………………………………………………………………………
This Reference Module was prepared by the
Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC)
Programme Cycle Steering Group, which is
made up of Directors from IASC UN agencies
and NGOs, and oversees the work of various
IASC bodies working on the programme cycle.
The Reference Module will be revised
periodically to take account of feedback from
practitioners and further developments in
guidance and tools.
2
INTRODUCTION
This ‘Humanitarian Programme Cycle Reference Module’ is a practical guide for managers of
humanitarian response operations. While the Module has been developed by the InterAgency Standing Committee (IASC), it is intended to be accessible to all humanitarian actors
and practitioners. The Module presents the key components of the Humanitarian Programme
Cycle (HPC) and sets out how they should fit together and build on one another. The Module
is applicable to all types of humanitarian response operations1 and it will be updated
periodically as required. For specialists who require more detailed information on any
particular part of the HPC, each section provides references to where technical guidance and
support can be found.
What is the
Humanitarian
Programme Cycle
(HPC)?
The overall purpose of the HPC is to deliver a fast, coordinated, effective and protectiondriven response to people affected by humanitarian crises. The HPC is a coordinated series
of actions undertaken to prepare for, manage and deliver humanitarian response. The focus
of this Module is primarily on the HPC in the context of multilateral humanitarian response
operations - in support of the national and local response – but again, the approach is
intended to be accessible to all humanitarian actors.
It is well recognised that in emergency situations and crises, initial lifesaving operations will
likely be led by affected communities, local actors, authorities or other organisations,
agencies or institutions that have already been active in the affected area. Often
humanitarian and development actors, including local civil society, local and international
NGOs, and the Red Cross and Red Crescent societies, have long-established relationships
with the affected communities. The HPC – beginning with a coordinated assessment –
should build on this initial response and draw on information already gathered. Strategic
planning should also acknowledge the existing capacities of first-line responders.
The HPC generally involves the following actions:
1. Timely, coordinated assessments and analysis identify the needs of affected people and
provide the evidence base for planning the response;
What actions
2. The Resident/Humanitarian/Senior Coordinator and country team2 use the analysis from the
are taken in the
needs assessments to develop and publish a joint ‘Strategic Statement’ and ‘Strategic
HPC?
Response Plan’ which sets out clear strategic objectives and a plan of action for the
response;
3. Funding and other resources are mobilized for the response based on and in support of the
Strategic Response Plan which is also reflected in sector/cluster response plans;
1
Noting that in emergencies which involve refugees, UNHCR has the mandate to prepare for, lead and coordinate the refugee response.
2
‘When the term ‘country team’ is used, this assumes that a UN Country Team (UNCT) and ideally Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) is in place. If
an HCT is not in place, the UNCT should immediately seek means to include the broader non-UN IASC actors within the senior level
coordination and leadership structures.
3
4. Sectors/clusters implement the Plan, providing assistance and protection to affected
people;
5. Regular monitoring of agreed output and outcome indicators and the tracking of financial
information informs on-going decision-making and demonstrates results. It also contributes
to greater transparency and accountability, both within the system and to affected people;
6. Operational Peer Review provides an opportunity to conduct an internal assessment of the
response and make adjustments in real-time to ensure it meets objectives;
7. Evaluation of the quality of the response by independent experts enables lessons to be
learned to improve the response and future humanitarian operations.
HPC Enablers
Successful implementation of the HPC depends on some key ‘enablers’ which run throughout
the cycle:
1. Effective emergency preparedness, including building partnerships in advance of a
humanitarian crisis so that, much of the ‘ground-work’ for effective coordination of the
response has already been done;
2. Good coordination with national and local authorities and humanitarian actors to ensure
each aspect of the HPC is applied as part of a joint effort which uses the resources and
capacities available to the best effect;
3. Information management which plays a crucial support role for individual components of
the HPC and helps link them all together.
4
Humanitarian Programme Cycle (HPC)
• Coordinate/harmonize assessments
• Agree emergency indicators and
thresholds for response
• Collect assessment information and
data, ensuring interoperability
• Jointly analyze and prioritize
• Internal operational peer review of
systems and approaches
• External independent evaluation
of results/quality/impact
• Deliver aid to affected people
• Track input, output and outcome
of humanitarian response
• Report on progress towards Strategic Objectives
• Provide data for analysis, decision-making,
operational review and evaluation
• Develop Strategic Response Plan
based on prioritization of needs
• Agree strategic, cross-cutting objectives
and measurable indicators
• Identify activities per objective
• Estimate costs
• Summarize sectoral strategic response
plans and estimated costs
• Provide periodic needs updates and analysis
• Advocate to donors on situation, needs
and strategic objectives
[perhaps diagram should have a page to itself to be clearer]
While none of the components of the HPC described in this Module are ‘new’, there has
recently been renewed focus on (1) ensuring there is standardization across the component
parts of the HPC, with humanitarian actors using common approaches and tools, and (2)
ensuring the HPC is coordinated/managed in a seamless manner, with one step logically
leading to and building on the next in the cycle. It is hoped that this Module will assist in
achieving these goals.
A principled
Each component of the HPC should be implemented in a way which adheres to and promotes
approach
well-established principles, standards and codes of conduct for humanitarian action. These
include (but are not limited to):

The Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief;

The humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and
independence;
5

The use of a protection lens to ensure that all humanitarian action is designed
to achieve protection outcomes;

The Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response
elaborated by the Sphere Project;

The Principles of Partnership;

The Principles and Good Practice of Humanitarian Donorship.
Humanitarian actors should also ensure the following factors are central to each aspect of
the HPC and programme design and delivery:



Accountability to affected populations; [to be elaborated upon]
The integration of cross-cutting issues3; [to be elaborated upon, see footnote]
Early recovery and resilience; [to be elaborated upon]

Working with development actors to ensure long-term sustainability. [to be
elaborated upon]
Note on
In order to keep the text as concise as possible, some terms are used as a ‘short-form’
Terminology
intended to cover a range of variations on the theme. For example:

Humanitarian Country Team (HCT): in many circumstances, especially in the
‘preparedness’ phase, there may not be an HCT in place and coordination of
humanitarian action may be taking place through a range of different
mechanisms. When used in the text, the term HCT should be taken to also refer
to any senior humanitarian team which has been brought together to
coordinate the multilateral response;

Clusters: this term is used to describe sectoral coordination under the ‘cluster
approach’ which was brought in as part of an effort to reform humanitarian
response (from 2005). Throughout the text, an effort has been made to use
both the term ‘sector’ and ‘cluster’ but where this has not been possible, the
term ‘cluster’ should be taken to also refer to any form of sectoral coordination
mechanism in place;

Humanitarian Coordinator (HC): should be taken to also refer to ‘Resident
Coordinators’ (RCs) and any other Senior Emergency Coordinators tasked with
leading the international humanitarian response in support of the national
response (although it is recognised that HCs and RC have specific mandates and
responsibilities).
3
Footnote will refer to latest IASC agreement (currently pending) on integration of cross-cutting issues.
6
Enablers for the
Humanitarian
Programme Cycle
7
1.
COORDINATION
Note on Terminology
As mentioned in the introduction, in order to keep the text as concise as possible,
some terms are used as a ‘short-form’ intended to cover a range of variations on the
theme. In this section:

Humanitarian Country Team (HCT):
should be taken to also refer to any
humanitarian team which has been brought together to coordinate the response
in support of the national authorities;

Cluster: should be taken to also refer to any sectoral coordination mechanism in
place, while recognizing that ‘clusters’ activated through the IASC mechanism
have specific roles and responsibilities;

Humanitarian Coordinator (HC):
should be taken to also refer to ‘Resident
Coordinators’ and any other Senior Emergency Coordinators tasked with leading
the international humanitarian response in support of the national response.
What is
coordination in
this context?
How does
coordination
support the HPC?
Good coordination enables humanitarian actors to work together to more effectively
respond to the needs of people affected by crises. It ensures multilateral humanitarian
actors organize themselves in support of the national response as a system, rather than as a
series of disjointed, separate organisations with their own priorities and timetables.
Moreover, good coordination makes ‘the multilateral humanitarian system’ more
predictable, transparent and understandable for local and national actors.
Without good coordination, the HPC cannot be managed efficiently or effectively.
Coordination enables humanitarian actors to jointly assess and prioritize the needs of
affected people and to respond to those needs as part of a single strategy. This ensures that
increasingly scarce resources are maximized to address gaps and avoid duplication.
Where does
coordination
happen?
Coordination takes place at the HC/HCT level, between and within sectors, and between the
HC/HCT and the sectoral level. It can therefore be seen as 3-dimensional:
8
At the HC/HCT level: The HCT is led by the HC, supported by OCHA4, and comprises senior
representatives of Cluster Lead Agencies, the UN, NGOs, and any other key operational
partners in the country5. It is through coordination in this decision-making forum that the
Strategic Response Plan is developed (see section 5) and the multilateral humanitarian
response operation is led.
Between and within sectors: Inter-sector/cluster coordination can take many different forms,
depending on the particular needs in-country. In most cases though, the HC/HCT will ask
OCHA6 to facilitate inter-cluster coordination between the Sector/Cluster Coordinators and
other relevant national and international operational actors and cross-cutting issue
representatives, to coordinate implementation of the HPC. Sector/Cluster Coordinators are
then responsible for coordinating the work of actors within their respective sectors.
Between the two: It is absolutely essential that the HC/HCT interacts with the inter- sectoral
level and vice versa, so that the strategic direction of the response is continuously informed by
the realities on the ground (through the work of sector/cluster partners) and the work of
sectors/clusters contributes to developing and fulfilling the Strategic Response Plan agreed by
the HC/HCT.
Communication between Cluster Coordinators/cluster members and their
respective HCT representatives is essential to this process and as a facilitator of inter-cluster
coordination, OCHA is also responsible for ensuring that the HCT and the sectors/clusters are
working well together.
The Protection Cluster supports the HC/HCT in ensuring that
protection is fundamental to all parts of the humanitarian response.
What needs to be At the HC/HCT level: The HC should establish and maintain a well-functioning, action7
done, how and by oriented HCT to coordinate and lead the multilateral response . The HC should encourage
HCT members to consistently represent the views of their wider constituencies.
whom?
The HC/HCT should decide on the most appropriate and streamlined coordination
arrangements for the particular context, i.e. which sectors/clusters should be activated and
what type of inter-cluster coordination is needed at both the national and sub-national level
(The HC will send these recommendations to the ERC for approval at the Principals’ level).
There is no one-size-fits-all model, and coordination mechanisms should only be established
if and for so long as they are needed.
4
Or UNDP if it is a ‘development’ context.
5
See 2009 IASC Guidance on Humanitarian Country Teams.
6
At the sub-national level this will depend on OCHA’s presence and capacity – another humanitarian actor may be better placed to take on this
role. There may also be inter-cluster coordination between specific sectors on a particular issue, facilitated by one of those Sector
Coordinators. Also the national authorities may wish to assume/share this inter-cluster coordination role.
7
The HC should be supported by OCHA in this work.
9
Between and within sectors: The main goal of inter-cluster coordination is to coordinate
work on the HPC across all the sectors/clusters in order to implement the Strategic
Response Plan developed by the HC/HCT – and thereby meet the needs of affected people.
The HC/HCT will therefore ask Sector/Cluster Coordinators to come together in inter-cluster
forums at the national and sub-national level as needed, to work on all the components of the
HPC.
Inter-cluster coordination can take many different forms. There may be one inter-cluster
forum at the national level – normally facilitated by OCHA - which brings all the clusters
together when necessary, but it is likely there will also be a need for related sectors/clusters
to work together in smaller groups on particular aspects of the response (i.e. to address a
cholera outbreak). It may also be advisable for technical experts to lead smaller groups8
within a larger inter-cluster forum to work on particular aspects of the programme cycle, e.g.
coordinated assessments, or to focus on a particular shared support service, e.g. information
management. Whatever coordination arrangements are put in place to address particular
challenges and whoever they are facilitated by, it is important that OCHA maintains an
overview so that it is able to keep the HC and HCT updated on operational developments.
Cluster Coordinators coordinate the implementation of the Strategic Response Plan by cluster
partners working in their respective sectors of the response, and act as conduits of
information between the inter-sector and sector level.
Between the two: : As mentioned earlier, HCT members, Cluster Coordinators and OCHA are
responsible for ensuring there is a good flow of information between the HCT and the
sectors/clusters. This communication is absolutely essential for ensuring that the strategic
decisions made by the HC/HCT are evidence-based and continuously informed by the
operational realities on the ground. Cluster Coordinators and OCHA also have a responsibility
for raising any over-arching concerns to the HCT for their attention.
Links to more
detailed
Please see the IASC Reference Module for Cluster Coordination at the Country Level which
can be found online at http://clusters.humanitarianresponse.info/
information and
guidance
8
Sometimes called Strategic Advisory Groups (SAGs) or Technical Working Groups (TWIGs)
10
2.
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
Humanitarian Information Management (IM) is the systematic process for the collection,
collation, storage, processing, verification, and analysis of data and information from
one or more sources, and the dissemination of relevant data and information to
humanitarian stakeholders, to support effective and timely humanitarian action.
The implementation and coordination of a humanitarian response requires access to the most
reliable, up-to-date and accurate information available. Decision-makers need to know who
has been affected, what the needs are and how humanitarian actors are responding in order
to develop a strategy which will direct resources to address priority needs.
Information Management (IM) is undertaken during the preparedness, response and recovery
phases of humanitarian crises. It therefore supports and underpins every stage of the
programme cycle and helps connect them by carrying consistent and ever-richer information
from one stage to another. It is crucial that Humanitarian Information Managers9 coordinate
with each other, particularly at the inter-sectoral level, to ensure the HPC runs smoothly (see
‘who is responsible for what?’ below).
How does IM
support the
HPC?
1. Preparedness
Supporting national capacity: IM Managers should know what IM systems already exist incountry so that mission-critical information can be found quickly. They should also identify
national IM capacity and build partnerships with national actors before an emergency occurs.
How does IM
support the
different
stages of the
HPC?
Risk analysis: Risk models such as the ‘Global Focus Model’ analyse hazards, vulnerabilities
and response capacity at the country level using a range of quantitative indicators.
Data preparedness: is undertaken by a large number of humanitarian and development
actors. Through the use of the Emergency Response Preparedness process (see section 3),
country teams can ensure baseline data is available and each actor understands their roles
and responsibilities in humanitarian information management before a crisis occurs.
Common Operational Datasets (CODs) are used to support the work of humanitarian actors
across multiple sectors. They are considered a de facto standard for the humanitarian
community and should represent the best-available datasets for each theme10.
9
To assist humanitarian actors in understanding their roles and responsibilities for performing IM functions, the IASC created the Operational
Guidance on Responsibilities of Cluster/Sector Leads and OCHA in Information Management. As its name implies, the Operational Guidance
outlines the information management responsibilities of OCHA and the clusters, while also setting out expectations for sector/cluster
members, including the role of an Information Management Working Group.
1010
The CODs include: Administrative Boundaries (level 0, 1, 2, etc.); Populated Places (settlements); Transportation Network (roads, ports, etc.);
Hydrology (streams, water bodies, etc.); Hypsography (elevation models, contours); Population statistics; and Humanitarian Profile (caseload).
11
The Fundamental Operational Datasets (FODs) are datasets that are relevant to the entire
humanitarian operation but are either related to a specific sector or do not fit into one of the
seven COD themes. A typical FOD could be a dataset on primary health or education facilities
in a given geographical area.
2. Needs Assessment and Analysis
The Multi-Sector Rapid Assessment (MIRA) framework (see section 4) maps the information
on needs which is necessary for joint planning (in PSD and MIRA reports). Based upon the
PSD, the country team identifies priority needs and creates strategic objectives (see section 6).
IM assessment tools include KoBo, the ‘humanitarianresponse.info’ website and the Common
Request Format (CRF) – please see the weblinks below for more information. If common and
fundamental operational datasets (CODs and FODs) have been established as part of
preparedness, assessment databases can be populated more quickly.
3. Strategic Planning
The Strategic Response Plan developed by the HC/HCT (see section 6) is translated into
sector/cluster-specific response plans. At this stage, the On-line Projects System (OPS) comes
into operation as a drafting and reviewing area for organizations' contribution to fulfilling the
response plans. Enhanced with geographical details, it allows Sector/Cluster Coordinators to
coordinate the proposed projects so as to minimize gaps and eliminate duplications, and to
feed information into 'Who does What Where' (3W) and monitoring systems11.
4. Resource Mobilization
Once sectors/clusters agree on their planned activities, they estimate the resources needed to
carry them out. The Financial Tracking Service (FTS) monitors resource mobilization, showing
resource requirements (replicated from OPS), contributions from donors and allocations from
pooled funds (plus internal agency allocations of loosely earmarked funds, to the extent the
agencies can share the information in real time).
5. Monitoring
Monitoring the humanitarian response means recording the inputs (projects, funds,
resources) and tracking progress in delivery against the objectives set out in the Strategic
Response Plan and in the Clusters Specific Response Plans. OPS is being adapted for part of
the monitoring framework (see section 9) to record outputs of approved projects so that
Sector/Cluster Coordinators can compile and share reports on collective cluster outputs versus
targets. Individual project output reports may also satisfy part of the pooled fund reporting
requirements, and eventually even a common donor reporting system. Standardized
indicators (and cluster activities or ‘domains’) can be captured in an ‘indicator registry’ which
would facilitate the management of certain kinds of monitoring information.
11
The 3W is being revised to adapt to current requirements, including integration with ‘humanitarianresponse.info’ and ensuring sufficient
flexibility to work in small-scale emergencies. A further tool identified for development is an estimate of funding requirements per sector,
possibly taking overall funding figures and automatically breaking them down into funding by activity, beneficiary etc.
12
Who is
responsible for
what?
[This part will be edited down/put in an annex after seeing what is useful during the
simulation]
HC/HCT: Sets the overall requirements for information management services, products, and
tools in consultation with clusters and agencies with IM capacity, so that systems can be
tailored to context and resources.
OCHA: OCHA has responsibility for ensuring there is appropriate IM needed for an effective
inter-sector/cluster response in new and on-going emergencies. To this end, OCHA will
allocate appropriate IM resources (according to the nature and scope of the emergency) and
facilitate the determination of standards that allow for datasets and databases to be
compatible in order to support the inter-operability of data. OCHA will ensure that the
development of tools takes into account capacities and the buy-in of members of the
humanitarian community.
The minimum set of predictable standardized information products to be produced in
collaboration with clusters/sectors and made available to all are:
 Contact directories of humanitarian partners and IM focal points;
 Meeting schedules, agendas and minutes of coordination meetings chaired
by the Humanitarian Coordinator or facilitated by OCHA;
 Who does What Where (3W) database and derivative products;
 Inventory of relevant documents on the humanitarian situation, i.e. mission
reports, assessments and evaluations;
 Inventory of relevant common cluster/sector data sets, including
population data disaggregated by age and sex;
 Data on humanitarian requirements and contributions (through FTS);
 A country-specific or disaster specific humanitarian web-portal;
 Situation Reports; and
 Mapping products that allow for cluster/actor visibility.
The minimum services to be provided or made available to sectors/clusters are:
 A space where the humanitarian community can access information
resources;
 Maintenance of common datasets that are used by the majority of
sectors/clusters;
 Geospatial data and analysis relevant to inter-cluster/sector decision
making;
 Management of the collection and dissemination of all inter-cluster
information;
 Advocacy for data and information sharing within the humanitarian
community as well as the adoption of global data standards;
 Provision of technical IM advice to sectors/clusters on survey design for
needs assessments and/or other significant external data collection
exercises; and
 Access to schedules, agendas and minutes of sector/cluster coordination
meetings.

OCHA will aim to provide standardized cross-cluster needs/gap analysis based
on information provided by the clusters.
13


OCHA is responsible for establishing Information Management Network at the
country level in order to coordinate IM activities and support sectors/clusters in
their IM activities, including the promotion of best practices.
In determining OCHA’s IM response, OCHA will be cognisant of those
organizations with in-country IM operational capacities willing to support intercluster humanitarian response throughout the emergency.
Sectors/Clusters: Responsibility for ensuring appropriate IM needed for an effective and
coordinated intra-cluster response rests with the Sector/Cluster Lead Agency.









Sector/Cluster Lead Agencies shall allocate the necessary human and financial
resources for IM.
Each sector/cluster shall appoint an IM focal point, who should have sufficient
expertise and an ability to work with different partners and clusters.
While it is important that there is one IM focal point per sector, humanitarian
partners are encouraged to share IM resources and capacities within and across
clusters at the country level where appropriate to promote harmonization and
economies of scale.
Sector/Cluster IM focal points should contribute to inter-cluster IM coordination
led by OCHA, and support efforts to ensure coherence and coordination
between intra and inter cluster information management initiatives.
Sector/Cluster IM focal points are responsible for ensuring adherence to
global—and taking into account national—IM norms, policies and standards.
Global level clusters and OCHA can be called upon for IM expertise, operational
support, general guidance, training materials and funds as appropriate.
Sector/Cluster IM focal points will work with OCHA to establish the systems and
processes needed for effective information sharing with cluster partners related
to inter-cluster coordination and cross-cluster programming.
Cluster/Sector Lead Agencies are responsible for generating up-to-date cluster
specific information (e.g. contact lists, meeting minutes, standard forms, policy
or technical guidance, datasets, needs/gap analysis, etc.) and sharing it with
OCHA in order to support inter-cluster data sharing.
If needed, Sector/Cluster Lead Agencies are responsible for establishing a data
confidentiality and privacy policy within their cluster, which ensures that
sensitive, personally identifiable datasets are suitably anonymized.
Sector/Cluster Lead Agencies should ensure all information is age and sex
disaggregated where possible.
Sector/cluster partners: Support the efforts of the Sector/Cluster Lead Agency as per
above.
14
HumanitarianResponse.info
Links to more
Common Operational Data:
detailed
information/guida IASC Operational Guidance:
nce?
Financial Tracking Service:
KoBo Toolbox:
http://www.humanitarianresponse.info/
http://cod.humanitarianresponse.info/
http://bit.ly/134qHVW
http://fts.unocha.org/
http://www.kobotoolbox.org/
15
3. PREPAREDNESS
What is
The HPC is designed to ensure timely, effective, principled and coordinated humanitarian
preparedness in
response. Response without preparation is not optimal. Preparedness involves building the
this context?
readiness of the humanitarian system to implement the HPC in support of national capacities
in times of crisis (this includes preparedness support to RC/HCs, HCTs, national authorities,
and other humanitarian partners at country-level).
Preparedness is a continual process and is used to build the readiness of country teams prior
to the onset of a crisis, as well as to strengthen response mechanisms in an on-going
response to be ready to deal with the deterioration of the crisis or new shocks that may
compound a crisis.
What needs to be
done and how
In practical terms this means addressing anticipated problems; establishing good working
relationships that will be critical in managing the response, reinforcing coordination
structures and clarifying roles and responsibilities in advance between the humanitarian
community and the national authorities, as well as within the humanitarian community.
To better enable this proactive approach, the IASC SWG on Preparedness has developed the
‘Emergency Response Preparedness (ERP)’. The ERP is a management tool used to analyse
the impact of potential crises, or deterioration in an on-going crises, and provide guidance
for ensuring that adequate levels of readiness are in place to respond in a timely, effective
and appropriate manner to the needs of affected people. The ERP’s emphasis is on a
continual process that is divided into five key parts:
1. Risk Profiling: It is important that humanitarian actors have a clear and common
understanding of the potential risks which may trigger a crisis requiring a coordinated
humanitarian response. Therefore, the first step of the ERP is to undertake a risk profiling by
identifying risks and ranking them according to their seriousness. This is a combination of
foreseen impact and likelihood.12 The outcome of risk profiling should be a commonly
agreed Country Risk Profile, which also includes indicators and triggers to be monitored
using available early warning mechanisms and tools.13 Risk analysis must include information
identifying groups and populations particularly vulnerable to the potential threats in their
country as well as about populations with particular needs that should be taken into account
in the event of an emergency. The Protection Cluster (where Clusters are activated) and
Protection agencies should be able to provide this type of analysis as part of risk profiling
exercises.
12
Once the most prominent risks are identified they are scored using a scale of 1 to 5 to reflect their perceived impact and likelihood of occurrence.
Multiplying these two variables will give a product that will indicate the seriousness — low, medium or high — of a given risk.
13
This includes the early warning element of the IASC Early Warning-Early Action process (comprising a twice-annual Early Warning report as well as
on-going monitoring and warning).
16
2. Early Warning Monitoring: Once a Country Risk Profile is developed it is essential that the
risks are monitored to give warning of any deterioration in the situation. This monitoring
helps to provide warning of an impending crisis and in so doing allows for early action that
may mitigate or prevent a crisis as well as providing time for the development of a
Contingency Response Plan.
3. Contingency Response Planning (CRP): Once a risk appears imminent based on early
warning monitoring evidence, or following identification of a likely specific high impact,
sudden-onset event (e.g. a population concentration in an earthquake zone), a CPR should
be developed. The objective is to bring all relevant actors to an advanced level of readiness
to respond to the effects of the specific risk identified.
A CRP should be developed in a way that it can be readily transformed into a Strategic
Response Plan when an emergency hits and it should inform resource mobilisation to ensure
an effective response. 14 To ensure this, it is suggested that the contingency response plan
follow the structure of the Strategic Response Plan (see section 5).
The CRP should also include the identification of early actions to further strengthen
readiness for the anticipated response (i.e. pre-positioning, training, simulation) with a clear
indication of timeframe, budget and responsibility.
For some risks, particularly those
deriving from slow-onset situations, there may be actions that can be taken well in advance
to mitigate the effects of the emerging risk, based on anticipatory warning through the IASC
Early Warning-Early Action process and related monitoring15.
4. Minimum Preparedness Actions (MPAs): MPAs seek to identify preparedness gaps and
thereafter provide a checklist of targeted actions to achieve the minimum levels of
preparedness needed to undertake a coordinated multilateral response in support of the
national response. The MPAs focus on seven main areas considered central to an effective
response: 1) Coordination; 2) Assessment; 3) Response Planning; 4) Resource Mobilization
and Monitoring; 5) Information Management; 6) Public Information and Crisis
Communication; and 7) Training. Simulation exercises are recommended to test the overall
effectiveness of the implementation of the MPAs.
5. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for the Initial Emergency Response: SOPs are
meant to guide responders in their initial emergency response when rapid decision-making
is required and critical actions cannot be overlooked. They outline clear roles and
responsibilities and focus on the rapid scale-up of humanitarian assistance and effective
coordination at the HC and Sector/Cluster levels.
14
See Chapter 5 Strategic Planning
15
An example is controlled destocking of livestock or increasing safety nets in risk areas
17
The SOPs facilitate decision-making on the prioritization of needs and immediate life-saving
interventions, on how to better identify initial steps in the response and on how to
coordinate with elements outside the country. The effectiveness of this approach is
enhanced when individual agencies develop internal SOPs that are coherent with the HC and
Sector/Cluster levels’ version.
In countries where humanitarian coordination structures are already established: the
Who is
responsible for
what?
Humanitarian Coordinator – working with both the HCT16 and the country level
clusters/sectors - , should ensure appropriate action in each of the five components of the
Emergency Response Preparedness (ERP) framework and appropriate engagement with
national structures.
In countries where humanitarian coordination structures are not established: the Resident
Coordinator, through the appropriate in-country mechanisms and in cooperation with the
national authorities, should implement as much of the ERP approach as possible. Extra
support is available for the HQ and Regional level of OCHA and Agencies. Particular
consideration should be given to the input and participation, as well as capacities and
expertise of local, national and international NGOs operational in the country, especially
those with a humanitarian/emergency and DRR profile.
Sectoral level17: The sectors/ clusters have an important role in supporting national sector
coordination mechanisms in preparedness, which may vary according to country capacities
and existing emergency context. The following is an overview of the areas cluster should
focus on:

Sectors/Clusters should use the Risk Profile and identify which clusters might be
necessary and what risks could affect cluster-specific activities.

Sectors/Clusters should agree upon and prioritize Minimum Preparedness
Actions (MPAs) necessary to ensure appropriate arrangements within the
following areas: 1) Coordination; 2) Assessment; 3) Response Planning; 4)
Information Management; and 5) Capacity mapping and training. MPAs should
be specifically tailored to the requirements, structure and mandates of each
cluster.

Sectors/Clusters should engage in the CPR process of the UNCT or HCT and
provide technical support as needed.
16
Note that the ERP approach does not apply to refugee situations as other coordination mechanisms lead by UNHCR apply in those contexts.
17
See the Cluster Coordination Module – Role of Clusters in Preparedness for a detailed breakdown of cluster/sector responsibilities
18

Sector/Cluster Lead Agencies should engage readily in monitoring the state of
readiness of their individual cluster, including the completion of MPAs, the
consistency of Contingency Response Plans and the availability and
understanding of response SOPs.
Agency/organisation level: The ERP approach does not direct the form of
agency/organisation level preparedness action. To enable and foster overall coherence,
however, agency and NGO action should be aligned with interagency and cluster/sector
action undertaken as part of the ERP approach.
Time line
In risk prone countries (with an HC or RC), the country risk profile, minimum preparedness
actions and response SOPs should be reviewed and updated as necessary on an annual
basis. They should also be tested regularly through the use of simulations.
Specific contingency response planning is required only for imminent specific risks identified
though early warning mechanisms, or for sudden onset risks with very high impact in specific
locations (such as earthquakes).
Support & Monitoring
Guidance and support on implementing the ERP as well as testing it through simulations can
be provided through the IASC SWG on Preparedness and through Agency HQ Preparedness
Sections, as well as OCHA and Agency Regional Offices.
OCHA tracks implementation of the ERP for countries with a HC. On the request of UNDG it
can track implementation in countries with an RC but no HC.
Links to more
detailed
A full explanation of the ERP including guidance and templates can be found at the following
link www.preparednesstracker.org
information
and guidance
19
The components of the
Humanitarian Programme
Cycle
20
4.
COORDINATED ASSESSMENTS & NEEDS ANALYSIS
Coordinated assessments are carried out in partnership by humanitarian actors in order to
assess the humanitarian situation and to identify the needs of the affected population, and
thereby inform strategic response planning. 18 Local and national authorities, civil society
and affected communities are encouraged to participate in this process.
What are
coordinated
assessments?
Coordinated assessments may be either ‘joint’ or ‘harmonized’. For joint assessments,
actors use a common data collection form and produce a single report. For harmonized
assessments, humanitarian actors carry out separate assessments but they are done in a
manner which allows for the data to be aggregated in a single data base and analyzed
together, providing a shared overview of the situation.
In both instances a joint analytical process is needed to produce a situation/context
overview and identify priority needs.
Where
assessment fits
into the cycle
and its purpose
A coordinated approach to the assessment of the situation and the prioritization of the
needs of affected people lays the foundation for a coherent and coordinated humanitarian
response, and should therefore be done at the start of the HPC when a crisis hits. It provides
the evidence base for the development of a Strategic Response Plan and subsequent
cluster/sector response plans. It also provides important baseline information upon which
situation and response monitoring systems will rely.
Coordinated assessments are most useful when a number of preparedness activities have
been undertaken before a humanitarian emergency occurs, thus ‘assessment preparedness
activities’ are important elements of the Minimum Preparedness Package (see section 3 on
Preparedness).
What needs to
be done and
how
The IASC has developed a range of guidance, tools and products which can be customized
for different emergency contexts.
Preparedness
Preparedness is critical for ensuring the initial data produced on needs is timely, relevant
and of an appropriate quality. Minimum assessment preparedness activities consist of:


18
Agreement on rapid assessment methodology, approach and data collection
tools.
Data preparedness, including agreement on Common Operational Datasets
(CODs) and data sharing agreements (i.e. open data) with relevant national
authorities, UN agency, NGO and other actors. In many countries, information
on pre-existent vulnerabilities, risks, and capacities can be collected before
emergencies occur, allowing for ‘pre-population’ of the ‘Preliminary Scenario
The term ‘coordinated assessment’ comes from the IASC Operational Guidance on Coordinated Assessments in Humanitarian Crises, which can be
found at: www.assessments.humanitarianresponse.info.
21


Definition’ (PSD).19 The PSD should be regularly updated as part of contingency
planning and preparedness activities.
Agreement on roles and responsibilities (including logistics, data management
plan and triggers) for undertaking joint rapid assessments.
Ensuring the existence in-country of trained, standing assessment capacity.
Preparedness actions should take account of local cultural and language needs
and should ensure there is a system in place for notifying communities when
assessments will occur.
Context A: New or Escalating Emergencies
For new or escalating emergencies, a joint assessment using the Multi-Cluster/Sector Initial
Rapid Assessment (MIRA) approach should occur within the first two weeks of the onset of the
emergency. It will elaborate a concerted operational picture based on the best information
available from primary and secondary sources and joint analysis. It should be undertaken by
in-country emergency specialists drawn from clusters/sectors (with headquarters and regional
support available upon request), with the engagement of local and national actors as
appropriate.
The approach consists of:



Systematic analysis of pre-and post-crisis secondary data to determine the
extent of the disaster and number of people affected to sketch initial strategic
humanitarian priorities and identify information gap areas.
Systematic collection of primary information through engagement with
affected communities to identify needs as articulated by those affected by the
disaster.
Joint analysis of information using an analytical framework and prioritization
model to arrive at an agreed vision of the situation/context and priority needs.
Results are expressed through the following products/outputs:


Preliminary Scenario Definition (PSD) produced within 72 hours, the PSD
provides the initial overview of the situation and initial needs prioritization to
serve as a foundation for the development of the Strategic Statement and
Strategic Response Plan by the HCT.
MIRA Report completed within 10–14 days to inform response planning,
appeals and subsequent in-depth sectoral assessments.
Upon completion of the MIRA process, it is assumed that assessments will continue to be
coordinated through an inter-cluster coordination mechanism (e.g. an Assessment and
Information Working Group) to ensure future assessments are either joint or harmonized, and
that joint analysis and needs prioritization is undertaken in a systematic manner on a cyclical
basis.
Context B: Protracted Crises
19
The Preliminary Scenario Definition is the first output of the Multi-Cluster/Sector Initial Rapid Assessment (MIRA) which depends heavily on
secondary data, or information that is already on-hand to allow for a pre versus post-crisis comparison.
22
As crises evolve, the depth and volume of information necessary for an effective response
increases. This often translates into a requirement for in-depth cluster/sector, thematic or
agency-specific assessments or studies to inform planning and operations. In these
circumstances, the harmonized assessment approach with joint analysis is recommended.
While assessment coordination is important throughout the life of an emergency, it is of
particular importance in advance of the strategic planning and mid-year review cycles (CAP,
CHAP or other). The following processes and tools are recommended for use in protracted
crises, or later phases of sudden-onset emergencies:




Establish
a
coordination
mechanism
bringing
together
assessment/coordination and IM focal points to harmonize, aggregate and
analyze existing assessment information, agree on emergency indicators to be
tracked and agree on a process for collating data from multiple assessments.
Initiate or revitalize assessment registry and map assessment coverage to
ensure temporal and geographic synchronization and agree on a plan to collect
any missing information.
Jointly analyse existing information using the MIRA Analytical Framework20 to
arrive at context/situation analysis
Identify and prioritize needs using an inter-sectoral model and use this to
identify strategic priorities and develop cluster response plans.
Results are expressed through the following product/outputs:
The Humanitarian Needs Overview (template currently under development) should be
produced, at a minimum, biannually, to inform the planning and mid-year review processes.
The Humanitarian Needs Overview is the comprehensive analysis of the overall situation and
associated needs, as well as prioritization of needs, presented as a stand-alone document to
be developed in advance of a joint planning process.
The Humanitarian Dashboard is used to consolidate and present the basic information which
is fundamental to any humanitarian situation in a visually appealing and easily digestible
format (including data on needs, response monitoring and gaps).
Coordinating assessments and needs analysis is a responsibility shared among all
humanitarian actors21. Findings and information are a shared commodity intended for the use
of all humanitarian actors, as appropriate. No single entity is considered the ‘owner’ of data
or information. All actors are responsible for ensuring engagement with and feedback to
affected populations through the coordinated needs assessment process.
Who is
Responsible
for What
20The
MIRA Analytical Framework supports efforts by humanitarian actors to reach a common understanding of the situation, priority needs and
strategic objectives. The Framework is based on eight key themes: (1) Drivers of the crisis and underlying factors, (2) Scope of the crisis and
demographic profile of affected, (3) Status of populations living in affected areas, (4) National capacities and response, (5) International
capacities and response, (6) Humanitarian access, (7) Coverage and gaps and (8) Strategic humanitarian priorities. The MIRA Framework can
be found within the MIRA Guidance document.
21
In refugee situations, this responsibility is borne by UNHCR.
23
Specific roles and responsibilities include: [may use the table below for all the sections, or
may decide to take out of this format to conform with the others]
National authorities
HC/HCT
OCHA
Cluster/Sector Coordinator
Cluster/Sector Members
Timelines
 Lead and/or participate in MIRA
 Lead and/or participate in assessment coordination mechanism
 Ensure relevant data and information (i.e. population,
monitoring) is shared
 Ensure assessments are coordinated, joint analysis of the
situation and a prioritization of needs is undertaken based
on assessment information collected, and subsequent
strategic and response plans are developed based on this
evidence and analysis.
 Ensure appropriate assessment preparedness is done
 Ensure there is a mechanism for assessment coordination
 Hold actors accountable for sharing data and relevant to
assessments through inter-cluster coordination mechanism
 Chair or co-chair inter-cluster assessment coordination
mechanism.
 Serve as coordinator for MIRA and harmonized assessments.
 Provide information management support in collecting and
collating inter-sectoral secondary data.
 Lead and facilitate needs analysis and prioritization to inform
strategic and cluster response planning.
 Coordinate cluster or sector specific joint and harmonized
assessments, facilitating sector participation in the MIRA.
 Share assessment data.
 Support analysis within the sector/cluster.
 Engage in cluster or sector level assessment coordination,
participating in joint assessments when appropriate and adhering
to agreed methodologies and data sharing.
 Ensure communities receive feedback on how information has
been used and programming has been developed and modified
based on information from the affected populations.
All humanitarian emergencies evolve over a different timeline, and are rarely linear. Thus, the
IASC Operational Guidance on Coordinated Assessments in Humanitarian Crises does not
outline specific timelines but instead disaggregates emergencies into different phases. Each
phase is meant to be illustrative of different characteristics common to both sudden-onset
and protracted emergencies, and recommends assessment methodologies and tools for each.
24
Important elements to remember on timing:
Links to more
detailed
information
and guidance

The timeliness of joint rapid assessments in sudden-onset emergencies is
essential with outputs required within 72 hours and 2 weeks of onset.

In protracted or later stages of emergencies where CAPs/CHAPs are developed,
needs assessments coupled with analysis and prioritization should be aligned
with the planning and review cycles, and must take place prior to any planning.

Early recovery considerations must be integrated into all phases, and linkages
between humanitarian assessments and post-conflict needs assessments
(PCNA) or post-disaster needs assessment (PDNA) should be ensured.
Examples/templates
1) The Assessment Framework
2) The PSD Template
3) The MIRA Analytical Framework
4) Situation Analysis and Needs Prioritization Model
5) Humanitarian Needs Overview
6) Humanitarian Dashboard
Links to more detailed information/guidance
1) IASC Operational Guidance for Coordinated Assessments in Humanitarian Crises
2) Multi-Cluster/Sector Initial Rapid Assessment (MIRA) Guidance
These documents and other assessment tools and support information can be found at
www.assessment.humantiarianresponse.info.
Please contact the OCHA Coordinated Assessment Support Section at [email protected] or through
Support
www.assessment.humanitarianresponse.info.
available from
the global/
regional level
.
25
5. STRATEGIC PLANNING
What is Strategic
Planning?
A more effective humanitarian response requires a shared strategy and clear responsibilities
to strengthen mutual accountability and unite the country, regional and headquarter
response. A stronger strategic vision at the onset of an emergency serves as the basis for
monitoring the quality of the response (and enabling subsequent adjustments) and for
better resource mobilization and allocation. Strategic planning should inform decisionmaking of the humanitarian response at national and sub national levels and within
clusters/ sectors, and be aimed at advancing the protection of vulnerable people and
addressing basic needs.
Strategic planning within the Humanitarian Program Cycle refers specifically to the delivery
Where does
Strategic Planning of a Response Plan by the HCT under the leadership of the HC. In sudden-onset L3
emergencies, the Response Plan should be preceded by the delivery of a brief Statement
fit in the HPC?
from the HC/HCT, articulating needs and the response that will be provided, in support of
national efforts22. . The requirement to deliver a Strategic Statement and Strategic
Response Plan should be taken into account as part of preparedness efforts and should be
included in the Contingency Response Plan (please see Preparedness section 3).
To the extent possible, the HCT should seek to consult and engage the national authorities of
the affected state, national and local aid organizations and affected people in all aspects of
the strategic planning process.
Strategic Statement
A two to three-page Strategic Statement will provide top-level direction on initial priorities
and an indication of capacities that will be required for the humanitarian response. The
Strategic Statement should be drafted immediately after the onset of a large scale crisis and
within 72 hours of a L3 declaration, possibly even before the designation of a Senior
Emergency Coordinator. Its formulation can therefore be supported/ agreed by the
Emergency Directors. The Statement will be the basis for advocacy and public information,
and will galvanize and focus the humanitarian community. Subsequently, the HCT will
develop a Strategic Response Plan that is more detailed and sets out the targets and
accountabilities of humanitarian actors for meeting the objectives contained therein.
22
Engagement with the non-UN national and international humanitarian actors in the strategic planning is essential, but in situations where an HCT
is not set up, extra efforts by the HC/RC, UN agencies and UNCT will be required to ensure that outreach is undertaken and participation
achieved.
26
Strategic Response Plan
Informed by the Preliminary Scenario Definition23 and where relevant, the Contingency
Response Plan, the Strategic Response Plan provides an overview of the parameters of the
international response and how it will support the national response. The Strategic
Response Plan should contain a limited number of prioritized objectives for the response. As
such, it forms the basis for the collective accountability of the HCT. Progress will be
measured against the objectives and accompanying indicators as part of the 'Monitoring and
Reporting Framework' (see section 7) and must therefore be specific enough to support
strategic, results-based management, facilitating corrective action by the HCT when
necessary.
The Strategic Response Plan is not the place for individual agencies/organizations to set out
their proposed activities or estimated budgets; these will be included in appeals (please see
the Resource Mobilization section of this Module).
Operational Peer Reviews and Evaluations should take the Response Plan as the benchmark
against which the effectiveness of the international humanitarian response can be assessed.
Timing
While more time could be taken in protracted crises, in general, the Strategic Response Plan
should be delivered within five days of an L3 declaration, or within five days of the onset of a
smaller scale emergency where there is no L3 declaration.
Sector/Cluster Planning
As the overarching plan for response, the Response Plan will guide the development of
(inter)cluster/sector operational plans; the prioritized objectives of the plan should guide
and inform inter cluster/ sector discussions. The Response Plan will also inform the
development (or revision) of the Flash Appeal and, if necessary, the Consolidated Appeal,
and the allocations of the CERF and any country-based pooled funds. It will also guide the
decisions of donors when allocating funds.
23
The Preliminary Scenario Definition (PSD) is produced within 72 hours and provides the initial
overview of the situation and initial needs prioritization to serve as a foundation for the
development of the Strategic Statement and Strategic Response Plan by the HCT.
27
Revisions
The Plan should be considered a living document, with the opportunity to refine, adjust and
re-prioritize as the response develops. The finalization of inter-agency needs assessments
(MIRA) and resulting needs analysis will provide a critical juncture for reviewing the plan,
although changes in the response or context can also result in a decision to revise and/or reprioritize objectives. For a level 3 response, the Strategic Response Plan should be revised no
later than after the first three months of the response.
Who is
The HC and the HCT are responsible for delivering the Strategic Statement and the Response
responsible for
Plan, for its content and quality and for ensuring that the response, including the operational
what?
cluster/sector response, is designed and undertaken in line with the stated objectives.
Cluster and sector Coordinators contribute to the Country Team's development of the
Strategic Response Plan by rapidly estimating needs, communicating inter-sectoral and
sectoral priorities and defining indicators to the HCT. They then ensure
plans/programmes/projects are developed in line with it.
Timelines for completion and revision

Strategic Statement produced immediately after the onset of a large scale crisis and
certainly within 72 hours of a L3 declaration;

Strategic Response Plan produced no later than five days after the declaration of an L3,
followed by a flash appeal as soon as possible after that;

The Strategic Response Plan is a living document constantly reviewed and adjusted in the
initial stages of the response. It should be formally revised after the finalization of interagency needs assessments and then no later than after the first three months of the
response.
28
PROPOSED STRUCTURE FOR THE STRATEGIC RESPONSE PLAN
A. CONTEXT: (one paragraph): type of emergency, location, scale, severity.
B. NEEDS ANALYSIS
Summarize the key findings of the Preliminary Scenario Definition and consider:





Analysis of underlying vulnerabilities and their inter-relations;
Definition and identification of humanitarian needs;
Identification of protection vulnerabilities and needs;
The top-priority needs among and within clusters/sectors (including possible sequencing
considerations and inter-sectoral issues);
Number and type of people in need.
C. NATIONAL AUTHORITY or REGIONAL STRATEGIES


Assessment of national/local capacities and likely regional or bilateral response;
The resulting gaps that this strategy should fill.
D. (PRE-) EXISTING INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE AND CAPACITY


Assessment of international capacities;
The resulting gaps that this strategy should fill.
E. THE HUMANITARIAN STRATEGY








Overall goal and strategic objectives looking ahead to the end of the crisis;
Parameters: what the response will aim to achieve and what is outside the scope;
Identification of how protection of human rights will be taken into account in the response;
Number of people to be targeted (considering parameters and national and regional
response outlined in part C);
Prioritization (needs, clusters/sectors, geography, target groups);
Challenges (security, access, logistics, capacity gaps) and potential solutions;
Areas for immediate operational support from HQs;
Specific, measurable, results-based objectives, in the following format.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE ONE
OBJECTIVE:
OUTCOME INDICATOR(s) AND TARGETS:
KEY RELEVANT CLUSTER/SECTOR ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUT TARGETS
29
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE TWO
OBJECTIVE:
OUTCOME INDICATOR(s) AND TARGETS:
KEY RELEVANT CLUSTER/SECTOR ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUT TARGETS
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE THREE
OBJECTIVE:
OUTCOME INDICATOR(s) AND TARGETS:
KEY RELEVANT CLUSTER/SECTOR ACTIVITIES AND OUTPUT TARGETS
ESTIMATED COSTS
Initial estimate of the cost of this response to give a first indication of the scale of resource
mobilisation required.
[Refer to annexes for good examples of ‘strategic objectives’]
30
6
Where
resource
mobilisation
fits into the
cycle and its
purpose
RESOURCE MOBILISATION
Resource mobilization (RM for short) aims to secure the financial resources necessary to
achieve the strategic objectives of the humanitarian response and thereby, meet the needs of
affected people. It also directs resources (or aims to influence their direction) according to
the priorities of the strategy and the division of labour in the detailed sector/cluster action
plans.
RM links closely to every part of the HPC. Needs assessment and analysis provides the
evidence-base for agreeing strategic objectives which RM then supports through the appeal
process. RM relies on monitoring as part of accountability to donors, ensuring resource
allocations have been effective. RM itself also has to be monitored, tracking resources
secured versus requirements. Finally, evaluations should lead to a more rigorous
enforcement of lessons learned which may lead to increased RM in the next programme
round. The latter is particularly important in light of donors increasingly examining aid
efficiency and effectiveness in funding decisions.
The various kinds of ‘appeals’ (strategic humanitarian plans with budgets) serve as the
‘demand side’ of resource mobilization whereas pooled funds serve as part of the ‘supply
side’.
THE DEMAND SIDE: ADVOCACY AND FUNDRAISING TOOLS
1.
Flash appeal
What is it and
The initial inter-agency fundraising tool for new (usually sudden-onset) crises, based on the
what purpose
Strategic Response Plan. The flash appeal outlines roles and responsibilities, cluster response
does it serve?
plans, and activities that require funding. It presents collective humanitarian funding
requirements for up to six months.




To operationalize and put a ’total amount’ on the Strategic Response Plan.
To provide a framework for coordinated and inclusive planning and programming.
To outline implementation responsibilities and the division of labour;
To attract donor attention, give them an inventory of priority actions, and guide them to
implementers who are ready to act;

To preclude competing and overlapping single-agency appeals.
(Historically, flash appeals have been the vehicle for developing and publishing rapid-response
strategic plans. Starting in 2013, those plans, i.e. Strategic Response Plans, will be developed
and published before and separately from the flash appeal.)
31
Who can
The RC/HC, in consultation with the HCT and the ERC.
initiate it?
How do they
Any disaster exceeding the affected country’s capacity and that of any single international
decide
agency to respond requires an inter-agency strategic plan. This, in turn, will usually lead to a
whether to do
flash appeal, because a response to a disaster of that scale usually needs major resources.
one?
(There may be exceptions, for example if a disaster is just large enough to require an interagency strategic response but this response is small-scale and can be covered by agencies’
internal funds plus CERF.)
Who can
All humanitarian partners, including national authorities, can participate in developing the
participate?
flash appeal. There is no requirement for national authorities to give their permission to issue
a flash appeal, but consultation is essential. UN agencies, international organizations and
NGOs (both national and international) may include projects in the appeal, provided the
activities are humanitarian. According to established IASC policy, government bodies of the
affected country can be included as partners in UN or NGO projects but cannot appeal directly
for funds. Components of the International Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement are welcome
to join the flash appeal, though they often choose to appeal through their independent
financing mechanisms24.
Timelines:
Flash appeals should be issued as fast as possible after the Strategic Response Plan is
developed, to catch donor attention and get the necessary resources for response quickly.
•
Within 5 days: RC/HC and HCT complete the Strategic Response Plan and decide whether to
follow it with a flash appeal.
•
Within 7 days: RC/HC leads the HCT in producing a draft flash appeal document based on
the Strategic Response Plan and on available assessment results by clusters. A CERF request
may also be considered at this time. In cases where agency country offices are severely
affected by a sudden-onset emergency, the process and drafting can be initiated at
headquarters level.
•
Within 8 days: Final draft of the appeal cleared in-country and sent to OCHA-HQ for interagency headquarters review. (OCHA-HQ guarantees finalizing and publishing a flash appeal
within 48 hours of receiving a complete final field draft.) The most urgent life-saving
projects from the flash appeal can be submitted to CERF for rapid funding.
24
if they do appeal for funding separately, it is critical that the planning and programming phases are closely coordinated with the International Red
Cross/Red Crescent Movement.
32
•
Four to six weeks: The flash appeal is revised, using improved and up-to-date information
from expanded assessments by clusters, and includes early recovery projects.
•
By end of appeal: The RC/HC, in consultation with the HCT, decides if a follow-on
consolidated appeal is warranted.
2. Consolidated appeal (CAP)
An advocacy and fundraising process for crises exceeding the time horizon of a flash appeal,
What is it?
consisting of a Common Humanitarian Action Plan (‘CHAP’ for short) based on the Strategic
Response Plan, and a list of necessary actions (sometimes further specified as project
outlines).25 It is used for protracted complex emergencies or as a follow-on to a flash appeal.
It is typically launched in November and covers the upcoming calendar year.26
What purpose
The CAP provides donors with the information they need on the total amount of humanitarian
does it serve?
funding necessary to achieve the strategic objectives in the Plan, broken down by
sector/cluster partner and activity.
Who can
All humanitarian partners, including national authorities, can participate in developing the
participate?
CAP. There is no requirement for national authorities to give their permission to issue the
appeal, but consultation is essential. UN agencies, international organizations and NGOs (both
national and international) may include projects in the appeal as long as their projects are in
line with the priorities defined in the CAP. Government bodies of the affected country can be
included as partners in UN or NGO projects, but cannot appeal directly for funds, by IASC
policy. The International Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement are welcome to join the CAP,
though they usually choose to appeal independently.
Who does what for resource mobilisation around CAPs and flash appeals?
•
Participating organizations: should contact donors directly to raise funds independently,
showing how their proposal is consistent with the strategic objectives of their sector/cluster
response plan;
25
Historically and by IASC policy, CAPs have been the forum and publication platform for humanitarian needs analyses and common strategic plans,
as well as the more detailed information necessary for fundraising and operational coordination. Starting in 2014, strategic plans are likely to
be published separately and before the rest of the CAP’s customary components, leaving the CAP to be more purely a fundraising document.
26
Consolidated appeals often use variant names (like “Humanitarian Action Plan”), usually for reasons of political sensitivities. This does not change
their nature or purpose; so unless they differ radically in purpose and method, they are categorized as CAPs. (All references to ‘CAPs’ in this
document refer equally to comparable plans with variant names.)
33
•
Sector/Cluster Coordinators: should approach donors to advocate for funding to fulfil their
sector’s objectives, with initial funding being targeted to the highest priorities.
•
The HC: should advocate for sufficient funding to meet the overarching strategic objectives
and the highest-priority actions across sectors.
•
Donors: Should look at the appeal’s strategic and sector objectives to decide what generally
they want to fund.
They then either make a loosely-earmarked grant to a recipient
organization, or receive a more specific proposal from an organization and verify its
coordination with the relevant sector/cluster. Alternatively, they may ask the sector/cluster
which organization is best positioned to receive funding for and implement the actions that
the donor wants to support.
•
OCHA: Should monitor funding levels for CAPs and Flash Appeals through the Financial
Tracking Service (FTS). Upon request from the HC, the IASC Principals or the Emergency
Directors, OCHA can initiate coordinated system-wide advocacy and resource mobilization
activities at the HQs inter-agency level. Activities could include the development, and
support to the implementation of, comprehensive inter-agency resource mobilization
strategies and the organization of ad-hoc briefings and events.
Additional Information (for both FA and CAP):
•
OCHA CAP web-site (http://www.unocha.org/cap)
•
CAP and Flash appeal guidelines and templates
(http://www.unocha.org/cap/resources/policy-guidance)
THE SUPPLY SIDE: SOURCES OF FUNDING
1.
Direct funding from donor to implementing organization
The majority of humanitarian funding in appeal situations goes directly from donor to
implementing organization. Organizations should approach donors directly with funding
proposals, and be prepared to show that their proposed activities are consistent with the
strategic objectives in the appeal (which is easy if the proposal has already passed through
peer review in the sector/cluster). Organizations should try to secure funds for their highestpriority actions (as identified in peer review) first, or - if the donor gives flexible funds - should
allocate them to the highest-priority actions.
2.
Pooled funds
2.1 The Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF)
What is it?
An OCHA-managed worldwide fund consisting of a grant element (target of $450 million a
year) and a loan element ($30 million a year). The grant element is divided into (A) a ‘rapid34
response window’ (2/3rds of grant element) and (B) an ‘underfunded-emergencies window’
(1/3rd of grant element). Grants are provided for critical, life-saving actions.
Who can
UN agencies and IOM can request CERF grants and loans (OCHA may apply for a loan, but as
request it?
manager of the Fund it cannot benefit from the grant element.) Other humanitarian partners
including NGOs can receive funding indirectly through sub-grants from CERF grant recipients
and since NGOs constitute the majority of operational actors, they need to be actively
encouraged to be included in the application process.
CERF Grants
A. CERF Rapid Response (RR) Window
•
A grant for life-saving activities in (1) sudden-onset disasters, (2) sudden (unexpected)
deteriorations of existing crises, or (3) time-critical interventions.
•
Provides an initial injection of funds to enable agencies to jump-start humanitarian
assistance.
•
Has to be implemented within a 6 month period.
Timeline for CERF RR grants:
• Within 72 hours of onset of crisis: RC/HC, in consultation with the HCT, assesses the need
for a rapid response grant in parallel with the development of a flash appeal. The RC/HC
should determine funding priorities based on the CERF life-saving criteria, results from the
joint multi-sectoral rapid assessment, the Strategic Response Plan’s strategic objectives,
funding shortfalls and capacity to implement within the grant’s time frame. The RC/HC
requests Cluster Lead Agencies to submit priority projects.
• Within one week of onset of crisis: RC/HC, in consultation with the HCT, and based on the
agreed criteria and funding priorities, reviews and approves projects submitted by clusters.
If a Flash appeal exists, the most urgent life-saving projects in the appeal are prioritized and
selected.
A consolidated grant request is sent to the ERC, with a copy to the CERF
Secretariat.
NB:
• The process for developing a grant request should be evidence-based, inclusive and
transparent. NGOs and other humanitarian partners should be involved in the CERF funding
prioritization and application process.
• CERF rapid response funds should kick-start projects rather than funding them in full. CERF
is not meant to be a primary funding mechanism.
35
B. CERF Underfunded Emergencies (UFE) Window
•
Allocations from the CERF UFE window are made in two rounds annually to countries with
chronically underfunded humanitarian emergencies. The ERC determines which countries
receive allocations based on the analysis of global humanitarian funding data from the
Financial Tracking Service (FTS) and broad consultations with the humanitarian community.
•
CERF UFE grants intend to improve equity of funding by supporting existing humanitarian
response efforts in underfunded emergencies.
•
Once a country has been selected, the ERC invites the RC/HC to submit a grant request for
the amount of funding that has been allocated
•
The deadlines for implementing UFE grants are as follows:
o
First allocation round: 31 December
o
Second allocation round: 30 June of the following year
C. CERF Loan Element
•
Provides agencies with cash flow to cover immediate expenditures in the aftermath of a
crisis while waiting for donor commitments to be disbursed.
•
While CERF loans are directly requested by eligible agencies, they should inform the RC or
HC of their request.
•
Loans must be reimbursed within one year.
Additional Information:
•
CERF website (http://www.unocha.org/cerf/)
2.2. Country-based pooled funds
Note: these may pre-exist in a country that suffers a Level 3 disaster (as in Haiti and Pakistan), but
are seldom created fast in response to an L3.
36
Emergency Response Funds (ERFs)
• A multi-donor funding mechanism providing small, rapid and flexible funds to address
sudden humanitarian needs not foreseen in the CAP in a protracted emergency. The HC
manages the fund with support from the OCHA office and is often advised on strategic issues
by an Advisory Board (AB). A technical Review Board with equal participation of UN and
non-UN partners recommends proposals to the HC for final decision-making.
NB:
• Establishing an ERF requires OCHA endorsement. It is generally not established for a
sudden-onset emergency.
• Currently there are no ERFs in countries where an HC and OCHA are not present.
Common Humanitarian Funds (CHFs)
•
A CHF is a larger multi-donor funding mechanism to which donors make un-earmarked
contributions. It is suitable for a large protracted crisis. CHFs aim at addressing the highest
priority humanitarian needs as identified in the CAP—i.e. it responds to medium-term
strategic and operational planning. NOTE: CHFs are complicated to set up and operate, and
therefore are not established in the early stages of a sudden-onset crisis. Currently there
are only five CHFs (DRC, Sudan, CAR, South Sudan, and Somalia). Most of these feature an
ERF-type rapid-response window within the larger fund.
• The HC, supported by OCHA, manages the CHF. OCHA serves as the secretariat of the fund.
• A CHF Advisory Board advises the HC in the management of the fund, and a
• Technical Review Committee reviews proposals on behalf of the HC.
• All partners in the CAP can apply for CHF funding. However, NGOs and components of the
International Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement access CHFs after having gone through a
capacity assessment in line with CHF requirements.
Additional Information:
•
General information on ERFs and CHFs: http://www.unocha.org/what-we-do/humanitarianfinancing/overview
TRACKING WHERE THE FUNDING IS GOING
The Financial Tracking Service or FTS (http://fts.unocha.org) is an essential companion to
resource mobilization.
It is a global, real-time database and website which records all
reported international humanitarian funding, including that for NGOs and the Red Cross / Red
Crescent Movement, bilateral aid, in-kind aid, and private donations.
Although FTS records funding to any country or disaster, it features a special focus on
consolidated and flash appeals, because they cover the major humanitarian crises and
37
because their funding requirements are well defined (which allows FTS to show gaps in
funding vs. requirements, and by implication the extent to which people receive humanitarian
aid in proportion to needs). It is therefore a key coordination tool for humanitarian leaders
and donors.
FTS shows pooled fund information on a series of special tables that make it easy to see
contributions to and allocations from pooled funds.
FTS is managed by the UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). All FTS
data are provided by donors, pooled fund managers and recipient organisations.
Field staff can help ensure that FTS data are complete by forwarding to [email protected] any
information they encounter that is not already on FTS.
(For example, government-to-
government donations and private donations to NGOs are often not reported to FTS by the
usual channels.) Donors and implementing organizations in-country should review FTS tables
frequently, and send any additions or corrections to [email protected]. All IASC staff should refrain
from publicly presenting figures that differ from what their headquarters or donors have
reported to FTS; instead, if they have information that differs, they should send it to
[email protected] and let FTS verify and post the new data—then they can cite it. (FTS uploads new
data daily, and corrections usually appear on line within 24 hours.)
38
7.
IMPLEMENTATION & MONITORING
The whole point of the Humanitarian Programme Cycle is to enable the delivery of a fast,
effective and principled response to meet the needs of affected people.
Immediate
As stressed in the introduction, in emergency situations there will be an immediate response
emergency
to save lives and assist those affected, before the first stages of the HPC get underway. This
response
response will come from within the local community, from local and national authorities and
civil society, NGOs, the ICRC and national Red Cross/Red Crescent societies, UN agencies and
other actors already present in the affected area. Within the first days of the emergency,
additional humanitarian actors may join the response effort and deploy directly to the area of
the disaster.
It is important therefore to recognize that implementation of an emergency response is most
often being undertaken in parallel with the activities of the broader humanitarian system to
undertake an overall assessment and develop a strategic plan for the response. This is not a
contradiction, but just underlines the fact that the development of a Strategic Response Plan
needs to factor in the on-going response and the HC/HCT must engage with the first-response
actors who will have important information for the assessment of the situation.
Implementa-
While at the HCT-level, the immediate focus is on completing a rapid coordinated needs
tion of the
assessment and developing an overall strategy to guide the response, agencies/organisations
jointly
participating in sectors/clusters will also in parallel be discussing existing capacities and
developed
resources for the partners to start implementing a response. Some agencies may already have
strategy
access to a level of emergency funding drawing on corporate reserves or bilateral funding
arrangements.
It is important that cluster partners map the priority areas of intervention in support of the
overall strategy and seek to agree on a common response plan for implementation that is
realistic and which maximizes the capacities and resources of each of the participating
partners.
Involvement of
Wherever possible, Sector/Cluster Lead Agencies should ensure that an appropriate
national
coordination mechanism is established in support of respective national authorities at the
authorities in
central and local level27. This coordination will ensure the Strategic Response Plan supports
response
the national response by focusing on priority areas for intervention where the national
authority has identified a lack of capacity.
27
See 2009 IASC Guidance Note on working with national authorities.
39
Involvement of
It is important that agencies/organisations seek to maximize the active engagement and
affected
participation of affected people and community groups in every stage of the HPC. Discussions
populations in
should take place within sectors/clusters – as well as in inter-sector/cluster forums - on how
response
to optimize the participation of affected people to ensure their capacities and resources are
best utilized and strengthened as a step towards early recovery. This may take many forms;
from the active involvement of local community groups fostering a cooperative approach to
the response and sourcing relief materials locally, to the recruitment and employment of
persons within the affected population as active participants in the delivery of a sector’s
response.
Agencies/organisations working in the same geographic area should reach agreement on ways
of involving the affected population in the response. This is especially important regarding the
recruitment of local staff; agencies should agree on harmonized salary levels to avoid a
constant rotation of staff between agencies and a spiraling of salary levels which may
negatively affect the local job market and community life.
MONITORING THE HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE
Monitoring the humanitarian response is about observing whether assistance is actually
What is
delivered to affected people and protection afforded to them as intended.
Monitoring of
It is the
responsibility of every humanitarian actor involved in the response to constantly monitor
the
the quality of the response and raise issues of concern if they witness failures or problems in
Humanitarian
delivery.
Response?
Monitoring means recording the inputs (projects, funds, resources) and tracking progress in
delivery against the objectives set out in the Strategic Response Plan and in the Clusters
Specific Response Plans28.
Where
Monitoring fits
into the HPC and
Monitoring is a continuous process which should be carried out at the same time as assistance
is delivered or protection provided.
It has four purposes:
its purpose
1) It serves to improve the accountability of humanitarian actors towards affected people and
donors, as well as to national authorities and the general public.
2) It provides an opportunity to receive feedback from the affected population on their
perception of the response (e.g. whether the humanitarian response is meeting their needs
and doing no harm).
28
The term Monitoring does not include Needs Assessment (analysing a context or a situation, foreseeing a probable scenario, and assessing
needs). And it is not about Performance Monitoring (observing the functioning of the humanitarian actors and their coordination system).
40
3) It allows for short term adjustments by providing humanitarian actors with a real-time
evidence base for making decisions about what actions should be taken to redress
shortcomings, fill gaps and/or adjust strategy, contributing to a more effective and efficient
humanitarian response.
4) It allows for long-term improvement of the response, by providing humanitarian actors a
quantitative and qualitative information base. This will allow for analysis, lesson-learning and
identification of best practices, which in turn will permit the improvement of the strategies,
modes of intervention and standard norms in the long-run. (See ‘Operational Peer Review’
section).
What needs
to be done
Monitoring the humanitarian response involves measuring inputs, outputs and outcomes.
Inputs are the financial, human and material resources used for an intervention.
Outputs are the products, capital goods and services which result from an intervention and may
also include changes resulting from the intervention which are relevant to the achievement of
‘outcomes’. Output monitoring measures the delivery of goods and/or services to a targeted
population, (e.g. % of people who need tents that receive them).
Outcomes are the likely or achieved short-term and medium-term effects of an intervention’s
Outputs. Outcomes can be intra-cluster requiring multiple outputs from one Cluster, (e.g.
defecation-free environment) or be inter-cluster requiring outputs from multiple clusters, (e.g.
Decreased incidence rate of Cholera.)
The monitoring process is grounded in the country’s Strategic Response Plan, and the ClusterSpecific Response Plans. As explained in section 5, the Strategic Response Plan will lay out
three to five strategic objectives; a small number of outcome indicators will be identified for
monitoring the strategic objectives, and targets will be set for each indicator against which
progress will be monitored.
Based on the Strategic Response Plan, clusters will develop their specific Response Plans.
These will have clusters-specific objectives for which targets will be set, using cluster output
indicators.
As a crisis evolves, needs change and/or more information becomes available; the Strategic
Response Plan will therefore need to be revised. The monitoring process will both feed that
revision, and be adapted according to the decisions made, e.g. if indicators are revised and/or
there is a change to the frequency of reporting.
41
Who will use
Internally:
the
The primary users of the monitoring information are the humanitarian actors themselves at
monitoring
several levels of the humanitarian system: RC/HC, HCT members, the inter-cluster
information ?
coordination forum(s), Cluster Coordinators and cluster members. The information collected
will be consolidated and analysed to:
•
Support evidence-based decision-making at HC/RC and HCT level;
•
Allow the inter-cluster coordination forum to review and analyse the progress
of the humanitarian response against the strategic objectives. This analysis will
provide the basis for further review by the HC and HCT, to track progress
against strategic objectives and revise the Strategic Response Plan accordingly.
•
Enable clusters to use monitoring information to track progress against Cluster
Response Plans.
• Enable individual agencies/organisations to see how they have contributed to
the overall humanitarian response.
Externally:
Once endorsed by the HCT, the monitoring information and analysis should also be made
available to affected people, national authorities, donors, the media and the general public,
through a range of reporting products.
•
The Humanitarian Dashboard presents information on situation, needs,
achievements to date, coverage and gaps, at the cluster and inter-cluster levels.
It will serve as the primary product for displaying monitoring information.
•
Specific analysis of monitoring information may be prepared for donors, for
advocacy on resource mobilisation.
•
Clusters may produce their own additional monitoring updates as they see
necessary.
•
Documents are disseminated through email, hardcopy, and the OCHA country
office website.
Who is
Successfully monitoring the humanitarian response relies on clearly outlining the roles and
responsible
responsibilities of humanitarian actors.
for what?
Field Level Monitoring and Analysis
Individual organisations play a crucial role in monitoring as they are the implementers of the
humanitarian activities and the first reporters of field level (or project) monitoring data.

Cluster coordinators and cluster members should agree on simple forms for
reporting essential monitoring data on their projects, i.e. inputs (funding,
activities) and outputs (objectives and effective results), and agreed clusters
42
output indicators drawn from existing indicators within each cluster. These
forms should include gaining the views of affected people.

Organisations will monitor the results of their activities. This will support
decision-making within the organisation, and allow for organisation-specific
reporting.

Organisations will report to clusters on their inputs and on their output results,
using an agreed format.

In order to achieve this, a harmonised approach should be agreed upon within
the cluster, i.e. on the indicators that will be used, on sharing field monitoring
findings, on data compilation, and gaps identification. Cluster members should
ensure they have the capacity to perform their field monitoring activities.
NB : The modalities of these field monitoring activities will vary depending on the scale
required, the available resources and capacities on the ground and the operational realities in
the country.
Sector/Cluster Level Monitoring and Analysis
Sectors/clusters are instrumental to the monitoring strategy, from their development of
Sector/Cluster Response Plans and selection of indicators to monitor the response, to their
work of harmonising the collection, sharing and analysis of monitoring information.
Sectors/Clusters will use existing tools and mechanisms within the clusters, like 4W databases
(‘Who does What, Where and When’) and established communication channels for collecting
field monitoring data and receiving feedback from affected populations.

Sector/Cluster Coordinators will compile and collate cluster members’ project
Input and Output monitoring data.

Sectors/Clusters may also organise joint monitoring exercises, which should be
coordinated with other assessment activities.

As these pieces of monitoring information become available, Sector/Cluster
Coordinators will compile and analyse them against the cluster targets.

This will support decision-making within the sector/cluster, and allow for
sector/cluster-specific reporting.

At given times, it will allow for a revision of the Sector/Cluster Response Plan.
The revision should incorporate findings from field monitoring, feedback from
affected populations and situation updates (including the tracking of affected
population figures). It may also incorporate information from the Coordination
Performance Monitoring Framework29 and information about other factors that
affect the humanitarian response such as access, the environment and other
cross-cutting issues.
29
Reference
43

Sector/Cluster Coordinators will present the sectoral analysis of monitoring
information at the inter-cluster coordination (ICCG) group/forum, as well as any
gaps in the monitoring that need to be filled with inter-agency exercises, in
order to bring this concern to the attention of the HCT.
Country Level Monitoring and Analysis
The inter-sector/cluster forum is essential to the monitoring strategy, as it brings data
together from all clusters and analyses it in order to measure progress towards the Strategic
Objectives.
The RC/HC and the HCT are the final recipient of the consolidated monitoring information. It
will enable them to make evidence based decision making.

The ICCG will prepare a set of outcome indicators for measuring results against Strategic
Objectives, and propose it to the HCT for their agreement.

Following a proposal from the ICCG, the HCT should agree the roles and responsibilities for
collecting input, output and outcome monitoring information and establish the frequency of
data collection and reporting.

Cluster Coordinators and cluster members will collect data on the outcome indicators agreed
by the HC/HCT.

OCHA will monitor financial inputs, in collaboration with clusters, through the Financial
Tracking Service (FTS) and Online Project System (OPS).

OCHA will compile all the clusters’ monitoring data and facilitate analysis which will result in a
report for the HCT on progress made against the strategic objectives, possibly accompanied by
recommendations and concerns (including any gaps in field monitoring).

At given times, this monitoring information will allow for a wider revision of the Strategic
Response Plan. This revision should also take into account any reports generated by the
Cluster Coordination Performance Monitoring Tool30, and other factors affecting the
humanitarian response such as access, the environment and other cross-cutting issues.

The HCT will decide which monitoring information and analysis should be made publically
available through OCHA Situation Reports, Humanitarian Dashboards and other presentation
documents.
The concrete implementation of the monitoring approach presented above requires
What are
appropriate tools that should facilitate the work of data collection, compilation, analysis and
the tools
presentation at various levels. Some of these tools currently exist, while others still need to be
for
developed.
monitoring
30
Reference
44
Field Level:
Every cluster member organisation has some form of field monitoring practice in place, and
uses its indicators and systems to track results. Depending on the sectors, a certain degree of
standardisation may exist. A harmonised approach within the cluster would benefit all by
facilitating the data collection efforts and the compilation and sharing of the findings.
Cluster Level:
Each Cluster Coordinator should identify the appropriate tools for compiling monitoring data.
Existing tools are:

the indicators registry : the output and outcome indicators used by the sectors/clusters
should be in-line with the indicators used for harmonised assessments (see the IASC Needs
Assessment Task Force (NATF) Key Humanitarian Indicators).

the “4W” databases (Who does What, Where and When)
There is a need to harmonise existing tools for intra-cluster compilation of field monitoring
information.
Country Level:
The FTS-OPS online system allow for the tracking of projects and their funding levels.
Tools for compiling output and outcome data at the inter-cluster level do not yet exist and
should be developed by OCHA.
Timelines:
The timing of the monitoring work will very much depend on the type of crisis in the country.
The specific timing of the different phases of monitoring should be established by the HCT.
Humanitarian Actors in a protracted crisis may organise a planned system for the collection
and analysis of monitoring data during the year, with key moments for strategic revision.
In the case of a level 3 emergency, the first weeks of the crisis will place emphasis on inputs
and outputs, then gradually shift to outputs and outcomes as the crisis continues. (See Annex
2 : Level 3 Emergency Response : Monitoring Timeline.)
In all cases, indicators and targets at field, cluster and country level should be established
during the planning phase, with adequate allocation of resources for the collection of the
monitoring data. Field monitoring activities should start as soon as the humanitarian
response plans are implemented.
Resources:
The IASC Technical Working Group on Monitoring of the Humanitarian Response is developing
an IASC Response Monitoring Framework, which will provide the fundamentals of how to
45
develop monitoring of the humanitarian response. This will be annexed to future versions of
this Reference Module.
46
8. OPERATIONAL PEER REVIEW
An inter-agency ‘internal’ management tool to inform the HC and HCT members on the need
to adjust or improve the collective humanitarian response to ensure that it is on track to
meets its objectives, and that there are no significant gaps. The objective of the OPR is to
assess and recommend any necessary corrective action on:
What is
Operational
Peer Review
(OPR)?




leadership arrangements 31;
application of the HPC32;
coordination mechanisms 33; and
modalities to account to affected populations 34.
The OPR is remedial and forward-looking, aimed at immediate and rapid corrective action
early in the response. It is not an evaluation for accountability purposes35, and does not
measure results. It is not a ‘public’ document. It is not a lengthy process, large mission or long
report.
The scope of the OPR covers the collective response being managed by the HC and HCT, and
the role of the OCHA Office in providing support. While the OPR does not review the response
of national/local authorities or organisations who are not part of the HCT, the OPR will
consider the HCT’s response against the broader effort in terms of aligning objectives and
filling gaps. The OPR will also consider whether the ‘global system’ is providing the necessary
support to the HC and HCT in the areas outlined above.
An Operational Peer Review can be undertaken for non-L3 and L3 emergencies.
The results of the OPR and related action plan are primarily intended for and delivered to the
HC/HCT for action (for this reason, the HCT will be involved in the planning of the OPR from
the outset.) Secondary users are the members of the IASC Emergency Directors Group (EDG).
The OPR will also generate information relevant to all the actors engaged in the response,
including affected people, national and local authorities and sector/cluster partners.
Who is it for?
For L3 emergency responses, secondary users will also include the IASC Principals.
31
ref ((relevant IASC reference module)
32
Humanitarian Programme Cycle: consists of coordinated assessments, strategic response planning, resource mobilization, implementation and
monitoring (ref. IASC Reference Module on the Humanitarian Programme Cycle).
33
ref (relevant IASC cluster coordination modules)
34
ref. relevant IASC AAP document
35
Link to evaluation: the OPR is a management learning tool for corrective action, while an inter-agency evaluation is an external, independent
exercise intended to account for results and identify lessons for future programming.
47
Who initiates
it?
An OPR can be initiated by the HC/HCT, EDG or the IASC Principals. For L3 emergency
responses, an Operational Peer Review is mandatory and will be conducted within the first 3-6
months of the declaration by the IASC Principals.
Who manages
it?
For non-L3 emergencies, it is managed by the HC with support from OCHA.
Who
undertakes it?
Operational Peer Reviews are undertaken by a small group of experienced ‘peers’ of the HC
and HCT members The OPR team is comprised of senior operations managers, including from
agencies addressing priority sectors (but who are mandated to review the full response), and a
representative from the national authorities as appropriate.
For L3 emergencies, it is managed by the EDG with support from OCHA.
For an L3 Operational Peer Review, the OPR team consists of a small group of Emergency
Directors36. In all cases, a team leader is nominated when planning begins.
The Operational Peer Review will be conducted within the first three months of a sudden
onset crisis. For other humanitarian crises, the OPR is triggered by a request from the HC/HCT
or EDG but it should be planned early in the response and preferably timed to inform an
update of the Strategic Response Plan37.
When?
For an L3 emergency response, an Operational Peer Review is conducted within 3-6 months of
the declaration by the IASC Principals.
The OPR team will produce a short report (maximum 10 pages) plus an action matrix
(proposed actions, by whom, by when). The final report will be submitted to the HC/HCT
within two weeks of the end of the mission.
What is the
output?
For further reference:
Annex X: Template for TORS for an Operational Peer Review and Recommendation Matrix
36
Or by senior operations managers as delegated by the EDG.
37
which may take the form of an update to a flash appeal or CAP
48
9. EVALUATION
An inter-agency humanitarian evaluation (IAHE) is an external, independent assessment of the
collective humanitarian response. Its purpose is to promote strategic learning for the
multilateral humanitarian system and ensure accountability of the system in terms of
fulfilling the objectives and rising to the standards it has set for itself . An IAHE
provides a summary of collective results achieved to date, with the main emphasis being on
the quality of the aid delivered and protection given to affected people38. IAHE needs to be
conducted in a timely way so that results can be used to support strategic and operationallevel decision making.
What is InterAgency
Humanitarian
Evaluation?
As a joint effort, IAHE brings distinct added value by allowing for a reduction in the overall
number of individual agency and donors conducting their own individual evaluations. IAHEs
are carried out by independent experts who apply professional evaluation norms and
standards to collect and present evidence on the basis of key evaluation criteria including:
Appropriateness: how well humanitarian activities are tailored to meet local needs.
Effectiveness: how well an activity has achieved its purpose or can be expected to do so on
the basis of existing outputs. Reference will be made to the agreed JSI quality standards39.
Efficiency: a measure of the outputs, qualitative and quantitative, achieved as a result of the
inputs.
Connectedness: the extent to which short-term emergency response steps take longer-term
connected problems into account. Evidence of a sound exit strategy with timelines, clear
allocation of handover responsibilities to national authorities and development agencies and
availability of post-response funding.
Coverage: the extent to which assistance reaches all major population groups affected by a
crisis including men and women. If needed, IAHE will explore why certain groups may have
not been covered and the main reasons why this may have occurred.
Coherence: the extent to which there is consistency across security, developmental, trade
military and humanitarian policies, and the extent to which all policies take into account
humanitarian and human rights considerations.
Coordination: the extent to which different actors’ interventions are harmonized, promote
synergy and avoid gaps, duplications and resource conflicts.
Impact: looks at the wider effects of the interventions on affected men and women, agegroups, communities and institutions.
The above criteria will constitute a general frame of reference for IAHE; however, the
evaluation criteria will be context specific. The evaluation will also seek to determine progress
38
In refugee situations the UNHCR evaluation policy will apply.
39
INSERT FOOTNOTE
49
achieved against the objectives set out in the Strategic Response Plan, including the overall
strategic direction established by the HC and the HCT for the period in question.
All IAHE will also define clearly the set of humanitarian activities under evaluation including
the geographical coverage and the precise time period. This may include for example an IAHE
covering the first twelve months of a major L3 system-wide response in a whole country or
region, an evaluation of an on-going response in a specific country over a one, two or three
year time frame or an evaluation of all response activities at a sub-national level over a fixed
period of time.
In all cases, evaluation teams will seek to apply the evaluation criteria specified above. The
evaluation will, as a general rule, cover the collective response as outlined in the Strategic
Response Plan or specific sub-elements as appropriate.
An IAHE will undertake its field work 9-12 months after the emergency in question, and will
be informed by the data collected by the various monitoring tools at the field level, at the
sector/cluster level and at the country level.
To ensure the IAHE provides clear value added, it will not focus on management and
coordination arrangements, insofar as these issues will have already been covered in the
Operational Peer Review which occurs earlier in the response. An IAHE is also not an in-depth
evaluation of any one sector or of the performance of a specific agency.
What it is not?
The results of the IAHE are primarily intended as a strategic input to the HC/HCT, the
Emergency Directors, the IASC Principals, and the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC). The IA
evaluation may generate analysis and information relevant to actors engaged in the on-going
response, including local and national authorities and sector/cluster partners. Secondary
users are people affected by disasters, affected states, member states and major resource
partners for the response.
Who is it for?
An inter-agency evaluation is initiated by the ERC and/or the HC/HCT once the established
triggers have been reached.
Who initiates
it?
It is managed through OCHA’s evaluation section, working with a small inter-agency
management group to make day-to-day decisions on the conduct of the evaluation40.
Who manages
it?
Headquarter-level evaluation specialists from IASC agencies constitute an IAHE Steering
Group, which helps to provide broad strategic guidance and ensure quality control41. The
Steering Group will approve the ToR and final report.42
Evaluation support missions facilitated by OCHA and other members of the management
group may be undertaken to help brief and prepare HCTs to engage effectively in an IAHE, to
manage expectations properly. These missions provide an opportunity to further ‘scope’ the
40
An IAHE manual will detail how the management group will be constituted to ensure rotational agency representation.
41
A quality assurance system will be put in place to support IAHE
42
The IAHE manual will specify procedures to be followed in the event of a lack of agreement on the final report.
50
IAHE and to involve members of the HCT and other key stakeholders in the definition of core
evaluation questions and to ensure the implementation of the evaluation’s recommendations.
At the country level, OCHA will support the RC/HC in chairing an in-country advisory group
whose role will be to help focus the evaluation, and contribute to the preparation of a
management response plan based on the evaluation recommendations.. The in-country
advisory group will include national authorities where appropriate.
IA Evaluations are undertaken by independent evaluators who have not been involved with
the design and implementation of the intervention in any way. OCHA maintains a roster of
pre-qualified humanitarian evaluators with specific technical and sector expertise to conduct
the evaluations.43 Consultants are retained based on a competitive bidding process.
Who
undertakes it?
An IAHE is triggered by the ERC once certain criteria have been met. Currently these are:
When?
a) In the case of all L3 emergencies, the IAHE will be conducted within 9-12 months of the L3
declaration, with the aim to have the results available at the 12 month mark;
b) In the case of large-scale natural disasters where a single country appeal exceeds USD 500
million, or a regional appeal exceeds USD 1 billion;
c) In the case of on-going chronic emergencies, an IAHE should be done at a minimum, every
four years.
In line with the broader commitment to lesson learning and accountability, IAHE will in
principle be funded through the appeals process, and will therefore be budgeted for in the
Strategic Response Plan. In the event that there is insufficient capacity and resources
available to undertake the IAHE, the Steering Group will use a prioritization exercise;
situations that meet conditions (a) and (b) above will be given priority. The aim will then be
to identify those situations where IAHEs can bring the most value-added.
What are the
outputs
43

In coordination with the HCT, the RC/HC will be responsible for preparing a formal
management response plan which will also be available in the public domain.

An IA Evaluation will produce an analytical report, which will be available in the
public domain. Summaries ‘lessons learned’ will also be produced to feed into
knowledge management systems.

Dissemination events will also be organized to ensure proper communication and
uptake of the recommendations at the operational, policy and strategic levels. This
would include in- country workshops with the HCT, IASC briefings at headquarters
level, short briefings for decision-makers and synthesis work across evaluations to
identify lessons learned.
To be further discussed as appropriate.
51

Where possible, IAHE reports will be submitted to agency boards for information
purposes. Results will also be included in annual evaluation reports and other
reports to relevant governance bodies.

The ERC will ensure follow up mechanisms are put into place to ensure that agreed
recommendations are implemented. The ERC will ultimately be responsible for
follow up to the evaluation results.

A meta-analysis will be conducted bi-annually to identify findings and conclusions
relevant to global policy and strategy development.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Annex X: Draft example TORs for IAHEs
Annex X: Outline of process for IA Evaluations in emergency response (time period indicated
is from date of declaration of L3 emergency)
52
Annexes
53
ANNEX 1: GOOD EXAMPLES OF STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES AND INDICATORS
CAP SWG needs to go through this and pull out some good examples on 1-2 pages
Haiti Humanitarian Appeal – Mid-Year Review, June 2010
(http://unocha.org/cap/appeals/mid-year-review-flash-appeal-haiti-2010)
3.2
Revised Strategic Objectives for 2010
The revised strategic objectives for humanitarian response for 2010 agreed upon by the
humanitarian community have been adapted and reflect the necessity to continue with
immediate relief operations alongside initiation of long-term response based on the
government’s ‘Safer Shelter Strategy’:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Objective
Relocate at-risk populations from 1.
imminently dangerous locations before
hurricane season.
Fill information gaps regarding number
2.
and location of affected people, coping
capacities, and remaining humanitarian
needs.
Attain full provision of needed basic 3.
services and necessities around all
displaced people’s sites according to
applicable humanitarian standards by
July 1 and maintain through 2010 or as
needed. (This provision of services will
be re-oriented to more appropriate
community-based services around the
settlements, with an understanding of
urban dynamics, and in a way that
prepares for implementation of the full
resettlement strategy.)
Provide all needed humanitarian support
4.
to the moves from spontaneous
settlements to better transitional or
permanent locations (Safer Shelter
Strategy), and encourage those in host
communities (including non-destroyed
areas) to remain (by means of improving
social services and livelihoods in those
communities).
Protect vulnerable IDPs, women, 5.
children, separated families and others
who are at heightened risk of various
forms of exploitation, neglect or abuse.
Foster effective and equal participation
of men, women, boys and girls in all
Indicator
Relocation of all people in ‘red’ sites or parts of
sites to green sites by July 1.
Full and continuously updated mapping of
needs, coverage and gaps, by July 1.
Residents of each site have access to basic
essential services up to humanitarian standards
(including emergency shelter and NFIs,
emergency education, food and nutrition,
health services, physical security, potable water,
and sanitation, plus livelihoods support where
needed and feasible) as of July 1.
(a) Percentage of capacity of designated
settlement sites filled with resettled displaced
people enjoying full basic services by end 2010.
(b) Number of displaced people returning from
host communities to temporary sites or areas of
origin made unsuitable by the earthquake.
Number of reported incidents among displaced
or otherwise affected people of GBV,
exploitation, neglect and abuse; proportion of
such cases assisted by humanitarian actors (or
by government or civil society actors with
humanitarian support).
54
6.
7.
phases of planning and implementation
of humanitarian strategy.
Complete all possible contingency 6.
planning and preparation before
hurricane season so as to ensure the
safety of earthquake-affected people
whose current shelter and coping
strategies will not withstand a hurricane.
Identify places where displaced people
are vulnerable to extreme weather and
implement at least minimum mitigation
and preparedness measures.
More emphasis on communal or
7.
community-based early recovery
initiatives such as income-generating and
livelihoods programmes, in addition to
temporary direct service provision where
needed, in order to enhance
sustainability of resettlement efforts and
reduce dependence on humanitarian aid,
monitoring and supplementing
government social safety net
programmes where needed.
Identification and preparation of hurricane
shelter and positioning of stocks, sufficient to
protect and assist all people made homeless or
otherwise extremely vulnerable by the
earthquake that are at risk of hurricanes and
other natural hazards.
Number of people requiring humanitarian relief
(broken down by type of relief) at end 2010,
compared to May 2010 baseline.
Côte d’Ivoire Consolidated Appeal 2012
(http://unocha.org/cap/appeals/consolidated-appeal-c%C3%B4te-divoire-2012-englishversion)
Strategic objective
1. Improve the living conditions and the
protection of target populations,
including the most vulnerable people,
IDPs, host families and host communities,
by ensuring access to basic services
according to SPHERE standards.
2. Identify and support sustainable
solutions for the voluntary return and
socio-economic integration of at least
75% of the people who have returned to
safe areas.
Corresponding strategic indicators
■ By end of 2012, in multi-sectoral
humanitarian intervention areas, 50%
reduction in morbidity from diarrhoeal or
faecal-oral diseases as from January 2012.
■ By end of 2012, in multi-sectoral and sectoral
humanitarian intervention areas, 10%
increase in the number of households whose
food consumption score is 35 +.
■ By end of 2012 in areas of return, 75% of
basic health facilities to be operational.
■ By end of 2012 in areas of return, the
enrolment rate in primary school to reach the
national average.
■ In 2012, regular and gradual increase (+ x%
monthly) of the rate of return of IDPs and
refugees.
55
3. Reduce the risk and mitigate the
effects of a new crisis.
■ By end of 2012, in food-security intervention
regions, decrease by 12 points of the
household survival strategy index.
■ By end of 2012, in food security intervention
regions, 40% reduction in the number of
households in moderate food insecurity.
■ By end of 2012, in food security intervention
areas, 60% reduction in the number of
households in acute food insecurity.
■ By end of 2012, in the Montagnes and
Moyen-Cavally regions, the percentage of
acute respiratory infections among five-yearold children in displaced populations to be
similar to the national average.
Central African Republic Consolidated Appeal 2012
(http://unocha.org/cap/appeals/consolidated-appeal-central-african-republic-2012)
Strategic Objective
S.O. 1) People affected by
conflict and other
humanitarian crises have
access to basic services
and respect for their
fundamental human
rights.
Indicators
Under-five children mortality
rate
Target
Target 2012: 102 per 1,000
live births
Baseline 2011: 105 per 1,000
live births
Percentage of populations
100%
affected by crisis having access
to humanitarian aid.
Newly constructed or
336 water points
rehabilitated and functional
institutional structures
(schools, health centres) and
community water points
(boreholes, protected wells,
reticulated water distribution
systems)
Number of under-five children
having access to basic and
emergency health care
Target 2012: 40,000
Baseline 2011: 28,000
56
Strategic Objective
Indicators
Number of cases affected by
grave human right violations
receiving legal response and
appropriate support
S.O. 2)
Strengthen the resilience
capacity of people
affected by crisis and
support their
empowerment.
Number of children
demobilized and receiving
appropriate support
Number or percentage of
income-generating activities
supported to improve the
affected communities
economic capacity
Number or percentage of
affected people or households
having received assistance to
increase their farming
production and income
Percentage of host
communities, IDP and refugee
households supported and
living above the poverty level
Newly created, reactivated or
re-trained water point
committees
Target
100% of reported cases of
people affected by grave
human right violations
receiving legal response and
appropriate support
Baseline 2011: 50%
1,500 children associated with
armed groups benefit from
appropriate assistance
100% refugee communities
initiatives supported
5 projects benefiting to host
and displaced communities
supported and implemented
50 IGAs promoted
303,475 people to receive
support to resume or improve
their agro-pastoral
production.
100% of returning refugees’
households receiving
protection and reintegration
kits
80% of rural-based refugees
engaged in livelihoods and
self-reliance activities
(Baseline 2011: 70%)
60% of host communities and
IDPs supported with socioeconomic recovery activities.
358
Somalia Consolidated Appeal 2012
(http://unocha.org/cap/appeals/consolidated-appeal-somalia-2012)
2012 Somalia CAP Strategic Priorities
57
Monitoring and Evaluation
Strategic indicators and data collection system
Humanitarian aid
Provide immediate and integrated life-saving assistance to people living in famine
and humanitarian emergency to reduce mortality and prevent further displacement.
Stabilize and prevent the deterioration of livelihoods for populations in Famine, HE
and AFLC through the protection and restoration of livelihood assets and through
early recovery, resilience-building, emergency preparedness, DRR and
social/productive networks.
Provide vulnerable women, men, boys and girls, including but not limited to IDPs,
with equal access to a minimum package of basic services.
Strengthen the protective environment for civilian populations by increasing
response to protection violations, and through engagement with duty bearers and
communities.
The CAP 2012 will continue to use the strategic monitoring plan developed in previous years
with the aim of monitoring the impact of humanitarian aid. The plan is a three-tiered
framework to measure the strategic objectives of the CAP in order to inform the operational
and policy decision-making of Somalia’s humanitarian community. The monitoring will pay
particular attention to the collection and compilation of sex-disaggregated data. The Strategic
Priorities Monitoring Matrix and its indicators (see next page) will inform decisions on
priorities, while at the same time they will ensure accountability from all clusters. The
overarching objectives for the CAP 2012 are the four Strategic Priorities for humanitarian
action in Somalia. The nine cluster response plans provide the operational details for
addressing these strategic priorities. Each plan includes objectives, indicators and targets
which are outlined in Annex II. The CAP includes 350 projects to implement the strategic
priorities and each project includes a monitoring strategy.
2012 Strategic
Priority
1. Provide
immediate
and
integrated
life‐saving
2012 Somalia Strategic Priorities Monitoring Matrix
Responsible
Mid-year and
Cluster Objective
2012 Indicator
Cluster
end-year targets
Prevent further
GAM and SAM
Food
No deterioration
deterioration of
rates do not
Assistance,
acute
deteriorate from
Agriculture
malnutrition in
2010 median rates and
children under
(GAM 16% and
Livelihoods,
58
2012 Strategic
Priority
assistance to
people living
in famine and
humanitarian
emergency to
reduce
mortality and
prevent
further
displacement.
2012 Somalia Strategic Priorities Monitoring Matrix
Responsible
Mid-year and
Cluster Objective
2012 Indicator
Cluster
end-year targets
five in targeted
SAM 4%)
Nutrition,
humanitarian
WASH,
emergency and
Health
famine-affected
Number of relief
Food
Mid-year: 1.5
populations in
food distribution
Assistance
million
Somalia
beneficiaries
End-year: 3
million
Coordinate
Number of
Logistics
Mid-year: 80% of
support to
organizations that
requests
strategic services have received
resolved
for the efficient
logistics support in
End-year: 90% of
delivery of
terms of common
requests
common
logistics and
resolved
humanitarian aid information
services offered by
the logistics cluster.
Increase access
Number of men
Agriculture
Mid-year:
to food and
and women in HE
and
788,000
water and
and IDPs accessing Livelihoods
End-year:
increase
immediate cash
1,576,000
purchasing
and food needs,
power for
emergency
populations in
livestock
Famine and HE
interventions, and
emergency
agricultural and
fishing inputs
Contribute to the Percentage of
Shelter/NFIs Mid-year:
protection of
women and men
505,000
displaced and
target beneficiaries
End-year:
other vulnerable receiving EAPs
1,010,000
groups from lifethreatening
elements
through the
distribution of
emergency
assistance
packages
Acutely
Percentage of
Nutrition
Mid-year:
malnourished
acutely
U5 SAM: 120,750
children and
malnourished
(30%)
pregnant and
children and
U5 MAM:
lactating women pregnant and
134,550 (30%)
are treated by
lactating women
PLW 57,520
having access to
caseload referred
(20%)
and utilizing
and admitted to
Community
quality services
centres for the
mobile: 40%
59
2012 Strategic
Priority
2. Stabilize
and prevent
the
deterioration
of livelihoods
for
populations
in Famine, HE
and AFLC
through the
protection
and
restoration of
livelihood
assets and
through early
recovery,
resilience
building,
emergency
preparedness,
DRR and
social /
productive
networks
3. Provide
vulnerable
populations,
2012 Somalia Strategic Priorities Monitoring Matrix
Responsible
Cluster Objective
2012 Indicator
Cluster
for the
management of
management of
acute malnutrition
acute
malnutrition
Improve the
quality of
education,
integrating
essential services
and life-saving
messages into
formal and nonformal education
Number of learners
and teachers
(disaggregated by
sex) benefitting
from life-saving
messages and/or
child-friendly
spaces
Education
Provide, protect
and increase
production
capacity of
livelihood assets
and reduce
exposure to the
effects of natural
shocks for
population in
crisis
Number of men
and women in HE
and AFLC with
access to improved
productive assets
Agriculture
and
Livelihoods
Increase access
to education for
children, youth
Number of children
(disaggregated by
sex) benefitting
Education
Mid-year and
end-year targets
End-year:
U5SAM: 241,500
(60%)
U5 MAM:
269,100 (60%)
PLW: 115,040
(40%)
Community
mobile: 80%)
Mid-year:
200,000
children/teachers
(120,000 male;
80,000 female)
End-year:
400,000
children/teachers
(240,000
male/160,000
females)
Mid-year:
251,000 men and
women in crisis
End-year:
501,000 men and
women in crisis
Mid-year:
100,000 (60,000
boys; 40,000
60
2012 Strategic
Priority
including but
not limited to
IDPs, with a
minimum
package of
basic services
2012 Somalia Strategic Priorities Monitoring Matrix
Responsible
Cluster Objective
2012 Indicator
Cluster
and adults in
from teaching and
humanitarian
learning supplies,
emergencies
including
recreational
materials
Provision of
Percentage of
Health
primary and
population in
basic secondary
humanitarian crisis
health services
with access to
with a focus on
primary and/or
sexual,
basic secondary
reproductive and health care services
child health
Acutely
Percentage of
Nutrition
malnourished
geographical area
children and
providing basic
pregnant and
nutrition services
lactating women accessed by
are treated by
children six–59
having access to
months of age and
and utilizing
pregnant and
quality services
lactating women
for the
(based on
management of
geographical
acute
coverage surveys)
malnutrition
Access to quality Number of children Health
life-saving health under five and
care services and women of childemergency
bearing age
assistance
vaccinated
including high
impact, critical
life-saving
services for
women and
children in both
rural and urban
areas
Increase access
Number of
Agriculture
to a basic
livelihoods
and
livelihood
opportunities
Livelihoods
support package (cash-for-work
in order to
opportunities,
counter negative income-generating
coping
activities, skills
mechanisms for
transfer) provided
populations in
to IDPs
Mid-year and
end-year targets
girls)
End-year:
200,000 (120,000
boys; 60,000
girls)
Mid-year:
2,750,000 (69%)
End-year:
3,000,000 (75%)
Mid-year: 40%
End-year: 60%
Mid-year:
300,000
End-year:
600,000
Mid-year:
136,500
End-year:
273,000
61
2012 Strategic
Priority
4. Strengthen
the protective
environment
for civilian
populations
through
advocacy and
ensure equal
access to
humanitarian
2012 Somalia Strategic Priorities Monitoring Matrix
Responsible
Cluster Objective
2012 Indicator
Cluster
transit and in
(disaggregated by
camps
sex) either in
transit or in camps
Improve the
Number of
Shelter/NFIs
living conditions
beneficiary
of the displaced
households headed
population in
by women or men
stabilized
receiving
settlements
transitional shelter
through site
planning and the
provision of
transitional
shelter
Ensure that the
Number of people, WASH,
most vulnerable
disaggregated by
Education
displaced and
sex, with
disaster-affected sustainable access
women, girls,
to safe water,
boys and men
sanitation and
have increased,
hygiene
equal and
sustained access
to safe and
appropriate
water, sanitation
services and
hygiene
promotion,
including
complimentary
activities with
the Nutrition,
Health,
Agriculture and
Livelihoods, and
Food Assistance
Clusters
Strengthen the
Number of indirect Protection
resilience of male beneficiaries
and female
(catchment
survivors of
population/number
rights violations
of directly targeted
and vulnerable
populations
communities
(disaggregated by
through the
age and sex, if
provision of
possible)
protection
Mid-year and
end-year targets
Mid-year: 15,000
End-year: 35,000
Mid-year: 1.3
million
End-year: 2.6
million
Mid-year: 4,000
End-year: 13,500
62
2012 Strategic
Priority
services for
vulnerable
women, men,
girls and boys.
2012 Somalia Strategic Priorities Monitoring Matrix
Responsible
Cluster Objective
2012 Indicator
Cluster
related services
Strengthen the
Number of direct
Protection
resilience of male beneficiaries
and female
(survivors of
survivors of
protection
rights violations
violations)
and vulnerable
accessing services
communities
(medical, legal,
through the
psycho-social,
provision of
family tracing,
protectionchild-friendly
related services
spaces, assisted
voluntary return,
etc.), emergency
support, and
community-based
projects
(disaggregated by
age and sex)
Improve the
Number of learners Education
quality of
and teachers
education,
(disaggregated by
integrating
sex) benefiting
essential services from life-saving
and life-saving
messages at
messages into
schools
formal and nonformal education
Mid-year and
end-year targets
Mid-year:
300,000
End-year:
750,000
Mid-year: 88,750
End-year:
161,335
63
ANNEX 2: LEVEL 3 EMERGENCY RESPONSE - MONITORING TIMELINE
This diagram is
outputs and ou
addition it disp
reporting throu
to guide the tim
significant chal
Emergency are
Indicators and
Strategic Respo
highlighted by
illustrate the le
outputs and ou
Input monitor
first report to b
then continue
a crisis, moving
of the HCT. Fin
monitored in d
this time, it is l
resources.
Output monito
Organizations
crisis with repo
Outcome mon
with the first r
continue on a
64
These are some definitions – they came from one section (monitoring) but then we realised
they are not limited to that section - maybe we can add to this if it’s useful
INTER-CLUSTER TOOLS
COMMON REQUEST FORMAT (CRF)
The CRF aims to strengthen and coordinate existing OCHA processes for gathering,
aggregating, and managing situation information and data on the humanitarian response
shared by Clusters on a regular basis. It involves a flexible request template (on and off line), a
system for aggregating data, and guidance around roles/responsibilities. The CRF specifies a
consistent, minimum set of information: indicator data, sectoral analysis and operational
presence, OCHA will request from Clusters or sectors on a regular basis throughout a crisis.
The CRF will be made available on the Humanitarian Response website and will be linked to an
indicator repository. It will allow geographic disaggregation of data, and trend analysis. The
data in the CRF provides the basis for the Humanitarian Dashboard, the Situation Report,
Operational Presence (contacts and operational locations), Survey of Surveys (SoS) and other
OCHA information products and services.
COMMON OPERATIONAL DATASETS (CODS) AND FUNDAMENTAL OPERATIONAL DATASETS (FODS)
The CODs and FODs are country-specific datasets housed in a public registry on the
Humanitarian Response website (http://cod.humanitarianresponse.info).
CODs are basic cross-sectoral datasets required for the preparedness and implementation of
humanitarian response. They provide a means for standardising the identification of the
locations of humanitarian response, and for sharing agreed upon affected population
estimates and pre-crisis population statistics. The administrative boundaries and populated
places will be embedded in the CRF for the geographic disaggregation of indicator data. The
CODs are identified and maintained prior to an emergency as part of data preparedness
measures, and made available by OCHA (or a pre-agreed in-country alternate) within 48 hours
of a crisis. They consist of the following datasets:
:: Humanitarian Profile – the estimated
number of displaced, non-displaced, host
families/resident communities, refugees,
dead, injured and missing in a country
:: Population Statistics
:: Administrative Boundaries
:: Populated Places - settlements, towns,
cities
:: Transportation Networks
:: Hydrology – Rivers and water bodies.
:: Hypsography – Elevation and resolution.
65
FODs are to be determined by Clusters and are used to support multiple Cluster/Sector
operations, complementing the CODs. These datasets are characterized by thematic areas
(such as education and health facilities) and should be prepared prior to an emergency.
Updates on FODs (e.g. in relation to damage) are made available as soon as possible after the
onset of an emergency given availability. For more information about the CODs and FODs see:
http://cod.humanitarianresponse.info/about
INDICATOR REGISTRY (under development)
To be developed, the Indicator Registry will be made available on the Humanitarian Response
website. The registry will house the collection of Output and Outcome indicators from Global
Clusters that Clusters and HCTs can use to monitor the humanitarian response. The indicators
in the registry will be available for the CRF, and for each indicator in the registry a set of
searchable information will be presented, such as Cluster, Indicator Type, suggested data
sources, etc.
HUMANITARIAN EXCHANGE LANGUAGE (HXL) (under development)
OCHA is undertaking an initiative to build a data exchange language to streamline information
flows during crisis response. Key to the success of this approach is that it does not require
changes to existing information management tools and procedures in use in a given
humanitarian organization. Instead, an open export format is defined that allows
organizations to publish their data in a machine-readable format. Because the published data
is machine-readable, products such as Humanitarian Dashboards or other analytical products
can be updated in near real-time. Information managers in the field become consumers of
these data streams, focusing on analytical products needed by decision makers, rather than
spending time cleaning unstructured data coming from numerous actors. COD and FOD data
are examples of data that will use HXL.
66
ANNEX 3: OPERATIONAL PEER REVIEW
Template for
Terms of Reference for an Operational Peer Review of
(insert title of humanitarian operation)
(to be adapted based on the nature and complexity of the crisis)
1. Introduction
Under the rubric of the Transformative Agenda, a number of IASC protocols have been
disseminated to the field aimed at improving the humanitarian response. As part of this
initiative, the IASC Principals agreed to introduce an inter-agency management tool, the
Operational Peer Review (OPR), to advise the Humanitarian Country Team on any required
adjustments or improvements to ensure that the response is on track to meets its
objectives, and that there are no significant gaps (insert reference to IASC Principals
meeting 23 August 2012).
2. Overview of the crisis
(In a few paragraphs, summarize the “who, what, where, when and how” of the emergency
and response.)
3. Objectives of the OPR (to be adapted based on feedback from the HCT/EDG/Principals on
specific issues to be reviewed)
The objective of the OPR is to assess and recommend any necessary corrective actions on:
 leadership arrangements;
 application of the ‘humanitarian programme cycle’;
 use of appropriate coordination mechanisms; and
 suitable modalities to account to affected populations.
The OPR is remedial and forward-looking, aimed at immediate and rapid corrective action
early in the response. It is a light, rapid exercise which produces an internal management
report to the HCT/EDG on any required adjustments.
4. Scope of the OPR
The OPR will examine the collective response being managed by the HC and HCT, including
the supporting role of the OCHA Office. While the OPR will not review the response of
national and local authorities, or local NGOs who are not part of the HCT, it will consider the
HCT’s response against the broader national effort in terms of aligning objectives and filling
gaps. The OPR will also consider whether the HC and HCT members are receiving the
necessary enabling support from their respective headquarters, the EDG and the relevant
IASC bodies.
5. The OPR Team
The operational peer review will be undertaken by a small external group44 of
experienced ‘peers’ of the HC and HCT members. The OPR team will be comprised of
senior operations managers, including from agencies addressing priority sectors (and
44
Suggest 3-6 senior managers, depending of the scale and complexity of the emergency response.
67
who will be mandated to review the full response), and a government representative as
appropriate. In all cases, a team leader will be nominated when planning begins.
L3 operational peer review: the OPR will be undertaken by a small group of Emergency
Directors45.
6. Management of the OPR
For non-L3 emergencies, the OPR is managed by the HC with support from OCHA.
For L3 emergencies, it is managed by the EDG with support from OCHA.
For all OPRs, OCHA will provide support for assembling the team, finalizing the TORs, incountry preparations, mission logistics and assisting the OPR team with producing the final
report.
7. Stakeholder involvement
As the results of the OPR are primarily intended for and delivered to the HC/HCT for action,
the HCT will be involved in the planning of the OPR from the outset and for the duration of
the exercise. Secondary users are the members of the IASC Emergency Directors Group
(EDG), who will support the exercise as necessary. The OPR team will also aim to engage
other actors with a stake in the response, including local and national authorities and cluster
partners, donors and beneficiaries.
8. Methodology
The OPR is a relatively light exercise, aiming to provide timely advice to the HCT/EDG on any
required adjustments. As appropriate to the context, the OPR will include the following
methodological components:
8.1
Involvement of HC/HCT: prior to the review mission, the OPR team leader and other
members will consult with the HC/HCT (by telephone or VCT) to discuss issues,
methodology and dates. The OPR TORs, including the key issues, will then be revised
accordingly.
8.2
HCT self-assessment exercise: prior to the mission, the HCT will undertake a ‘selfassessment’ with support from the OCHA Office (ref: IASC Self-Assessment tool). The
HCT may organize a retreat to jointly review the assessment results and prepare for
the OPR mission. The HCT will provide the self-assessment results to the OPR team in
advance of the mission. The HCT will also nominate HCT members as in-country focal
points for each of the identified key issues.
8.3
Secondary information, including monitoring data: relevant secondary data will be
assembled by the OCHA Office, and made available to the OPR team leader prior to
the arrival of the mission.
8.4
Key informant meetings: the OPR team will meet with the HCT upon arrival and
during the mission, to review key issues and possible corrective actions. The OPR
team will also meet with cluster/sector coordinators, key national authority officials,
donors, as well as representatives of main beneficiary populations.
8.5
Field visits: The OPR team may undertake field visits, as appropriate, to areas where
the response is the most intense or problematic, or reflects best practice.
8.6
Debriefing : Toward the end of the mission, the OPR team will have an internal
meeting with the HCT to discuss the findings and validate the draft conclusions and
45
Or senior operations managers, as delegated by the EDG.
68
recommendations. The aim of the meeting will be to finalize the recommendations,
set target dates and identify leads. The HC/HCT may also separately debrief the incountry donors and national authority officials.
9. Key issues to be addressed (to be adapted based on the HCT self-assessment results
and/or feedback from the HCT/EMG/Principals on specific issues to be reviewed)
9.1. Leadership arrangements46:
9.1.1. Do the HC/HCT members have the necessary authorities, management
tools47 and resources at their disposal, and support from the EDG and the
cluster lead agencies to effectively lead the humanitarian response?
9.1.2. Does the HCT function in a way that provides timely strategic guidance to the
clusters and agencies delivering the response?
9.2. Humanitarian programme cycle48:
9.2.1. Are the main components of the humanitarian programme cycle being
implemented in a timely way to facilitate an effective, quality response against
assessed need?
 Is there an overview of prioritized needs which is regularly updated?
 Is there a ‘live’ strategic plan which steers the collective response?
 Have collective resource requirements been clearly presented, and funds
allocated according to priority needs?
 Is monitoring information being regularly reviewed by the HCT to track results
and adjust the response at the sector/cluster levels?
9.3. Coordination mechanisms49:
9.3.1. Are coordination structures appropriate to the country context and
operational situation?
9.3.2. Do the existing coordination arrangements clarify the division of labour
between organizations and clearly define roles and responsibilities within
different sectors?
9.3.3. Are coordination structures effectively managed and inclusive of relevant
operational actors?
9.3.4. Do the sector/cluster groups effectively contribute to the components of the
humanitarian programme cycle to enable the delivery of results?
9.4. Accounting to affected populations50:
9.4.1. Have sectors/clusters identified practical entry points for improving
accountability to affected populations?
9.4.2. Are sectors/clusters systematically communicating with affected populations
using relevant feedback and communications mechanisms?
10. Timeline for OPR
46
IASC Responding to Level 3 Emergencies: What ‘Empowered Leadership’ Looks like in Practise, November 2012
47
As outlined in IASC Reference Module for the Implementation of the Humanitarian Programme Cycle, date?
48
IASC Reference Module for the Implementation of the Humanitarian Programme Cycle, date?
49
IASC Reference Module for Cluster Coordination at the Country Level, November 2012
50
IASC Accountability to Affected Populations: Operational Framework (date?)
69
10.1.
Six weeks before the arrival of the OPR team: the team leader and other
members are identified. OCHA assigns staff to support the exercise. The team
consults with the HCT (by telephone or VCT) to discuss dates and focus areas of the
OPR. The TORS are then revised.
10.2.
Two weeks before OPR mission: the HCT undertakes a ‘self-assessment’ with
support from OCHA (see IASC Self-Assessment tool). This may be followed by a
retreat to jointly review the assessment results and prepare for the mission. The
HCT will also nominate members as in-country focal points for each of the identified
focus areas.
10.3.
OPR mission: 7-10 days, including a workshop with HCT members toward the
end to validate and finalize the action matrix. The OR mission will separately debrief
in-country donors and national authority counterparts.
10.4.
Two weeks after departure of OR team: final report and action matrix
submitted to HCT (and EDG, IASC Principals as applicable).
Timeline for OPR (for L3 emergency response):
10.5.
Three weeks before the arrival of the OPR team: the team leader and other
members are identified. OCHA assigns staff to support the exercise. OCHA
facilitates a consultation with the HC/HCT to discuss dates and finalize the TORs.
10.6.
OPR mission: 4-5 days, including a meeting with HCT members toward the
end to validate and finalize the action matrix. The OPR mission separately debriefs
the in-country donors.
10.7.
Two weeks after departure of OPR team: final report and action matrix
submitted to HCT and IASC Principals.
11. Deliverable
The OPR team will produce a short report (maximum 10 pages) plus an action matrix
(proposed actions, by whom, by when - see format next page). The final report will be
submitted to the HC/HCT and the Chair of the EDG within two weeks of the end of the
mission.
70
Operational Peer Review
(date)
RECOMMENDATION MATRIX
OPR Recommendation
RECOMMENDATION 1:
RECOMMENDATION 2:
RECOMMENDATION 3:
RECOMMENDATION 4:
RECOMMENDATION 5:
RECOMMENDATION 6:
RECOMMENDATION 7:
RECOMMENDATION 8:
ETC
51
To be completed when updates on progress requested by HC/HCT.
Action By
Target date
Status report as of (date)51
ANNEX 4: EVALUATION
Outline of process for IA Evaluations in emergency response (time period
indicated is from date of declaration of L3 emergency):
Timing
Activity
Month 1
Planning and preparation phase: Planning and team selection.
to 6
Month 7-8 Planning mission by evaluation manager and team leader, in-
country advisory group established
Month
9,10
Month
10,11
End of
Month 12
Middle of
Month 13
End of
Month 13
Month 14
Consultations with HCT and EDG to identify key strategic issues
and develop ToRs, collect documents and begin research. The
HCT will also nominate HCT members as in-country focal points
for each of the identified strategic areas.
Inception phase: detailed workplan including field visits, interview
schedule, debriefings and workshops agreed
IA Evaluation mission: (4-6 weeks), including a debrief with HCT
members toward the end to validate preliminary findings. The IA
Evaluation mission should also separately debrief the in-country
donors. An aide memoire should be prepared for the preliminary
debriefing.
Presentation of results and draft report submitted to HCT and
EDG, IASC as applicable.
Stakeholder comments submitted to OCHA and channeled to the
evaluation team leader within 2 weeks of draft report
Evaluation report finalized and disseminated
Management response by HC/RC
Dissemination events at HQ and with global cluster leads, report
submitted to executive boards