Reference Module for Cluster
Coordination at the Country Level
Draft Revision June 2013
This Module has been revised and two new chapters have been added. New Chapters include 1.Clusters and
Sectors and 2. Role of Clusters in Preparedness. Those chapters which have been significantly updated are
1. Transition and De-activation of Clusters and 2. Inter-cluster Coordination. The document is available for
comments until 12 July, 2013 and all attempts will be made to update the document by 31 July 2013
Table of Contents
1
Cluster and Sector Coordination ........................................................................ 4
2.
Cluster Activation ................................................................................................. 7
3
Cluster Transition and De-activation.................................................................. 9
4
Cluster Functions ............................................................................................... 14
5
Role of Clusters in Preparedness ..................................................................... 16
6
Cluster Management Arrangements ................................................................. 19
7
Minimum Commitments for Participation in Clusters .................................... 22
8
Sub-National Level Coordination ...................................................................... 24
9
Sharing Leadership within the Cluster Approach .......................................... 26
10 Inter-Cluster Coordination ................................................................................. 29
11 Coordination Performance Monitoring ............................................................ 34
Annexes ...................................................................................................................... 36
Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................... 41
Further Reference ...................................................................................................... 42
Following the recommendations of an independent Humanitarian Response
Review in 2005, the cluster approach was proposed as one way of addressing
gaps and strengthening the effectiveness of humanitarian response through
building partnerships. The cluster approach ensures clear leadership, predictability
and accountability in international responses to humanitarian emergencies by
clarifying the division of labour among organizations and better defining their roles
and responsibilities within the different sectors of the response. It aims to make
the international humanitarian community better organised and more accountable
and professional, so that it can be a better partner for the affected people, host
governments, local authorities, local civil society and resourcing partners.
However, the strength of the cluster approach relies on an understanding that this
approach is not the only humanitarian coordination solution. In some cases, the
cluster approach may co-exist with other “non-cluster” coordination solutions –
whether national or international – or an alternative sectoral approach may be
preferable. An indiscriminate application of all clusters in every emergency may
waste resources and reduce opportunities for governments to exercise their
primary responsibility to provide humanitarian assistance to people in need.
Prepared by: IASC Sub-Working Group on the Cluster Approach
Endorsed by: IASC Working Group on 31 August 2012
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
2
Introduction
Using clusters
intelligently
This Cluster Coordination Reference Module1 is about the basics of cluster
coordination in non-refugee situations2. It is compiled in response to a request by the
IASC as a reference guide for practitioners to facilitate the work through which
humanitarian outcomes can be improved. It outlines key concepts and draws attention
to existing guidance, wherever relevant. This reference module will be reviewed
periodically based on feedback from the field. This module covers both large-scale
responses identified within the IASC Transformative Agenda3 as ‘level 3’4 and smaller
scale (‘non-level 3’) responses.
Coordination is a means to an end – the ultimate aim of the humanitarian community
is to serve vulnerable populations effectively5. Accordingly, the scale of international
coordination arrangements should be tailored to the operational context, to support
national efforts6 based on existing capacity in order to direct as many resources as
possible towards delivering humanitarian assistance in a timely, predictable manner.
Developing complicated coordination arrangements should be avoided; not all clusters
need to be activated in every response.
The IASC Transformative Agenda recognizes the need for Humanitarian Coordinators
(HCs), Resident Coordinators (RCs) and Humanitarian Country Teams (HCTs) to be
empowered to make decisions that are right for their own country operations. While
this reference module focuses on the cluster approach as the principal tool available
to the international community for coordinating and accounting for their response, it
falls to the leadership of the humanitarian team at the country level to devise the most
appropriate ‘coordination solutions’ taking into account the local operational situation.
This Module should be used alongside other guidance prepared under the
IASC Transformative Agenda.
2
UNHCR has a mandated responsibility to lead and coordinate international
action to refugee needs, and clusters are not established in this context.
3
The IASC Principals reviewed humanitarian response efforts to several major
disasters in 2010 and 2011 and pinpointed a number of shortcomings. Building on the
2005 Humanitarian Reform, they agreed to a set of actions in December 2011,
referred to as the IASC Transformative Agenda which focused on improving
leadership, coordination and accountability of international humanitarian response,
particularly in large-scale emergencies.
4
For more information on level 3 responses, please see the Level 3 Emergency
Response Timeline (2012) or the IASC Transformative Agenda: How the System
Responds to L3 Emergencies (2012) available on the IASC website.
5
Accountability to affected populations is the ultimate objective of the IASC
Transformative Agenda. In December 2011, the IASC Principals agreed to integrate
commitments to accountability to affected populations into their individual agencies'
policies and operational guidelines. An Operational Framework on Accountability to
Affected Populations was also endorsed to determine participation, information
provision, feedback and complaints handling with affected populations at the country
level.
6
For further advice on this key issue, please refer to the IASC Operational
Guidance for Cluster Lead Agencies on Working with National Authorities (July 2011).
1
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
3
1
Defining
Cluster and
Sectoral Crisis
Coordination
Cluster and Sector Coordination
This section outlines some of the main differences between a formally activated
cluster system reporting to the HC and HCT and other forms of humanitarian
coordination. Sectoral crisis coordination mechanisms for the purposes of this
description are led by government and report to the designated government bodies
Formally activated clusters are a temporary coordination solution only used when the
capacity of existing coordination and response mechanisms are overwhelmed or
constrained7 in their ability to appropriately respond to needs according to
humanitarian principles.
In some countries, coordination mechanisms are referred to as clusters although there
is no formally activated cluster approach. In essence the name of the coordination
mechanism does not matter, but a formally activated cluster 8 has specific
characteristics and accountabilities.
Comparing the
Lifecycle of
Cluster and
Sector
Coordination
Mechanism
It is useful to look at how the two coordination mechanisms respond in emergencies to
illustrate some differences.
Coordination
Mechanism
Government Led
-
Government humanitarian
leadership; can be supported
by additional international
coordination capacity
Government leadership
continues; may move from
humanitarian to pre-existing
or other recovery and
development coordination
structures; any additional
international capacity
withdraws or transforms to
recovery support
-
Activate Clusters as needed;
where possible, coleadership with government
bodies and NGO Partners is
strongly encouraged
Activated Clusters continue;
potentially activate additional
clusters depending on
review of coordination and
response needs; augment
capacity in activated clusters
as needed
-
Transition and Deactivation
-
Transition and Deactivation or
transition to pre-crisis cluster
structure
Limited or
constrained
capacity
Pre-existing
Formally
Activated
Clusters
Recovery
-
With capacity
Government Led
-
Crisis
-
A more extended table is available in Annex 1 which examines levels of national
capacity and constraints, activation and accountability in crisis situations and
transition/deactivation. Would be good to get feedback if Annex 1 necessary with new
table above
7
Overwhelmed or constrained throughout the text refers to the size of need, number
of actors, need for a multi-sectoral approach which is not reflected in current
structures or constrained in being able to respond according to humanitarian principles
eg actor in the conflict
8 as described in the section on Cluster Activation
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
4
It is important to note where leadership and accountability for coordination and
response mechanisms remain with government this does not restrict augmenting this
with additional coordination capacity. Whilst the response to limited or constrained
government capacity in a crisis is to activate the appropriate clusters, there may be
challenges in doing so formally, particularly where capacity is constrained and
different ways of augmenting coordination and response capacity may need to be
found but still underpinned by the principles of the cluster approach.
Comparison of
Characteristics
and
Accountabilities
of Clusters and
Sectors
In order to illustrate some of the key differences between clusters and sectors the
table below examines the main characteristics and accountabilities.
Attribute
Activated Cluster
Sectoral Crisis
Coordination
Leadership
Designated Cluster Lead Agencies lead
and manage the Cluster. Where
possible, co-leadership with relevant
government bodies and NGOs is
strongly encouraged and where
possible,establish strong links between
humanitarian and development
coordination bodies to ensure that
recovery approaches are aligned to
national development objectives
National government or other
designated national agency
leads the sector.
International coordination
and response capacity can
provide further support
Accountability
Cluster Lead Agencies are accountable
to the HC and the ERC for the
performance of the relevant cluster in
meeting needs as expressed in the
Strategic Response Plan in accordance
with national and humanitarian
law/principles
Government is accountable
for the response in the sector
in accordance with national
and humanitarian
law/principles.
Provider of
Last Resort
Cluster lead agencies ensure the
provision of services to fulfil critical gaps
identified by the cluster and reflected in
the Strategic Response Plan9
Government is responsible
Lifespan
Temporary
Long term structures as
defined by government
Mainstreaming
of Protection
and Early
Recovery
Strategies,
cross-cutting
issues
CLA responsible to ensure Protection
and Early Recovery strategies and
cross-cutting issues are mainstreamed
into programming
International partners can
advise government on
mainstreaming and
international actors are
responsible to adhere to
internationally agreed
principles, guidance and
standards
Human
Resources for
Coordination
Cluster Lead Agency will ensure
dedicated Cluster staff in line with need
including coordinator and information
management functions
Government bodies
responsible to ensure
sufficient coordination and
response capacity. Often
this results in personnel with
multiple responsibilities
Technical
Support
Technical support and guidance can be
provided from the relevant Global
Cluster
Technical support and
guidance can be provided
from the relevant Global
9Where
necessary, and depending on access, security and availability of funding.
From IASC Operational Guidance on the Concept of Provider of Last Resort
http://www.humanitarianinfo.org/iasc/pageloader.aspx?page=content-productsproducts&sel=18 and updated as per IASC TA Compendium of Agreed Actions
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
5
Attribute
Engagement of
the Global
Clusters for
Preparedness
Activated Cluster
Sectoral Crisis
Coordination
Cluster when capacity and
resources allow
The engagement of Global Clusters is not restricted to formally
activated clusters, but also related to the existence of humanitarian
coordination and response structures and the level of risk as identified
by the IASC Emergency Directors Group and informed by the IASC
Early Warning Early Action Report
At the country level sectoral groups have always existed. Formally activating clusters
where there is limited or constrained capacity aims to ensure that within the
international humanitarian response, there is a clear system of leadership and
accountability for all the key sectors or areas of humanitarian response. The cluster
activation is therefore intended to strengthen rather than to replace sectoral
coordination under the overall leadership of the Humanitarian Coordinator, with a view
to improving humanitarian response in emergency situations.
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
6
2. Cluster Activation
Cluster activation means the establishment of clusters as part of an international
emergency response, based on the HCT’s analysis of humanitarian need and
coordination capacity on the ground, in consultation with national partners.
The IASC Principals agreed that the activation of clusters must be more strategic, less
automatic and time limited. The HC should only recommend the activation of
clusters when there is an identified need which is not being addressed. The ideal
approach is to support national mechanisms for sectoral coordination. To the extent
possible, any new clusters which are established should complement existing
coordination mechanisms.
In a level 3 response, clusters may be activated - if they do not already exist – with the
support of personnel deployed through the Inter-Agency Rapid Response Mechanism
(IARRM). The IARRM ensures there are sufficient experienced people on the ground
working within agreed structures to either augment or fill the core coordination
functions required for an effective response. All clusters should be prepared to deploy
in a level 3 response, but the decision of which clusters to activate will be taken within
72 hours from the level 3 declaration by the HCT (if existent), supported by the IASC
emergency/operational directors at headquarters, and on the basis of analysis of
coordination mechanisms in place. Cluster activation will be regularly reviewed
thereafter (as per the table in Section 2 on cluster transition and de-activation).
Criteria for
cluster activation
Activation
procedures
The criteria for cluster activation are as follows:
a. Trigger event in the form of a new large-scale emergency or sharp deterioration
and/or significant change in an existing humanitarian situation leading to
coordination gaps.
b. Evaluation of existing national response and coordination capacity and/or national
response shows inability to appropriately meet needs.
c. Humanitarian needs justify a multi-sectoral approach that the existing coordination
and response mechanisms can no longer adequately address.
d. The size of the operational presence (the number of actors and complexity of
response) requires a sector-specific coordination mechanism, if this does not
already exist.
The procedure for activating one or more clusters is as follows:
1. The RC/HC agrees with the HCT which clusters should be activated, based on the
contingency plan and with a clear rationale for each case that takes into account
national capacity and needs.
2. Global Clusters are alerted in advance of the proposed HCT meeting to discuss
activation so that they ensure appropriate and informed representation at country
level in this discussion.
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
7
3. The RC/HC selects Cluster Lead Agencies in consultation with the HCT based on
the agencies’ coordination and response capacity, as well as the location and
level of its operational presence and/or ability to increase this. The selection of
Cluster Lead Agency ideally mirrors the global-level arrangements but this is not
always possible, and in some cases other organizations may be better placed to
take the lead.10 Shared leadership, including using non-governmental
organizations, should be considered.
4. Upon agreement within the HCT, the RC/HC sends a letter to the Emergency
Relief Coordinator (ERC) outlining the recommended cluster arrangements,
suggested Cluster Lead Agencies, and the rationale for the clusters selected for
activation. If other coordination solutions outside of the cluster have been agreed,
these should also be outlined in the letter.
5. The ERC transmits the proposal to IASC Principals and Global Cluster Lead and
Co-Lead Agencies for approval within 24 hours and informs the RC/HC
accordingly.
6. Once approved, the RC/HC informs relevant partners of the agreed clusters and
lead agencies.
Addressing
issues which cut
across clusters
Decisions on the activation of clusters to fill operational gaps should take into account
the protection needs of the affected population including the “areas of responsibility” of
the Protection Cluster (i.e. child protection; gender-based violence; mine action; and
housing, land and property). Cluster activation should also take into account needs
within other cross-cutting areas such as age; environment; gender; HIV/AIDs; mental
health and social well-being; and persons with disabilities. These issues should be
integrated into the work of the clusters, as should early recovery and disaster risk
reduction.
In the case of ‘service clusters’ (Logistics and Emergency
Telecommunications) the selection of the Cluster Lead Agency normally mirrors global
arrangements because they require a technical expertise to be effective and are less
able to hand over to the other agencies without the necessary institutional
infrastructure.
UNHCR is the Cluster Lead Agency of the Global Protection Cluster.
However,
at
the
country
level
in
disaster
situations or in complex emergencies without significant displacement, the three core
protection mandated agencies (UNHCR, UNICEF and OHCHR) will consult closely
and, under the overall leadership of the HC/RC, agree which agency, among the
three, will assume the role of Cluster Lead Agency for protection.
10
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
8
3
What does
Transition and
De-activation of
Clusters Mean?
Cluster Transition and De-activation
Cluster de-activation is the closure of a formerly-activated cluster supported by the
transfer of leadership and accountabilities for the core functions of clusters (as per the
Cluster Reference Module) from internationally led and accountable clusters, to
national led and accountable sectors 11. This may include resuming coordination and
pre-crisis response structures, or establishing new structures where there were
previously gaps
Cluster transition refers to the process (and potentially activities) by which the
transfer of leadership and accountabilities is planned and implemented from
internationally led cluster lead agencies to national led sectors over a period of time
which then results in de-activation of a cluster. This may necessitate the need for a
Transition Plan, which will map out phases of transition, specific benchmarks to be
met for each phase and activities to be implemented in order to meet the identified
transition and de-activation benchmarks
Why do we need to De-Activate?
As per guidance on ‘activation’, clusters are meant to be timebound and less
automatic ie be active only when there are specific gaps in humanitarian response.
Ensuring that there is a requirement to review the need for clusters over time,
promotes the goal of national led humanitarian action and coordination mechanisms
that follow humanitarian principles is kept in mind.
Review of clusters on a periodic basis ensures at worst that clusters remain light and
adapt to remain efficient, effective and fit for purpose, and at best, plan early for
transfer of leadership and accountabilities to national or other structures through
transition processes, and where necessary, capacity building activities to support the
ability of national or other structures to carry out cluster functions.
What Criteria need to be met for De-activation?
In order that activation is considered, there are two main criteria (1) Sharp
deterioration or significant change in humanitarian situation leading to response and
coordination gaps and (2) Evaluation of existing national response or coordination
capacity is unable or constrained to meet needs according to humanitarian principles 12
(size of need, number of actors, multi-sectoral approach, constraints to respond using
humanitarian principles). Therefore at least one of the two following situations need to
be met in order to consider de-activation:1. There is a decrease in humanitarian need
2. There is increased capacity of national structures to meet humanitarian needs
according to humanitarian principles
What will Inform our Decision Making whether to Transition or De-activate a
Cluster?
11
De-activation can also lead to transfer of leadership and accountabilities to other
internationally supported mechanisms
12For
additional
information
https://ochanet.unocha.org/p/Documents/OOM_HumPrinciple_English.pdf,
http://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/publications/icrc-002-1067.pdf
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
9
Five principles are proposed to guide and inform decision making and processes on
transition and de-activation planning:1. Process is led by HC and HCT - Clusters, cluster partners and national
counterparts should also be involved in the assessment and recommendations
made in the review of clusters; guided by the HC and HCT, they will play a key
role in the development of any transition and de-activation plans across the
sectors.
2. Focus on ability to lead and be accountable for Cluster Functions (as per
this CRM) according to humanitarian principles – assessment of ability to
meet accountabilities outlined in the cluster functions and according to
outstanding humanitarian needs. The cluster functions can also be used as a
basis to formulate any capacity building measures. The HC, HCT and CLAs
remain with a responsibility to ensure that preparedness actions are carried out,
as set out in the Preparedness section.
3. Based on Assessment of National Capacity13 – there are a number of different
components of national crisis response capacity which need to be assessed:(a) Existence, structure and resources of appropriate response and coordination
mechanisms (according to context) - some clusters will have a more natural
counterpart to ‘hand over to’ than others, making transition easier and
potentially more rapid.
(b) Extent of residual or on-going humanitarian response needs and ability to
respond according to humanitarian principles
4. Informed by the Context - de-activation in sudden onset crises may be a more
rapid process than de-activation in complex or protracted emergencies. Speed of
de-activation can also be influenced by a government declaration of the end of an
emergency phase and a shift of focus to recovery and therefore more
development focused coordination structures. Clusters do not all have to be
deactivated at the same time; some may need to remain longer, related to ongoing need, or differences in national sector structures. The probability of
recurring or new disasters (combined with national capacity) may also inform
transition length and de-activation, or if the costs of closure and subsequent early
re-establishment may outweigh potential benefits - including additional capacity
building and preparedness actions which may have taken place; all should all be
taken into consideration by the HC and HCT in Cluster Reviews.
5. Guided by Early Recovery objectives – (to be completed CGWER)
What happens to Appeals processes during Transition and after De-activation?
De-activation of a cluster does not mean that there are no further humanitarian
financing needs. As part of humanitarian financing, transitional activities, including
capacity building, can be included where this is required to meet its core cluster
functions. It is essential that humanitarian financing is available to build the necessary
capacity to enable the transition process and ensure that residual or on-going
humanitarian needs and preparedness functions can be handled by national or other
crisis authorities.
13
For more detailed analysis see IASC Operational Guidance for Cluster Lead
Agencies on working with National Authorities
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
10
It is also not necessary to be a formally activated cluster to participate in any
humanitarian appeals process. Neither is it a requirement for participation in any intersectoral/cluster coordination fora, nor is absence of funding a reason to de-activate a
cluster.
How do Accountabilities change during Transition and De-activation
Under the transition process the line of accountability for the core cluster functions and
responsibilities (such as provider of last resort) must be clearly articulated. Whilst the
cluster is formally activated these accountabilities will rest with the Cluster Lead
Agency. The transition plan should outline how these accountabilities shift to the
government (or other crisis coordination mechanisms) when the cluster is formally deactivated. In many cases agencies who have played the CLA will assume
responsibility to continue to support the government-led humanitarian coordination in
their sector14. Responsibilities continue for clusters and sectors (regardless which) for
ensuring preparedness actions as per the Preparedness Section.
When does De-activation Planning take place?
Good practice suggests that the HC/HCT along with clusters and national authorities,
should from the onset of a response develop transition and de-activation strategies.
Some immediate (and perhaps automatic) steps include (1) where appropriate,
involving national counterparts and development partners from the outset and (2)
establish strong links between humanitarian and development coordination bodies to
ensure that recovery approaches are aligned to national development objectives (3)
where possible, co-leadership of clusters with national authorities should be
considered during the activation process or as early as possible
It is recommended that within the first 3 months of the onset of an emergency, there
should at least be an initial review of clusters to ensure that the most appropriate
coordination solutions are used and clusters remain fit for purpose in an evolving
humanitarian situation and that transition and deactivation planning have been put in
place. Particularly in protracted crises, TA Protocols demand there should be at least
an annual review of clusters15, requiring HCs and HCTs to report back to the ERC of
their on-going status16.
How is a Cluster Review Carried Out? How long does it take?
Cluster reviews should be (1) led by the HC/HCT and (2) involve clusters, cluster
partners and national counterparts and (3) be guided and informed by the five
principles outlined above. There is therefore flexibility for the HC and HCT to decide
how best to carry out the cluster review.
14
This may be different from cluster to cluster. The process will be clearest with
clusters that have obvious government counterparts such as education and health.
Other clusters may have to work with a number of different government-led or civilsociety mechanisms. Service clusters may not have any natural counterparts, but
may work with government or other coordination structures to handover service
provision if appropriate or carry out preparedness activities if services are no longer
needed
15 IASC Principals Transformative Agenda Compendium of Agreed Actions, No 33,
December 2011
16 Further information can be found in the Coordination Performance Monitoring
Section
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
11
The type and duration of the emergency, as well as an initial assessment of national
capacity and ability to respond according to humanitarian principles are indicators as
to how comprehensive a review maybe needed and therefore how long this will take.
As part of Cluster Transition and De-activation Plans, clusters maps out (1) the
continued humanitarian response and coordination needs (based on the six cluster
functions) (2) identifies government or other appropriate coordination and response
mechanisms which would take over leadership and accountability for the cluster
functions (3) the capacity of the identified mechanisms to take these on (4) what
capacity building measures and
activities may need to be put in place during transition to enable de-activation and
over what period of time (5) Accountability for cluster functions between Cluster Lead
Agencies (CLAs) and national counterparts during any phased transition and deactivation plan should be clearly laid out, with benchmarks to indicate transition
between phases before reaching de-activation (6) proposed timing for transition
measures and if appropriate, eventual de-activation (7) proposed timing for any further
cluster reviews (where streamlining of clusters17 or transition activities are
recommended) and (8) how preparedness measures (as per the Preparedness
section) will be ensured after de-activation and any continued role of the Cluster Lead
Agency. The following case study outlines processes and timings of transition and deactivation in a protracted crisis
Case Study – Sri Lanka
In Sri Lanka, 3 years after the cessation of the protracted armed, an independent
review of clusters was carried out in August 2012 by the HCT, as well as consultations
with government, HCT members, NGOs, the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
and other UN agencies. As a result of the overall review recommendations, cluster
lead agencies submitted cluster transition plans to the HCT, formally announcing
transition and de-activation plans for transfer of cluster leadership and accountabilities
to government line ministries. By the end of 2012, seven clusters had transferred
leadership to government counterparts. Residual humanitarian coordination needs
and transition to development activities was taken up under the UN Development
Assistance Framework (UNDAF). Protection remained as one of the main elements
requiring continued support (through Pillar Group 3 of the UNDAF), and it was agreed
that transition of leadership should be done in a phased and nuanced manner given
the sensitivity of issues and need for adherence to international norms and standards.
A Durable Solutions Policy Group was also formed to continue some work of the
Protection Cluster, including addressing needs of IDPs.
Is there an Agreed Process for De-activation?
Once a review of clusters has taken place and agreements made on transition
plans and any de-activation:1. Under the leadership of the HC, the HCT notes which clusters have
successfully transferred effective coordination responsibilities to national
counterparts (government or other), and recommends de-activation. The
rationale for those clusters which may still be required is presented during
the review process, along with a plan for their transition.
17
Streamlining of clusters may also involve merging of clusters
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
12
2. The HC provides a summary of the review to the ERC, outlining which
clusters are to transition and subsequently be de-activated, along with an
indication of other sectoral coordination mechanisms in place, agency
focal points engaging with these sectoral coordination mechanisms, and
the implications of these decisions on contingency planning18.
3. The ERC shares this note with the IASC Principals and Global Cluster
Lead and Co-Lead Agencies for their approval.
4. Once approved, the HC informs relevant partners of agreed arrangements.
18
Examples of such summary notes
http://clusters.humanitarianresponse.info
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
to
the
ERC
can
be
found
at
13
4
Cluster Functions
The IASC Principals “agreed there is a need to restate and return to the original
purpose of clusters, refocusing them on strategic and operational gaps analysis,
planning, assessment and results.19” The aim of the cluster approach, as agreed in
200620, is to strengthen system-wide preparedness and technical capacity to respond
to humanitarian emergencies, ensuring clearly designated leadership and
accountability in the main areas of humanitarian response. At the country level, the
aim is to strengthen response through predictability, accountability, and partnership by
ensuring better prioritization and defining roles and responsibilities of humanitarian
organizations. Information management and analysis are key in this regard.
Delivering as a
cluster
Consequently, the core functions of a cluster at the country-level are:
1. Supporting service delivery
o
o
Provide a platform to ensure that service delivery is driven by the agreed
strategic priorities
Develop mechanisms to eliminate duplication of service delivery
2. Informing strategic decision-making of the HC/HCT for the humanitarian
response
o
o
o
Needs assessment and response gap analysis (across sectors and within the
sector)
Analysis to identify and address (emerging) gaps, obstacles, duplication, and
cross-cutting issues including age, gender, environment, and HIV/AIDs
Prioritization, grounded in response analysis
3. Planning and strategy development
o
o
o
Develop sectoral plans, objectives and indicators that directly support
realization of the HC/HCT strategic priorities
Apply and adhere to existing standards and guidelines
Clarify funding requirements, prioritization, and cluster contributions for the
HC’s overall humanitarian funding considerations (e.g. Flash Appeal, CAP,
CERF, Emergency Response Fund/Common Humanitarian Fund)
4. Advocacy
o
o
Identify advocacy concerns to contribute to HC and HCT messaging and
action
Undertake advocacy activities on behalf of cluster participants and the
affected population
5. Monitoring and reporting the implementation of the cluster strategy and results;
recommending corrective action where necessary
6. Contingency planning/preparedness/capacity building in situations where
there is a high risk of recurring or significant new disaster and where sufficient
capacity exists within the cluster.
Recommendation 26, IASC Transformative Agenda: Chapeau and
Compendium of Actions (January 2012).
20
IASC Guidance Note on Using the Cluster Approach to Strengthen
Humanitarian Response (November 2006).
19
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
14
Early recovery
Finally, each cluster is also responsible for integrating early recovery from the outset
of the humanitarian response. The RC/HC has the lead responsibility for ensuring
early recovery issues are adequately addressed at country level, with the support of
an Early Recovery Advisor. The Advisor works on inter-cluster early recovery issues
for a more effective mainstreaming of early recovery across the clusters and to ensure
that multidisciplinary issues, which cannot be tackled by individual clusters alone, are
addressed through an Early Recovery Network21. Exceptionally, where early recovery
areas are not covered by existing clusters or alternative mechanisms, the RC/HC may
recommend a cluster be established in addition to the network to address those
specific areas.
Aid workers conducting cholera awareness campaigns to at-risk communities in Niger. In 2012, nearly 4,000
cholera cases and over 80 deaths have been reported, mostly along the Niger River which recently flooded
after heavy rains in the west of the country. Credit: UNICEF/S Mebrahtu
An Early Recovery Network addresses the multi-dimensional nature of early
recovery by bringing together early recovery focal points from each of the
clusters/sectors to work together on the integration, mainstreaming and coordination
of early recovery issues and activities across all clusters/sectors.
21
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
15
5
Accountability for
Preparedness
Role of Clusters in Preparedness
Accountability for preparedness lies with the national authorities, and where applicable
with the Resident Coordinator. However, within the Humanitarian Program Cycle
(HPC), “Preparedness” relates to building capacities of the humanitarian system to
better support national capacities before, during and after a crisis for response and
recovery.
While preparedness is usually associated with measures taken in advance or in
anticipation of an emergency, it can also be seen as any early action and capacity
development which aims improve the overall effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness
of response and recovery.
Preparedness –
Establishing
Coordination
Structures
Establishing which structures will be used to coordinate response and recovery is a
key component of preparedness. As far as possible, preparedness actions should be
undertaken using the same structures and mechanisms that are likely to put in place
for the response. This is where consideration for the responsibilities of Clusters is
brought into focus. In addition to supporting agency preparedness and readiness to
coordinate, clusters each have an important role in supporting the establishment and
function of national level coordination mechanisms, directed at improving
preparedness, in their corresponding sectors of activity. The exact role will be
dependent on what type of coordination mechanisms are in place, which will vary
according to local capacity and context.
In practical terms, this means coordination before the onset of a crisis, including
establishing good working relationships; reinforcing coordination structures; and
clarifying roles and responsibilities between the humanitarian community and the
relevant national authorities, as well as within the humanitarian community. It also
means coordination during the crisis, in being prepared for changes in a dynamic
crisis situation, and after a crisis, in identifying lessons learned from gaps in
preparedness, which need to be addressed in preparation for future crises.
Cluster Preparedness Related to Coordination Mechanisms
Building on the IASC Emergency Response Preparedness (ERP 22) approach, the
points below outline where cluster accountabilities for preparedness lie at both the
global and country levels. These points are equally applicable to clusters or other
sector-based coordination mechanism.
.
Countries with
Humanitarian
Coordinators
In countries where humanitarian coordination structures are already
established, including a Humanitarian Coordinator (HC), it is the responsibility of both
the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) and the country level clusters/sectors to
ensure appropriate planning in each of the five components of the ERP approach and
to optimize support to and engagement with national structures. Clusters/ sectors at
country level should actively engage in preparedness actions, including planning,
information management and capacity mapping or training of partners. Global
Clusters should monitor these actions at country level and provide guidance and
support, as necessary.
22
need a link to where people can go to for more on this and we’ll footnote it
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
16
Countries with
Resident
Coordinators –
High Risk
In countries identified as at high risk by the IASC Emergency Directors Group, in
particular through the bi-annual IASC Early Warning Early Action Report (EWEA), the
Resident Coordinator, through the appropriate in-country mechanisms and in
cooperation with the national authorities, should implement contingency response
planning and associated actions contained in the ERP approach in line with the
Resident Coordinator terms of reference – and in particular to identify which clusters
will be activated within different scenarios.
In the absence of Clusters, sectors of activity will still benefit from improved
coordination. Global Clusters should provide support to sectors and potential cluster
lead agencies to ensure that Minimum Preparedness Actions (MPAs) and Emergency
Readiness Actions (ERAs) are in place. Global Clusters should promote the
preparedness process at country level and provide proactive guidance and support to
the Resident Coordinator.
Countries with
Resident
Coordinators –
Low Risk
Although a country may have no imminent threat, it is recommended that minimum
sector/ cluster preparedness measures are in place to ensure readiness to respond to
unforeseen events, such as rapid on-set natural disasters. Sectors at country level
should ensure that preparedness measures are taken based on the Minimum
Preparedness Actions (MPA) or specific contingency response plans developed for
these countries. Preparedness activities at country level should include the relevant
national authorities and be communicated to the Resident Coordinator, to ensure
overall coordination and to facilitate a coherent overview of these measures. In
particular, arrangements should be in place for how the humanitarian community will
coordinate with national and various sub-national entities in the event of a natural
disaster affecting one or more areas of the country.
Cluster Preparedness Related to the Emergency Response
Preparedness (ERP) Approach
Specific functions of clusters at either country or global level, as appropriate, can be
determined under each phase of the Emergency Response Preparedness approach,
with particular focus to be given to the MPAs.
Risk Assessment
and Early
Warning
Minimum
Preparedness
Actions (MPAs)
A Risk Profile is developed by the HCT/UNCT or other in-country coordination
mechanism at that level, to avoid fragmentation and ensure coherence within and
across functions. The Risk Profile should be used to identify which clusters might be
necessary and what risks could affect cluster-specific activities. An example of a risk
profile can be found at 23 XXX.
Clusters should agree and prioritize MPAs actions necessary to ensure
appropriate arrangements within the following areas:

coordination

assessment

planning

monitoring

information management

capacity building
and training

resource
mobilization

public information
23
Insert link to example of a risk profile
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
17
MPAs should be specifically tailored to the requirements, structure and mandates of
each cluster. In reviewing the MPAs, gaps may become apparent for priority attention.
Preparedness actions include pre-positioning of stocks, establishment of emergency
response rosters, regular training of enumerators for rapid needs assessments and/or
readiness for early deployment of a United Nations’ Disaster Assessment and
Coordination (UNDAC) Team. An example of a cluster MPA, developed by the IASC
Sub-Working Group can be found at 24XXX
Contingency
Response
Planning
Standard
Operation
Procedures
(SOPs)
Clusters should engage in the Contingency Response Planning process of the HCT
or UNCT and provide technical support as needed. This includes contributing to
scenario planning, and overall objectives, and determining how these objectives can
be met by each cluster’s response activities, along with budget allocations which can
serve as useful inputs for Flash Appeals. Clusters should also discuss the capacities
of members to undertake specific activities within certain timeframes and geographic
coverage. It should include consideration of what can feasibly be achieved with stock
levels and standby human resources. An example of a Contingency Plan can be found
at25.
The Emergency Response Preparedness approach includes a requirement of the
Resident/Humanitarian Coordinator and the Clusters to develop SOPs for the first
seven days after a crisis strikes. SOPs outline clear roles and responsibilities and
focus on continuity of operations, rapid scale-up of humanitarian assistance and
effective coordination within and among clusters. They should include agreed rapid
needs assessment tools which can be implemented, where appropriate, jointly by
international humanitarian and national actors, including arrangements for the collation
and reporting of this data to inform response strategies and actions. Inter-agency
SOPs are included in global level IASC ERP guidance. An example of a rapid needs
assessment tool is available at26 XXX.
24
Insert link to example of cluster MPA
Insert link to example of contingency plan
26 Insert link to example of a rapid needs assessment tool
25
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
18
6
Cluster Management Arrangements
This section covers the organization and coordination of the various cluster
components – the Cluster Lead Agency, the Cluster Coordinator and all cluster
participants at the national and sub-national level – in order to deliver on the core
functions of the cluster. It is important to balance the need for consultation on
operational concepts with the need to provide leadership of a cluster in an emergency
to ensure key decisions are taken by a manageable number of partners.
Effective and
efficient cluster
management is a
shared
responsibility
A well-run cluster is a formal deliverable of the Cluster Lead Agency and forms a part
of the agency’s work. However in practice, it has been recognized by the IASC and
donors that the efficient management or functioning of clusters is the joint
responsibility of the Cluster Lead Agency, the Cluster Coordinator, resourcing
partners and all cluster participants at the national and sub-national level.
The criteria for participation in the more strategic, management work of the cluster are:




Characteristics of
a well-managed
cluster
Operational relevance in the emergency
Technical expertise
Demonstrated capacity to contribute strategically and to provide practical support
Commitment to contribute consistently
Efficient cluster management should encompass the following characteristics:






Monitored performance of the six core cluster functions with regard to developing
programmes – which clearly contribute to the implementation of evidence-based
strategic objectives – based on the identification of good field practices and
agreed international benchmarks and standards;
Establishment and maintenance of an appropriate humanitarian coordination
mechanism;
o Strengthening pre-existing sectoral coordination through increased
predictability and accountability;
o Building complementarity of partner actions: avoiding duplication and gaps;
o Ensuring adequate resources are mobilized and are equitably allocated for the
effective functioning of the cluster and its response;
o Effective and comprehensive integration of relevant cross-cutting issues,
including age, gender, environment and HIV/AIDs;
Maintaining flexibility within the cluster to respond to changes in the operating
environment, evolving requirements, capacities and participation;
The effective use and transfer of information to, from and between cluster
members and other stakeholders;
Interaction with other clusters (including through inter-cluster coordination fora),
humanitarian actors, government counterparts, and relevant authorities for
operational planning, engagement and active contribution of operational partners;
Accountability to the affected population through effective and inclusive
consultative and feedback mechanisms.
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
19
No ‘one-size fits
all’ approach to
cluster
management
Strategic
Advisory Group
There is no ‘one-size fits all’ approach to cluster management. Due to the varying size,
scope and complexity of disasters and cluster response, the choice of a management
approach must be adapted to need and may change as the response evolves.
However, experience has provided some models for efficient cluster management
which have been approved by the IASC. In 2011, the IASC Principals agreed that
“participation in clusters should be better defined and managed to enhance the ability
of clusters to provide strategic direction, including through the creation of small
‘Steering Committees’ (SC) or ‘Strategic Advisory Groups’ (SAG) of key operational
partners, complemented by separate forums or mechanisms to ensure broader
information exchange for all cluster/sector partners” 27. The number of SCs or SAGs
formed will be context dependent and based on the need to ensure the required
leadership.
Chaired by the Cluster Coordinator, the SAG is responsible for developing and
adjusting the strategic framework, priorities and work plan for the cluster. SAG
membership must be representative of the overall cluster partnership. Apart from
operational UN, International Organization for Migration (IOM) and NGO
representatives, SAG members have included government representatives/focal
points; donors; national NGO forum representatives; representatives of the
International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and National
Societies; OCHA; cluster representatives; and where appropriate military liaison
officers (see table below). However, to be efficient and effective and avoid the
challenges arising from a large number of cluster partners, SAG membership should
also be limited (up to a maximum of 15 partners in larger emergencies). To avoid
feelings of exclusion among other cluster partners, the SAG (through the Cluster
Coordinator) must interact with the broader cluster membership to ensure a regular
flow of information.
Table 2. SAG Member/Invitee Options
Possible SAG Members
National Level







Cluster Coordinator (supported by
an information management
specialist and cluster administrative
support officer)
National NGO technical experts
International NGO technical experts
IFRC representatives (in natural
disasters not affected by conflict)
UN technical experts
OCHA
Government representatives
Sub-National Level
The need for sub-national management
should be determined by the national
level SAG on a context specific basis
(please also see section on sub-national
coordination).
Membership does not need to directly
mirror national level and often has
greater representation of local
authorities and NGO partners in both
leadership and/or technical roles.
Potential Invitees to the SAG (as appropriate)





Sub-national cluster focal points
Donor representatives
Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement representatives
Regional focal points, in instances where agencies may have technical
expertise based at a regional level
Military representatives and other authorities, as appropriate
Final Summary and Action Points, IASC Principals meeting, 13 December
2011, recommendation 29.
27
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
20
Technical
Working Groups
Technical Working Groups (known as ‘TWiGs’ or ‘TWGs’) are task-oriented and timelimited. They are created as needed, for example to agree minimum standards and
formulate appropriate technical practices, or to find solutions to local issues and
advise the SAG accordingly. TWiGs are coordinated by a focal point or technical
advisor nominated by the SAG and consist of the necessary technical experts, usually
not more than 15 people.
To facilitate communication with specific groups within the broader membership or
outside of the cluster - such as experts in particular technical areas (including crosscutting issues), military actors, government counterparts, and UN senior leadership the SAG might also designate cluster partners to serve as a liaisons with these
groups.
Yemeni girls stay at home to work when food is limited. With one of the greatest gender disparities in the
world, school feeding programmes strive to encourage rural families to enrol their young daughters in basic
and secondary education. Credit: Yemen HCT
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
21
7
Minimum Commitments for Participation
in Clusters
Without constant commitment by cluster participants, predictable coordination will not
be achieved.
The case for
commitment by
cluster
participants
These minimum commitments for participation in country-level clusters provide a
common basis of understanding of what organizations – whether local, national, or
international – commit to bring to clusters at the country level through their
participation. The commitments are not intended as a means to exclude organizations
from participating in clusters nor should they prevent actively seeking the participation
of national authorities within cluster coordination, as appropriate.
Balanced with these commitments from cluster partners, Cluster Lead Agencies have
a reciprocal responsibility28 to ensure that they lead clusters in a manner that goes
beyond simply sharing information and that they provide effective coordination with
their sub-national counterparts. Cluster Lead Agencies, together with the Cluster
Coordinators, are responsible for providing a forum for strategic response that meets
the needs of affected people and that feeds into other levels of strategic response
(e.g. inter-cluster coordination at the country and global levels).
Agreeing to the
commitments
All cluster partners, including Cluster Lead Agencies in their potential role as
implementer alongside other agencies, have common, mutual responsibilities to reach
the objective of effective and timely humanitarian response for affected people.
The minimum commitments are not prescriptive and should be adapted to actual
needs and context as cluster-based responses vary greatly in size, scope and
complexity. These commitments are a starting point and should be considered as
an absolute minimum to which organizations may build. Country-level clusters
should use this document as a basis when developing or updating their terms of
reference and their own commitments.
Minimum
commitments
The minimum commitments for participation in clusters include:


A common commitment to humanitarian principles, the Principles of Partnership29
through for example, cluster-specific guidance and internationally recognized
programme standards, including the Secretary-General’s Bulletin on Special
Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse.
Readiness to participate in actions that specifically improve accountability to
affected populations as per the IASC Commitments to Accountability to Affected
Populations30 and the related Operational Framework.
The terms of Cluster Coordinator, Cluster Lead Agency and Humanitarian
Country Team are used as per the IASC Guidance Note on Using the Cluster
Approach to Strengthen Humanitarian Response (November 2006); the Joint letter
from Cluster Lead Agencies to their Directors/Representatives at Country Level
(October 2009), IASC Guidance for Humanitarian Country Teams (November 2009).
29
Equality, transparency, results-oriented approach, responsibility, and
complementarity as defined in the statement of commitment available at
28
www.globalhumanitarianplatform.org
These commitments refer to leadership and governance; transparency;
feedback and complaints; participation; and design, monitoring and evaluation. See
Revised Action Points, IASC Principals meeting, 13 December 2011.
30
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
22








Demonstrate an understanding of the duties and responsibilities within the cluster,
as defined through IASC terms of references and guidance notes31 and any
guidance specific to the cluster itself, as well as country cluster terms of reference,
where available.
Active participation within the cluster and commitment to consistently engage in
the cluster’s collective work.
Capacity and willingness to contribute to the cluster’s strategic response plan and
activities, which must include inter-cluster coordination and cross-cutting issues
(age, gender, environment and HIV/AIDs).
Commitment from a relevant senior staff member to engage consistently in the
cluster towards the fulfillment of its mission.
Commitment to work cooperatively with other cluster partners to ensure an
optimal and strategic use of available resources, including sharing information on
organizational resources.
Willingness to take on leadership responsibilities of sub-national and/or working
groups, as needed and as capacity and mandates allow.
Contribute to developing and disseminating advocacy and messaging targeted at
various actors, including, but not limited to, affected communities, the host
government, donors, the HCT, cluster lead agencies, and the media.
Ensure interpretation and effective communication (i.e. appropriate language) in
order to support diverse participation within the cluster, notably from local
organizations (and national and local authorities where appropriate).
Humanitarian workers at a coordination meeting in South Sudan's Pibor coordination hub, Jonglei State,
where inter-communal violence affected nearly 170,000 people. Aid organizations have recorded 165
violent incidents with humanitarian consequences in the first five months of 2012 alone. Credit: OCHA
This includes, but is not limited to, the Generic Terms of Reference for
Sector/Cluster at the Country Level and IASC guidance on particular cross-cutting
issues and information management.
31
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
23
8
Sub-National Level Coordination
Sub-national coordination refers to de-centralizing coordination from the national level
by establishing sub-clusters/sectors in zones of particular operational importance.
Structures may be established at more than one administrative level if required (e.g.
provinces and districts in Pakistan), although the underlying principle of minimizing
structures remains firmly in place. Sub-national coordination is critical where the
response take place in remote areas (e.g. in Sudan) or over a large amount of territory
(e.g. in the DRC).
Importance of
sub-national
coordination
Coordination structures in humanitarian operations that involve both national and subnational level clusters have been identified as more effective than coordination models
that comprise a single national level cluster. Notwithstanding resource limitations and
operational context considerations, it is highly desirable to have sub-national clusters
to facilitate decentralized decision-making and enhance the response time between
decision-taking and implementation. In addition, sub-national level clusters are better
suited to adapting existing standards to local circumstances. They are also better
placed to maintain close cooperation with international, national and local NGOs and
authorities in implementing the strategic plan; paying attention to cross-cutting and
multidimensional issues; ensuring greater community involvement and participation;
and enhancing accountability to affected populations.
However, as outlined above, sub-national clusters should only be established on the
basis of the operational needs and should be de-activated as soon as those needs are
met or when there is local capacity to coordinate the response in that area.
Sub-national
cluster
establishment
The establishment of sub-national clusters should be formalized in terms of reference
outlining the key functions of the sub-national cluster and the parameters within which
it will operate. The agreed terms of reference should be shared with the national
Cluster Lead Agency for final endorsement.
Within the limits of available resources and operational context, sub-national clusters
should have full- or part-time sub-national level Cluster Coordinators. Sub-national
clusters offer ideal opportunities for UN agencies, international and national NGOs as
well as national authorities to share cluster leadership.
Relationship
between national
and sub-national
clusters
The national level clusters should provide support and policy direction to sub-national
clusters. There must be a clear link between corresponding sub-national and national
clusters in order to facilitate reporting, information-sharing and collaboration with
national and other sub-national level clusters; to promote national programmatic
cohesion and overall coordination to track trends; to identify common concerns across
operational areas; and to develop more upstream advocacy and programming
strategies. To ensure this coherence, the terms of reference should establish clear
accountability lines between national and sub-national clusters, thus enabling the
decentralization of operational decisions. There should also be a clearly understood
sequencing between national and sub-national bodies: national meetings should take
place after sub-national meetings and both discussions should be based on a reliable
record of decisions taken and issues raised.
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
24
Types of subnational activities
The terms of reference of sub-national clusters should follow the core functions of
the cluster at the country-level, while at the same time being streamlined and tailored
to local operational realities. Accordingly, the working methods of sub-national clusters
must be light and focused on service delivery and operational activities; ensuring
reporting and information sharing with the national cluster and, through that
mechanism, other sub-national clusters; and promoting the involvement of the affected
populations in cluster activities to ensure that humanitarian actors respond adequately
to their actual needs.
Coordination meeting at Agok in Warrap state, South Sudan. Thousands of residents of Abyei settled in
Agok after being displaced by armed clashes in 2011. Credit: OCHA/D DeLorenzo
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
25
9
Sharing Leadership within
the Cluster Approach
A number of evaluations and reports have found that clusters that share leadership
between UN, NGOs, Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement32 and other key
humanitarian actors, including IOM, generally produce positive benefits by improving
partnership, advocacy and information for a better response. Sharing leadership
ensures stronger engagement and better coordination. This is especially true in
remote field locations where a UN presence may be limited or non-existent, and where
often NGOs may have a strong and consistent presence. In addition to access, NGOs
can also bring technical expertise; different approaches on accountability to affected
people; long-term community involvement and understanding; and an expansive
partnership potential to any leadership role.
Sharing
leadership
Shared leadership is an approach which allows for an equitable and meaningful
distribution of either Cluster Lead Agency or cluster coordination responsibilities at the
global, national and/or sub-national levels. It is accompanied by clear roles, mutual
understanding and defined accountabilities. The appropriate and transparent sharing
of leadership amongst different actors is a true reflection of the interdependency of the
humanitarian community to ensure an effective strategic response.
While dependent on the context, sharing leadership will require actors to go beyond
the norms of participation and implementation, and to define together clear and wellunderstood leadership roles and responsibilities. No matter what the level, an
examination of the leadership role to be shared, and its accompanying responsibilities
must be undertaken as part of a joint terms of reference development. This should
cover the complementary roles of the Cluster Lead Agencies, the Cluster Coordinators
and the cluster participants, ensuring that key aspects - such as accountabilities,
strategy, representation, advocacy, fundraising and visibility - are clear to all parties33.
Examples of
shared
leadership
There are several shared leadership examples. The Global Logistics Cluster
embraces shared leadership through the secondment of NGO staff with specialized
skills to the global cluster support cell. Seconded staff can be deployed to serve as
Cluster Coordinators while working in the support cell. This shared leadership model is
useful in providing training; ensuring a consistent approach to each Logistics Cluster
deployment; ensuring that information management and reporting are handled
consistently; applying lessons learned uniformly; and engaging secondees in
preparedness missions. It also allows NGOs, which might not be in a position to take
on the Provider of Last Resort responsibilities, to operate with authority at the field
level as secondees of the Logistics Cluster, supported by WFP.
32
Subject to the mandates of the three different components of the Red
Cross/Red Crescent Movement.
33
Please see the good practice catalogue on the IASC website. In South Sudan,
for example, there is a process of developing a generic terms of reference for NGO
cluster co-coordinators.
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
26
Another example is sharing cluster leadership across the timeframe of an operation
with one Cluster Lead Agency handing over to another in a planned and agreed
fashion. The model of shared leadership used by the Emergency Shelter Cluster in
natural disasters since 2006 is that of "phased leadership", whereby different agencies
lead the cluster for different phases of the response (e.g. agencies like IFRC with
expertise in emergencies and the required surge capacity mechanisms lead during the
emergency and transitional phases, handing over to agencies such as UN-Habitat with
developmental expertise to lead during the recovery phase).
Parameters of
shared
leadership
When considering sharing leadership of the cluster, the following points should be
taken into account:



For further
consideration


Terms of reference or memoranda of understanding must be developed to ensure
a common understanding of roles and responsibilities with the leadership
arrangement within a specific context, as well as common accountabilities.
Examples
of
different
terms
of
reference
are
available
on
http://clusters.humanitarianresponse.info/. Actors engaged in shared leadership
should jointly determine the shared leadership model that works best for their
context. The terms of reference must be completed and understood in advance as
taking on a shared leadership role will in most cases require actors to hire full-time
staff.
Sharing leadership amongst actors can augment and strengthen cluster
leadership but should not relieve the designated in-country cluster lead agency of
its core responsibilities and agreed accountabilities, including Provider of Last
Resort34.
Terms used to describe sharing leadership vary, with co-facilitator, co-coordinator,
co-steward, co-lead, sub-cluster coordination, sub-national leadership, work group
membership, task force chairs and secondment all used in different contexts.
Within the complex and diverse environment of response, harmonization of
language should be sought; Global Cluster Lead Agencies and HCTs are
encouraged to provide guidance on this during the development of terms of
reference.
While potentially difficult in some cases, a goal within any response is for national
governments to uphold their responsibilities to their own people. Those who take
on shared leadership roles should assist with national capacity building.
There are transactional costs to sharing leadership effectively, in both workload
and financial terms. Resource partners, the RC/HC and the HCT need to ensure
that funding does not present a barrier to actors who would otherwise be in a
position to share the leadership of cluster responses. When possible (where
financial mechanisms under its authority exist) the HC/HCT should help to
mobilize funds to support shared leadership and in other countries donor support
should be encouraged.35
The 2008 definition of Provider of Last Resort (POLR) was revised by the
IASC Principals in December 2011 to read: “Where necessary, and depending on
access, security and availability of funding, the cluster lead, as POLR, must be ready
to ensure the provision of services required to fulfil critical gaps identified by the
cluster and reflected in the HC-led HCT Strategic Response Plan.”
35
The Framework on Cluster Coordination Costs and Functions in Humanitarian
Emergencies at Country Level (May 2011) highlights the value of NGOs taking on
leadership roles in coordination and states that "donors will also explore mechanisms to fund
34
NGOs directly for coordination roles.”
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
27



Sharing leadership will not compensate for poor core leadership. The expectation
is that sharing leadership will improve strong leadership by increasing capacity. It
is incumbent upon the Cluster Lead Agency and its partners to ensure that
qualified staff are placed in positions of leadership.
Training opportunities in the competency areas required to ensure success within
a shared leadership structure must be provided to all relevant actors.
Not all actors are willing or able to share leadership responsibilities and, as with
cluster activation, decisions to share leadership should be based on an
assessment of needs and capacities on the ground.
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
28
10 Inter-Cluster Coordination
Purpose
Core Functions
of Inter-Cluster
Coordination
Inter-cluster coordination is coordination between clusters around all aspects of the
Humanitarian Programme Cycle, in support of strategic evidence-based decision
making by HCTs and the HC. Inter-cluster coordination ensures multidisciplinary and
cross-cutting issues that cannot be tackled by individual clusters alone or that call for
concerted action are addressed appropriately, that inter-cluster duplications and gaps
are eliminated and synergies are encouraged with the aim of delivering a more
effective response to affected people.
Inter-cluster coordination is a key means of discussing shared strategic and
operational issues which are then fed to the HC/HCT for decision making and support.
The focus of inter-cluster coordination is the preparation, operationalisation and review
of the Strategic Response Plan.
The following core functions are common to all levels of inter-cluster coordination:







Identifying and operationalising critical inter-cluster/sectoral synergies and
coverage gaps based on consolidated needs and capacity assessment, analysis
and monitoring
Developing strategic response priorities and resource allocation for the HCT
Incorporating components of a protection and early recovery strategy to inform the
strategic response plan
Highlighting issues which require specific advocacy support from the HCT
Practical coordination of operational activities, to achieve the strategic objectives
by taking opportunities to work more efficiently together and reduce potential
overlaps between clusters
Putting in place an enabling environment through common standards and tools
Addressing common operational issues and inter-cluster/sectoral needs from
service clusters
Inter-cluster coordination is most effective when Cluster Coordinators
participate proactively and are able to represent appropriately the views of their
cluster partners.
The Humanitarian Coordinator (HC) and Humanitarian Country Team (HCT), in
consultation with cluster coordinators and Cluster Lead Agencies, should decide the
best inter-cluster coordination arrangements for the country context, both at the
national and sub-national level.
Inter-cluster coordination takes place at various levels and can take a number of
different forms, depending on the specific coordination needs in-country
Humanitarian Coordinator
Coordination
Facilitation
and Support
Levels of InterCluster
Coordination
Humanitarian Country Team
Inter-Cluster Coordination
Clusters
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
29
1. At the HC/HCT:
Coordination by the Cluster Lead Agencies to enable
development of the Strategic Response Plan (see section 5) and leadership of the
international humanitarian response operation in support of the national response.
2. Between the HC/HCT and the Clusters: two or more relevant clusters grouping
to coordinate the development and implementation of specific strategic and
operational objectives established by the HCT
Insert Diagram to show the linkages between strategic objectives, specific
clusters and inter-cluster coordination
3. In support of clusters:
 Coordination between the cluster coordinators and other relevant national and
international operational partners and cross-cutting issue representatives around
a specific strategic or operational issue.
 Fora ensuring all clusters are informed of strategic and operational issues of
common interest or concern
 Support to the production of common strategic and operational products and
outputs around the humanitarian programme cycle
 Services and support to provide an enabling operational environment
The Coordination of Strategic and Operational Objectives by Groups of Clusters
Strategic InterCluster
Coordination
Emphasis and support needs to be given specifically to inter-cluster coordination
between smaller numbers of clusters that need to work together on specific strategic
objectives of joint concern.
Examples of Strategic Response
Issue
Malnutrition
Cholera
Housing Reconstruction Strategies
Child Protection
Examples of Clusters that may work
together on this
Nutrition, WASH, Food Security, Food, Health
Health, WASH, Shelter
Shelter, WASH, Protection, Environment
Education, Protection WASH, Shelter
Early recovery strategies - Rubble
Removal
Shelter, Logistics, Protection
As illustrated below in the example of the Survival Strategy in Pakistan, respective
Cluster Coordinators organize themselves to determine the most appropriate
arrangements for inter-cluster coordination at the national and sub-national level.
Case Study - Pakistan – Survival Strategy
The overall aim of the strategy was to save lives and to reduce morbidity among
affected populations through the provision of food, life-saving maternal and neonatal,
preventive and curative health and nutrition services, safe drinking water, sanitation
and hygiene practices. An integrated approach having a very strong component of
community based interventions is essential to address the factors that contribute to
the main mortality risks such as, acute diarrhoea, acute respiratory infections, malaria,
measles, malnutrition, and maternal and neo-natal mortality/morbidity.
The aim of the multi-agency/cluster framework was to build upon the core functions of
the respective clusters to maximise programmatic synergies between the sectors, to
deliver more effective and efficient results.
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
30
The multi-agency/cluster framework regarding analysis, prioritisation and strategy
development and allowed cluster members to elaborate joint planning and
programming processes.
Operational InterCluster
Coordination
Enabling
Environment
As well as coordination of inter-cluster strategic interest, clusters need to work
together on areas of shared operational interest which improve the efficiency of
response. This may be done between two or more clusters. Some clusters at global
level have proposed checklists to assist country level clusters in identifying common
issues which may need to be clarified between clusters 3637.
Examples of Operational Response Issues
Examples of Clusters that
may work together on the
Operational Response Issue
Health and Hygiene Promotion - clarity of roles and
synergies, no overlap in content and outreach
work)
Scheduling
of
distributions,
vaccinations,
campaigns to take opportunity to target populations
with multiple activities of different sectors and to
ensure no competing activities scheduled at the
same time
Joint field visits for issues of inter-cluster strategic
concern eg outbreak investigations; floods resulting
in an inter-agency assessment site assessments
Health, Nutrition, WASH
Food, Health, WASH,
Nutrition, Logistics
Health and Protection
(Afghanistan)
Potentially all clusters
There are services and activities which help create the right environment within which
inter-cluster coordination can operate more effectively. Enablers therefore represent a
means to more effective inter-cluster coordination, rather than an end in themselves.
Enabler
Typical Examples
Common Standards/Approaches
Sphere Core Standards
Feedback
mechanisms
for
affected
populations
Common Operational Data Sets(CODS)
Fundamental Operation Data Sets (FODS) 38
4W Matrix
Information Management
Standards
Information Management Tools
OCHA often provides support to ensure this enabling environment by facilitating work
towards such common tools and standards.
This may be through bringing together resources within clusters, for example
information managers, but may also require dedicated specialist capacity to work with
and facilitate processes and outputs which are inter-cluster in nature eg needs
assessment, information management
36
Inter-cluster matrices of roles and responsibilities between WASH and CCCM,
Shelter, Health, Nutrition, Early Recovery, Education
http://www.washcluster.info/drupal/?q=technical-library/intercluster-coordination;
37 Protection cluster mainstreaming reference sheets and trainings being produced in
collaboration with/for CCCM, Wash, Shelter and Food Security clusters and will be
available in the Protection Mainstreaming Section, www.globalprotectioncluster.org
38 http://cod.humanitarianresponse.info/about
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
31
Inter-Cluster/
Sector
Coordination
Within the
Framework of the
HPC
Inter-Cluster
Coordination
Structures
In the same way that the humanitarian programme cycle has relevance and
implications at both the cluster and inter-cluster levels, the products associated with
each component of the cycle also have cluster and inter-cluster elements.
The table in Annex 2 illustrates products or outputs within the framework of the HPC
which have an inter-sectoral element to them, and include direct examples of the intersectoral nature of the output or product. The examples given refer to situations where
two or more clusters may come together around such an element (and not always all
clusters), as well as in some instances, all clusters.
The HC/HCT, informed by recommendations from Cluster Coordinators and Cluster
Lead Agencies, is responsible for determining the need and the most appropriate
mechanism to ensure inter-cluster coordination, beyond the HCT itself, particularly in
operationalizing priorities identified by the HC/HCT that cut across sectors. This will
be influenced by the complexity of the coordination challenges, the number of clusters
activated, the existence of other coordination structures and any additional criteria
identified by the HC/HCT.
This also includes the possibility of establishing an inter-cluster coordination forum
bringing all the clusters together on issues of common strategic and operational
interest. Inter-cluster coordination may also be facilitated through other more flexible
approaches outside of larger more formal meetings to include any form of
communication (eg physical, tele/video conferences) or working arrangements which
brings added value where two or more clusters work together.
The HC/HCT, and Cluster Coordinators may consider, on a needs basis, including
other stakeholders eg private sector, donors, NGOs in inter-cluster arrangements
around a specific strategic or operational issue. The case study from Haiti describes
such an example
Case Study - Haiti 2010
The interdependence between the many aspects of the humanitarian response
underscored the need for inter-cluster coordination to enable effective information
sharing and decision-making on topics that did not clearly fall under any one cluster’s
‘responsibility’. In the case of shelter provision and rubble removal, for example, this
was addressed in the inter-cluster coordination forum and through bilateral meetings
between the Shelter cluster and Early Recovery cluster leads.
A number of non-humanitarian actors (including foreign militaries and the private
sector) had a critical role to play in rubble removal, and rubble removal was a
necessary first step before humanitarian organisations could begin providing
transitional shelter.
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
32
Role of OCHA in
Supporting Intercluster
Coordination
OCHA is normally asked to ensure inter-cluster coordination with appropriate levels of
dedicated capacity, and facilitate the operationalisation of the components of the
humanitarian programme cycle where inter-cluster issues are identified at strategic
and operational levels as illustrated in the example products of the HPC in Annex 2.
OCHA, may support inter-cluster coordination more broadly through support to
providing an ‘enabling’ environment eg inter-cluster information management tools
and coordination, direct support in facilitating multi-cluster assessments, pooled
fund/common humanitarian fund mechanisms.
OCHA may be requested by the HC to establish an inter-cluster coordination forum to
ensure all clusters are fully informed of strategic planning and other key issues arising
from inter-cluster discussions and to keep the HC (HCT) informed of progress and any
issues which may require input or support from them 39. Whilst not requiring to
facilitate all inter-cluster coordination, OCHA would need to be kept up to date and
informed of key issues arising from such inter-cluster discussions to ensure
appropriate support
Inter-cluster
coordination and
Early Recovery
Early recovery is a vital element of an effective humanitarian crisis response, using
humanitarian mechanisms in accordance with development principles. It is an
integrated, inclusive, and coordinated approach to gradually turn the dividends of
humanitarian action into sustainable crisis recovery, resilience building and
development opportunities.
The Humanitarian Coordinator/Resident Coordinator (HC/RC) has the lead
responsibility for ensuring early recovery issues are adequately integrated in the
humanitarian programme cycle at country level in cooperation with national actors,
with the support of an Early Recovery Advisor working on inter-cluster early recovery
issues.
In order to focus on delivery of results, a flexible approach should be adopted for
coordinating inter-cluster early recovery at the national level, using existing intercluster humanitarian coordination fora rather than creating new ones.
Together with the integration of early recovery into the work of country clusters, the
HCT identifies if an additional coordination body needs to be created locally to meet
specific early recovery needs (e.g. emergency employment, community infrastructure,
restoration of local governance) which would not be covered otherwise. That body, or
cluster, would be named according to its subject matter and not using the generic title
of ‘early recovery’, so as to avoid possible confusion with the broader mainstreaming
efforts.
Inter-cluster
coordination and
Cross-Cutting
Issues
It is the responsibility of each cluster to ensure the integration of a protection lens and
cross-cutting issues, along with support from the HC and potential focal points for
various cross-cutting issues direct to clusters and within inter-cluster co-ordination.
39
Such HC/HCT support needs should be reinforced through the relevant Cluster Lead Agencies on the
HCT
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
33
11 Coordination Performance Monitoring40
This section requires updating to list all performance monitoring processes and
tools – (1) coordination activation checklist (2) country cluster configurations
(3) cluster performance monitoring (and recent updates) and (4) Annual Cluster
Reviews (fit for purpose), how they can support each other and the chronology;
fitting with strategic planning and resource mobilisation
Monitoring coordination performance at the national and sub-national level in both
sudden onset and protracted crises is necessary to ensure that clusters are efficient
and effective coordination mechanisms, fulfilling the core cluster functions outlined in
this Module, meeting the needs of constituent members, and supporting delivery to
affected people. It is also necessary for accountability purposes to demonstrate the
added value and justify the cost of coordination.
This section elaborates on two elements to monitor coordination performance 41: (1)
the Cluster Activation Checklist and (2) the Coordination Performance Report. Both
enable the identification of areas for support, improvement, and follow-up actions. The
Cluster Lead Agency can also use the processes in support of its accountability to the
RC/HC and national authorities. While this section focuses on monitoring the
performance of clusters, consideration should be given to extending the focus to
include ‘other coordination solutions’ in subsequent revisions of this Module.
Cluster
Activation
Checklist
 Two weeks
 One month
 Two months
Coordination
Performance
Report
 Three months
 Then every six
months
The Cluster Activation Checklist is a simple tool designed to monitor progress of
cluster activation and implementation after the declaration of a level 3 emergency, in
line with commitments and the level 3 emergency response timeline agreed under the
Transformative Agenda42. The checklist can also be used in all other contexts where
clusters are activated.
The checklist is completed by the Cluster Coordinator in consultation with other
humanitarian actors and looks at the status of the cluster activation, staffing,
establishment of core functions, and deliverables. It can be used as both an ongoing
performance checklist as well as a management and reporting tool. Updated
checklists should be produced by each cluster at periods of two weeks, one month
and two months after the declaration of a level 3 emergency or in other contexts after
the activation of clusters.
The Coordination Performance Report43 is used in all humanitarian responses with
activated clusters and when there is more time available for a more in-depth
assessment of the quality of cluster operations and production of key deliverables. If
clusters are activated, it is completed three months after the onset of an emergency
and every six months thereafter. In protracted crises, it is used immediately and then
updated every six months.
This section does not include cluster evaluation or system-wide humanitarian
response monitoring, which will be articulated in a framework to be developed by
December 2012.
41
The Cluster Activation Checklist and Coordination Performance Report
formats are available on clusters.humanitarianresponse.org.
42
Please see the Level 3 Emergency Response Timeline (2012) available on
the IASC website.
43
The Coordination Performance Report will be rolled out in a number of
countries in November 2012, with broader implementation planned for 2013.
40
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
34
The report focuses on the IASC six cluster core functions, as outlined in this Module,
with an additional component on accountability to affected people. The report is based
on feedback collected through a consultative process, with inputs from the Cluster
Coordinator and cluster partners. This is an opportunity for self-reflection by the
cluster, identifying areas that are working well and those that require increased
attention, raising awareness on support needed from the Cluster Lead Agencies,
partners, and/or Global Clusters.
To facilitate the completion of the Coordination Performance Report, separate
questionnaires for Cluster Coordinators and for cluster partners have been developed
to monitor the performance of coordination at national and sub-national levels. These
questionnaires are on-line self-assessment tools designed to monitor the performance
of the cluster in achieving its six core functions including a component on
accountability to affected populations. The questionnaires aim to assist clusters
recording the perception of partners and of Cluster Coordinators and do not replace
existing cluster performance tools based on peer review.
When there are sub-national clusters, each of the hubs should be treated as a
separate entity and reported against by the partners locally present in that cluster and
the sub-national Cluster Coordinator. This is a separate exercise to that performed by
the national cluster as it brings additional detail and insight.
The Philippine National Red Cross distributed blanket and hygiene goods and made a tour to reassess the
damages and the condition of the evacuation centers after typhoon Ondoy hit Calamba city in the province
of Laguna, Philippines in 2009. Credit: IFRC/Y. Shimizu
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
35
Annexes
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
36
Annex 1
Draft: Cluster Leadership, Activation and Transition in different contexts
The most significant criteria for Cluster activation is the capacity of national authorities to provide humanitarian coordination to the affected population in line
with the key principles of Humanitarian Response. The table below outlines a number of contexts either the capacity of the national authorities varies or their
willingness or ability to adhere to humanitarian principles is compromised. These factors will influence Cluster Activation and decisions around how to
transition out of the Cluster Approach.


National
Authorities
Capacity
and
willingness
to
coordinate
A
1.
National
authorities are able to
lead
 National crisis
response coordination
structure exists for
priority sector, and its
capacity can be
expanded to welcome
large number of
international partners
 Government
responds to needs
based on humanitarian
principles
Cluster Activation and
leadership
Cluster
Lead
accountability
 No need to activate
clusters
 Sector ministry leads,
using existing disaster
coordination structure
 International and
national partners
coordinated under
National crisis response
coordination structure.
 In case of an L3, an
HCT is established and
decides which clusters are
activated or not, in
dialogue with national
authorities.
 Government structure
accountable to lead the
coordination and overall
response
A
2.
National
authorities’ ability to
lead
is
limited
/
insufficient
 National crisis
response coordination
structure exists, but
insufficient capacity to
coordinate large
number of international
partners or large scale
response
 Government
 No need to activate
clusters (unless decided
otherwise in dialogue with
the relevant government
sector lead ministry).
 International and
national partners
coordinated under
National crisis response
coordination structure
Government ministry
leads, but coordination
capacity supported by the
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
Agency
 If clusters are not activated,
there is no formal CLA at country
level.
 However, the GCLAs, when
present in country, facilitate
sector-wide support from all
international partners to the
national disaster coordination
structure
 The agencies who have a
cluster responsibility at the global
level (GCLA) have the
responsibility and subsequent
accountability to the government
and HC(T) through their offices
in-country to ensure a
predictable response in line with
the Transformative Agenda
process.
 Global Cluster lead Agencies,
together with international
partners present in country
provide support to ensure
predictable and adequate
performance of coordination
Transitioning/deactivation
Remaining humanitarian
needs
 If there are no formal clusters,
there is no formal cluster transition /
de-activation.
 GCLA when present in country
and international partners have
responsibility to apply principles of
early recovery
 GCLA when present in country,
facilitate sector-wide support from
international partners to the
national structure to review and, if
needed, improve preparedness
capacity for similar and other
hazards in the future (contributing
to resilience and reducing need for
international response next time)
 Remaining humanitarian
needs are addressed by
existing National crisis
coordination structure
 When the need to
support response
decreases, international
partners will leave or close
programmes to support
the National crisis
response efforts.
 GCLA when present in country
and international partners have
responsibility to apply principles of
early recovery, and where possible
use the response to strengthen
National crisis / humanitarian
response coordination capacity
(based on disaster management
capacity assessment).
 GCLA when present in country
and partners support national
counterpart to improve
preparedness for similar and other
Remaining humanitarian
needs
addressed
by
existing National crisis
coordination
structure,
supported as needed by
remaining
international
partners
37
responds to needs
based on humanitarian
principles
country office of the GCLA
as co-lead or co-chair
A
3.
National
authorities’ ability to
lead is absent
 Relevant clusters are
activated.
 Coordination led by
CLA.
 Obligation to seek
involvement of national
counterpart, at least as cochair as early as possible
 No National crisis
response coordination
structure exists for a
priority sector
Government responds
to needs based on
humanitarian principles
functions as defined under the
cluster approach
 International partners
accountable to commit to the
principles of the cluster approach
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
 CLA accountability applies
 Cluster partners accountable
to commit to cluster approach
hazards in the future
 For any activated clusters GCLA
and partners, together with national
counterpart, start developing
transition or exit strategy after 90
days
 Identify national counterpart to
co-chair/co-lead as early as
possible
 CLA and international partners
have responsibility to apply
principles of early recovery
 CLA and international partners
use the response period to initiate
and build National crisis response
coordination capacity
 CLA and partners, together with
national counterpart, start
developing transition or exit
strategy after 90 days
 CLA and partners support
national counterpart to improve
preparedness for similar and other
hazards in the future
 Sector specific clusters
deactivate when
humanitarian needs have
decreased and demand for
coordination decreased as
numbers of international
partners reduced.
 In the sectors with
residual humanitarian
needs, clusters are only
de-activated if coordination
capacity exists on the
governmental side.
38
National Authorities Capacity
willingness to coordinate
and
and
Cluster Lead Agency
accountability
Transitioning/deactivation
Remaining
humanitarian needs
B1. National authorities’ ability to lead
is compromised (e.g. actor in the
conflict, no full control/access in all
affected areas)
 National crisis response coordination
structure not able to coordinate all
affected areas/populations and national
authorities agree with Cluster
Coordination
Clusters are activated and able
to coordinate response for all
affected areas/populations
 CLA accountability
applies
 Cluster partners
accountable to commit
to cluster approach
 RC/HC, on behalf of
the HCT advocates for
humanitarian space
and a humanitarian
response that covers
the needs of the entire
affected population
 Identify national counterpart to cochair/co-lead as early as possible
 CLA and international partners have
responsibility to apply principles of
early recovery
 CLA and international partners use
the response period to initiate and
build National crisis response
coordination capacity
 CLA and partners, together with
national counterpart, start developing
transition or exit strategy after 90 days
 CLA and partners support national
counterpart to improve preparedness
for similar and other hazards in the
future
 Sector specific
clusters deactivate
when humanitarian
needs have decreased
and demand for
coordination
decreased as numbers
of international
partners reduced.
 In the sectors with
residual humanitarian
needs, clusters are
only de-activated if
coordination capacity
exists on the
governmental side.
B2. National authorities are able to lead
coordination of the response but
allegations
that
humanitarian
principles are not respected
 National crisis response coordination
structure exists but significant
discrepancies between national
authorities and the humanitarian actors in
terms of the principles and objectives of
the humanitarian response
 National authority takes the
lead.
 If government sector does not
take the lead to coordinate,
cluster is to be activated, with
risk that activation is not
approved by government
 Global CLAs should continue
to try to coordinate the response
for their sector, to the extent that
the security and political
situation allows.
 Clusters activated, with risk
that activation is not approved
by government
 Global CLAs should continue
to try to coordinate the response
for their sector, to the extent that
the security and political
situation allows.
 CLA and international partners have
responsibility to apply principles of
early recovery
 CLA and international partners,
together with national counterpart,
formulate transition or exit strategy
after 90 days
 Support to national coordination
capacity not appropriate as long as
humanitarian principles not respected
CLA and international partners develop
preparedness and contingency plans,
where appropriate with national
counterpart when political situation
allows
If the clusters were
activated, the relevant
clusters remain unless
guarantee that national
authorities / structures
can take care of the
residual humanitarian
needs in a satisfactory
way.


B3.National authorities are not able to
lead coordination of the response, and
allegations the humanitarian principles
are not respected
 No National crisis response
coordination structure exists and
significant discrepancies between national
authorities and the humanitarian actors in
terms of the principles and objectives of
the humanitarian response
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
Cluster
Activation
leadership
 RC/HC, on behalf of
the HCT advocates for
humanitarian space
and a humanitarian
response that covers
the needs of the entire
affected population
Cluster
partners
accountable to commit
to cluster approach
39
Annex 2
HPC
Component
Preparedness
HPC Related Inter-Cluster Products and Outputs
Related Typical Product/Outputs



Coordinated
assessments



Strategic
planning








Resource
Mobilisation


Implementatio
n



Monitoring


Operational
Review/
Evaluation


Contingency Plan
Implementation of Minimum Preparedness
Actions (MPA)
Contribution to development of Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs) for the
preparedness emergency response actions
Contribute to the Preliminary Scenario
Definition (PSD)
Contribute to Humanitarian Needs Overview
Multi-cluster Initial Rapid Assessment
(MIRA)
Contribute to strategic response plan
Strategic response plan indicators
Identification inter-sectoral synergies to
meet strategic response objectives
Proposed prioritisation of response activities
Ensuring the protection lens of the strategic
response plan is incorporated across
clusters
Clarification of responsibilities on issues
shared between clusters
Defining inter-sectoral needs provided by
service clusters
Ensuring integrated strategies on Early
Recovery
Flash/Consolidated Appeal
Pooled/Common Humanitarian Fund
applications
coordination of field activities between
clusters to ensure appropriate sequencing
and/or sharing of events to maximise impact
Design of inter-cluster interface with affected
populations
Identification of humanitarian access issues
and impacts
Joint mechanisms for accountability to
affected populations
Monitoring of achievement of strategic
objectives
Cluster Performance Monitoring; Contribute
to operational reviews, real-time evaluations
Contribute to review of design of
cluster/sector coordination structures and
transition to development coordination
structures
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
Examples of Inter-Cluster Elements of
Outputs
 Analysis of scenarios, multi-sectoral nature
of potential response
 Coordination structures, joint needs
assessment
 Agreement on coordination structures in
event of a crisis
 Joint analysis of situational and initial
needs assessment information
 Development of joint rapid assessment
approach


















Joint analysis of needs and multi-sectoral
dimension of response
Agreed multi-sectoral indicators
Appropriateness of Cash solutions
Joint inter-sectoral analysis to propose
prioritization of response activities
Agreed approach to protection analysis of
multi-sectoral strategies
Clarity of agreement which sector will plan
for activities which could be covered by
different clusters eg health care waste
Agreement on critical shared services
needed eg logistics
Common approaches on shared early
recovery actions eg cash based
emergency employment
Agreement proposals for timeline,
prioritisation for funding
Agreed process and priortisation
Linking of timing different activities eg
vaccinations, nutrition assessments
Common approaches to Cash
Multi-sectoral approach for engagement
with communities
Joint analysis of impacts and proposed
advocacy strategy
Inter-cluster framework for community
feedback mechanisms
Joint analysis of objectives which are
multi-sectoral
Inter-cluster sharing of results and actions
to find common challenges and solutions
Agree common approach to review of
appropriateness of coordination structures;
agree approaches on engagement with
national structures
40
Acronyms and Abbreviations
CAP
CERF
CLA
ECHA
ERC
HC
HCT
IARRM
IASC
IFRC
IOM
MHPSS
NGOs
OCHA
RC
SC
SAG
TOR
TWiG
UNDG
UNDP
UNDOCO
UN-Habitat
Consolidated Appeals Process
Central Emergency Response Fund
Cluster Lead Agency
Executive Committee on Humanitarian Affairs
Emergency Relief Coordinator
Humanitarian Coordinator
Humanitarian Country Team
Inter-Agency Rapid Response Mechanism
Inter-Agency Standing Committee
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
International Organization for Migration
mental health and psychosocial support
non-governmental organizations
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
Resident Coordinator
Steering Committee
Strategic Advisory Group
terms of reference
Technical Working Group
United Nations Development Group
United Nations Development Programme
UN Development Operations Coordination Office
United Nations Human Settlements Programme
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
41
Further Reference












Guidance Note on Using the Cluster Approach to Strengthen Humanitarian Response, 2006
Operational Guidance on Designating Sector/Cluster Leads in Major New Emergencies, May 2007
Operational Guidance on Designating Sector/Cluster Leads in On-Going Emergencies, May 2007
IASC Draft Guidance on the Adaptation of Clusters in Transition, March 2011
Framework on Cluster Coordination Costs at the Country Level, May 2011
IASC Operational Guidance on Responsibilities of Cluster/Sector Leads an OCHA in Information
Management
Cluster Lead Agencies Joint Letter on Dual Responsibility, November 2009
IASC Generic Terms of Reference for Cluster Leads at Country Level
IASC Handbook for RCs and HCs on Emergency Preparedness and Response
Emergency Shelter Cluster Review in Myanmar
WASH Cluster Coordination Handbook, January 2009
WHO Health Cluster Guide, 2009
Cluster Coordination Reference Module | 2013
42