Building a Stronger, More Predictable Humanitarian Response System

1. Building a Stronger, More Predictable Humanitarian Response System Humanitarian Reform Support Unit, OCHA

2. FOUR PILLARS OF REFORM PARTNERSHIP Strong partnerships between UN and non-UN actors HUMANITARIAN COORDINATORS Effective leadership and coordination in humanitarian emergencies CLUSTER APPROACH Adequate capacity and predictable leadership in all sectors HUMANITARIAN FINANCING Adequate, timely and flexible financing

3. PILLAR 1 PARTNERSHIP Strong partnerships between UN and non-UN actors

4. Links with Government and national authorities “Each State has the responsibility first and foremost to take care of the victims of natural disasters and other emergencies occurring on its territory. Hence, the affected State has the primary role in the initiation, organization, coordination, and implementation of humanitarian assistance within its territory.”GA Resolution 46/182 In some cases government/local authorities lead the humanitarian response. In other cases, particularly during conflict, their willingness/capacity to lead the response may be compromised.

5. Strengthening partnership and complementarity • Humanitarian actors need to work as equal partners, respecting each other’s roles and mandates • Partnerships may take different forms, from joint programming to much looser associations • Humanitarian Country Teams are now a requirement in all countries with HCs

6. Coordination with national NGOs and other actors Ensure that humanitarian responses build on local capacities Promote/support training and capacity-building of local humanitarian partners

7. Global Humanitarian Platform • New process of UN/non-UN dialogue began with meeting in Geneva in July 2006 • Establishment of a Global Humanitarian Platform • Humanitarian Community Partnership Teams to be piloted in 3 countries

8. PILLAR 2 HUMANITARIAN COORDINATORS Effective leadership and coordination in humanitarian emergencies

9. Strengthening the HC System A comprehensive strategy for: • Identifying • Selecting • Training • Mentoring and Support • Holding Accountable individuals that can deliver effective leadership in humanitarian emergencies

10. Actions to strengthen the HC system 1. Greater inclusiveness, transparency, and ownership in the appointment of Humanitarian Coordinators 2. Training and Induction 3. Support to HCs during emergencies and in transition 4. RC/HC “score card” to be developed

11. PILLAR 3 HUMANITARIAN FINANCING Adequate, timely and flexible financing

12. Actions to improvehumanitarian financing • Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) initiative (being piloted in Burundi and DRC) • Establishment of CERF • Other initiatives (e.g. Common Funds and Emergency Response Funds at country level)

13. CERF • General Assembly Resolution A/RES/60/124 decided to upgrade the CERF to US$ 500 million (US$ 50 million Loan component plus US$ 450 million Grant component). • NOT a substitute for donor contributions to the CAP • Fully funded CERF represents 4% of global humanitarian funding (USD 500 million out of USD 13 billion)

14. Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) Created to help ensure timely, adequate and flexible funding Two Windows: • Rapid Response • Under-Funded Emergencies

15. CERF Criteria Funds will target core life-saving activities as per the assessment of the RC/HC • Activities that remedy, mitigate or avert direct physical harm or threats to a population or major portion thereof • Also common humanitarian services that are necessary to enable life-saving activities

16. CERF Commitments and pledges In 2006 the CERF committed more than $250 million to over 340 projects in 35 countries At the High-Level Conference on the CERF in December 2006, 49 donors pledged $344 million for 2007 2/3 funds for rapid response and 1/3 for under-funded emergencies Commitments in 2006: USD 250 million (to 35 countries) Pledges for 2007: USD 344 million

17. CERF Rapid Response Funds and Flash Appeals • Situations requiring CERF funds should normally generate a Flash Appeal • HC requests CERF funding for the highest-priority Flash Appeal projects simultaneously as the Appeal is prepared • CERF provides the initial injection of funds for the most urgent life-saving projects to cover the time lag between issuance of the Flash Appeal and receipt of funds from donors

18. Flash Appeal Table with CERF Allocations

19. PILLAR 4 CLUSTER APPROACH Adequate capacity and predictable leadership in all sectors

20. AIM • High standards of predictability, accountability and partnership in all sectors or areas of activity • More strategic responses • Better prioritization of available resources

21. IASC Guidance Note on the Cluster Approach June 2006 IASC issued Preliminary Guidance Note (invited comments from all stakeholders) Dec 2006 IASC issued Revised Guidance Note “ The Guidance Note will continue to be reviewed periodically and revised as necessary…”

22. New global cluster leads Technical areas Nutrition UNICEF Water/Sanitation UNICEF Health WHO Emergency Shelter: Conflict IDPs UNHCR Disasters IFRC ‘Convenor’ Cross-cutting areas Camp Coord/Mgmt: Conflict IDPs UNHCR DisastersIOM Protection: Conflict IDPsUNHCR Disasters & civilians in conflict (non-IDPs) HCR/OHCHR/UNICEF Early Recovery UNDP Common service areas Logistics WFP Telecommunications OCHA/UNICEF/WFP

23. Responsibilities of global cluster leads • Normative • Standard setting and consolidation of ‘best practice’ • Build response capacity • Training and system development at local, regional and international levels • Surge capacity and standby rosters • Material stockpiles • Operational Support • Emergency preparedness • Advocacy and resource mobilization

24. Global Cluster Appeal Appeal for USD 39 million launched in March 2006 USD 27 million received (70%) Report on use of these funds due in February 2007 New Appeal to be launched in March 2007 Thereafter, agencies to cover costs through their own regular fundraising mechanisms

25. Country level Where possible, cluster lead arrangements at the country level should mirror those at the global level. This principle should, however, be applied flexibly, taking into consideration the local context and capacities of agencies already on the ground

26. TOR for sector/cluster leads at the country level Sector/cluster lead agencies are accountable to the HC for facilitating a process at the sectoral level aimed at ensuring: Inclusion of key humanitarian partners Establishment of appropriate coordination mechanisms Coordination with national/local authorities, local civil society etc. Participatory and community-based approaches Attention to priority cross-cutting issues Needs assessment and analysis Emergency preparedness Planning and strategy development Application of standards Monitoring and reporting Advocacy and resource mobilization Training and capacity building Provision of assistance and services as a last resort

27. CHAP/CAP CHAPs/CAPs should clearly reflect the agreed sectoral structure, indicating which agencies are the designated sector/cluster leads

28. Role of HC and OCHA at the country level Ensure coherent overall response with effective coordination amongst sectoral groups Ensure sectors are provide with the necessary common services and tools, particularly for information management, needs assessment, contingency planning, development of CHAP/CAP etc. Ensure that coordination structures are adapted over time to reflect the capacities of government structures and the engagement of development partners

29. When to use the cluster approach • In the event of a sudden major new emergency requiring a multi-sectoral response with the participation of a wide range of international humanitarian actors, the cluster approach should be used from the start in planning and organizing the international response • The cluster approach should eventually be used in all countries with Humanitarian Coordinators • The cluster approach should be used in all contingency planning for major new emergencies

30. Activating clusters in major new emergencies Within the first 24 hours HC (or RC) consults relevant partners, proposes leads for each major area. HC sends proposal to ERC ERC shares proposal with Global Cluster Lead Within 24 hours of receiving proposal from HC ERC ensures agreement at global level ERC communicates agreement to HC and partners HC(or RC) informs host government and all partners

31. Application of the cluster approach in 2006 New emergencies: Pakistan Lebanon Indonesia (Jogjakarta) Philippines Ongoing emergencies: DRC Liberia Somalia Uganda

32. IASC Interim Self-Assessment of Implementation of the Cluster Approach in the Field Findings: • Potential to improve overall effectiveness of humanitarian response • Helps focus attention on long-standing gap areas (Lebanon vs. Darfur) • Deployment of additional capacity to address unmet needs • Creates a greater spirit of working together • Many challenges remain

33. Challenges: • Need to provide clear policy guidance to avoid confusion in the field • Need to translate agreed policies into user-friendly checklists and SOPs • Agencies to appoint sector/cluster leads with the requisite skills • Need to provide training to sector/cluster leads • Need for strong HCs and effective inter-cluster coordination • Global cluster leads to provide the necessary support to country-level clusters

34. Humanitarian ReformWhere to go for help? Key documents: • Guidance Note on Using the Cluster Approach to Strengthen Humanitarian Response • IASC Interim Self Assessment of the Cluster Approach • Specific cluster guidance, provided by global cluster leads For assistance: • www.reliefweb.int/humanitarianreform • Humanitarian Reform Support Unit: hrsu@un.org • CERF Secretariat: cerf@un.org • IASC website: www.humanitarianinfo.org/iasc • Humanitarian Reform Website coming soon!