Protection cluster performance monitoring report May 2014

Transcription

1 Protection cluster performance monitoring report May 2014 I. Description of the process The monitoring tool was presented to cluster members during the protection cluster meeting on 3 rd April 2014 conducted in Peshawar, Pakistan where the cluster performance monitoring (CPM) process and objectives were outlined to cluster members. Protection cluster members could access the online questionnaire from 12 April to 12 May Protection cluster comprises of 43 cluster member organizations, however only the regular participants, members of protection cluster, were invited to provide feedback (attended at least 3 out of last 5 protection cluster meetings)- in total 40 individuals. Subsequently, the preliminary coordination performance report was generated by UNHCR headquarters in Geneva, Global Protection Cluster Unit, out of 17 responses provided. The cluster description report was drafted by Protection cluster coordinator and shared with cluster members, along with the preliminary coordination performance report. In a half-day session conducted on 27 May 2014 in UNHCR office, the protection cluster members discussed the findings of the preliminary coordination performance report. II. Results The report focused on the six core cluster functions and the additional component on accountability to affected people. The protection cluster KP FATA in general scored good, with lowest score in objective being 75 %. 1

2 1. Supporting service delivery Good 1.1 Provide a platform to ensure that service delivery is driven by the agreed strategic priorities Good 1.2 Develop mechanisms to eliminate duplication of service delivery Good 2. Informing strategic decision-making of the HC/HCT for the humanitarian response Good 2.1 Needs assessment and gap analysis (across other sectors and within the sector) Good 2.2 Analysis to identify and address (emerging) gaps, obstacles, duplication, and cross-cutting issues Good 2.3 Prioritization, grounded in response analysis Good 3. Planning and strategy development Good 3.1 Develop sectoral plans, objectives and indicators directly supporting realization of the HC/HCT strategic priorities Good 3.2 Application and adherence to existing standards and guidelines Satisfactory 3.3 Clarify funding requirements, prioritization, and cluster contributions to HC s overall humanitarian funding considerations Good 4. Advocacy Good 4.1 Identify advocacy concerns to contribute to HC and HCT messaging and action Good 4.2 Undertaking advocacy activities on behalf of cluster participants and the affected population Satisfactory 5. Monitoring and reporting Satisfactory 6. Contingency planning/preparedness for recurrent disasters whenever feasible and relevant Good 7. Accountability to affected population Satisfactory Protection cluster members who did not complete the self-assessment questionnaire were also encouraged to contribute to the discussion. The group reviewed and discussed findings of the preliminary coordination performance report and developed following recommended action points. Despite the fact that protection cluster Pakistan did not have any weak and unsatisfactory core functions identified (areas where the guideline on the cluster evaluation recommends to provide concrete recommendations for improvement), specific actions were suggested. Improvement action Environment (cross-cutting Core cluster function Comments Action point Timeframe Responsibl e entities 3. Planning and strategy Environment is not Contact OCHA on End May PC development / 3.1 generally best 2014 coordinato Develop sectorial plans, mainstreamed in the practices/guidelines rs 2

3 issue) considered in strategic plan HIV/AIDS (crosscutting issue) considered in strategic plan Technical standards and guidance agreed upon and used by partners National and international standards and guidance identified and adapted as required objectives and indicators directly supporting realization of the HC/HCT strategic priorities 3. Planning and strategy development / 3.1 Develop sectorial plans, objectives and indicators directly supporting realization of the HC/HCT strategic priorities 3. Planning and strategy development / 3.2 Application and adherence to existing standards and guidelines 3. Planning and strategy development / 3.2 Application and adherence to existing standards and guidelines SRP 2014 for Pakistan. Focus on natural disasters in other provinces of Pakistan (Sindh, Punjab, Balochistan mainly) In the context of Pakistan, HIV/AIDS is not a mainstreamed cross cutting issue thus far. Cluster will seek from OCHA guidance/practices from other countries Protection is not included in SPHERE standards, however guidelines exist on specific topics (such as mainstreaming of protection, child protection in emergencies etc.). The tools have been regularly shared with cluster members Protection is not included in SPHERE standards, however guidelines exist on specific topic (such as mainstreaming of protection, child protection in emergencies etc.). The tools have been regularly shared with cluster members and of environment mainstreaming in other countries Contact OCHA and health cluster on best practices/guidelines of environment mainstreaming in other countries Compile a toolkit of all relevant technical standards and share as a package with cluster members, present the documents in a workshop Compile a toolkit of all relevant technical standards and share as a package with cluster members, present the documents in a workshop End May 2014 PC coordinato rs PC coordinato rs PC coordinato rs 3

4 Human rights (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses Advocacy activities agreed upon and undertaken with partners Programme monitoring formats agreed upon and used by cluster partners Monitoring and response of the cluster taking into account the needs, contributions and capacities of 3. Planning and strategy development/ 3.1 Develop sectorial plans, objectives and indicators directly supporting realization of the HC/HCT strategic priorities 4. Advocacy/ 4.2 Undertaking advocacy activities on behalf of cluster participants and the affected population 5. Monitoring and reporting 5. Monitoring and reporting workshops conducted on specific toolscontextualization for KP FATA Protection cluster reports analyze the situation of human rights in each report. Question was not well captured by respondents as they took it as obvious for protection cluster specifically Advocacy is being done intensively by coordinators as well as protection cluster members, however more information sharing on advocacy actions undertaken would be helpful Tools and formats are developed. Cluster members would require to have a package of those tools in one tool kit Tools and formats are developed. Cluster members would require to have a package of those tools in one tool kit NA NA NA A tracking matrix of advocacy issues to be created Compile a toolkit of all relevant formats and tools and share as a package with cluster members, present the documents in a workshop Compile a toolkit of all relevant technical standards and share as a package with cluster members, present the PC coordinato rs PC coordinato rs PC coordinato rs 4

5 women, girls, men and boys Partners contributed to risk assessments and analysis Early warning reports shared with partners Mechanisms to consult and involve population in decision-making agreed upon and used by partners 6. Contingency planning/preparedness for recurrent disasters whenever feasible and relevant 6. Contingency planning/preparedness for recurrent disasters whenever feasible and relevant 7. Accountability to affected population In the context of Pakistan KP FATA complex emergency, humanitarians are not warned in advance by Army prior to the operations conducted. Preparedness plan is however reviewed on year basis, stock matrix updated whenever necessary. In the context of Pakistan KP FATA complex emergency, humanitarians are not warned in advance by Army prior to the operations conducted. However, a tool for preparedness of population in FATA can be prepared. Mechanisms are in place, however protection cluster members would need to have a clarity on all the tools developed and have them all together in a toolkit package documents in a workshop Continue with regular updates with cluster members where relevant Draft a leaflet on preparedness for displacement, IOM to print out Compile a toolkit of all relevant technical standards and share as a package with cluster members, present the documents in a workshop continuous June 2014 PC coordinato rs PC, IOM PC coordinato rs 5

6 Mechanisms to receive, investigate and act upon complaints on the assistance received agreed upon and used by partners 7. Accountability to affected population Redress mechanism of grievance desks is in place (19 GD), helpline for IDPs (through IOM and CPWC), return intention surveys, consultations with IDPs and returnees. However analysis and evaluation of those tools is needed. Do an analysis of established mechanism in regards to accountability of IDPs July 2014 PC coordinato rs, UNHCR, PC member, VAM unit Issues relevant to cluster performance that were not included in the survey: - Frequency of the meetings - Style of chairing the meetings - Inclusiveness of participants during the meeting - Timely sharing of protection cluster meeting minutes - Evaluation of mainstreaming of specific needs of persons with disabilities - Evaluation of mainstreaming of specific needs of elderly 6

7 Annex 1: Protection cluster description report PROTECTION CLUSTER KP FATA Protection Cluster in Pakistan has a very articulated structure. In the complex emergency in the regions of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), the cluster is operating since 2009 in a highly volatile and politically-charged environment, characterized by counter-insurgency operations; sectarian violence; coexisting displacement and return population movements; restricted humanitarian access; and complex relations between civilian authorities, the Military and the humanitarian community. The activities of the cluster have targeted internally displaced populations (IDPs) with specific needs during the displacement phase, in camp settings and outside camps. The Cluster has worked towards a more inclusive registration process, more targeted humanitarian assistance, and has prioritized the provision of services to vulnerable segments of the IDP population. The cluster is also active with monitoring and advocacy to safeguard the principle of safe, voluntary (free and well-informed) and dignified return of the IDPs from displacement areas in KP to areas of origin in FATA, while advocating for alternative durable solutions for individuals/ groups unable or unwilling or unable to return. The overall objective of the Protection Cluster is to coordinate protection actors and ensure access to protection and assistance during all phases of the displacement cycle, in line with the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and other standards and principles and with particular attention to groups with specific needs: children, women, older persons, persons with disabilities, other individuals or groups at risk. 1. Structure of the cluster, Governmental counterparts The cluster is active with Protection, Child Protection and GBV coordination monthly meetings. In addition, coordinators participate in the Inter-Cluster Coordination Meetings (ICCM/HRT), chaired by OCHA. Participation often entails an active role of the cluster coordinators in the strategic discussion and in presenting achievements and challenges of the cluster. The cluster is also present at District level, with Protection Coordination Working Groups (DCWGs) co-chaired by the Social Welfare Department (SWD) and one NGO. At District level, the Working 7

8 Groups Chairs and Co-chairs are relatively new to the idea of protection coordination, particularly in the humanitarian context. The exigency to develop coordination skills and acquire best practices on how to effectively steer partners and agree on common strategies is even more evident. Authorities largely participate in the work of the cluster. The Provincial Disaster Management Authorities (PDMA), FATA Disaster Management Authorities (FDMA) and Child protection welfare commission (CPWC) are active participants of the cluster, although tend not to take a leading role. The capacity diminishes from Provinces to Districts. Protection Cluster Architecture in Pakistan- Key dates 2005 Launch of the cluster during the Pakistan Earthquake (UNICEF lead) 2009 Cluster reactivated for the complex emergency (conflict-induced displacement): continuous activities and partially regionalized structure up to now (but reporting to HCT) Cluster part of the Humanitarian Regional Team; Policy and Strategy Meeting with GoP Aug 2010 Nov 2011 Cluster activated also for the flood response First CO-LEADERSHIP IRC (MoU): national level, KP/FATA, Sindh, Punjab Cluster in KP/FATA continues Initial activation by HCT in September 2011 for the flood-response, then blocked by GoP/NDMA/HC. Cluster officially activated for natural disasters after the intervention of the GPC and the ERC. Cluster in KP/FATA continues 2012 Agreement between the HCT and the GoP/NDMA on natural disaster response: 2011 clusters (part of Early Recovery up to ) to continue until March 2013 (Letter from HC to ERC) HC communication to ERC for continuation of clusters initially to end December 2012, then in 2013 KP/FATA complex emergency: As part of a reorganization of the humanitarian architecture in Pakistan, national coordinators responsibility extended to KP/FATA (Letter HC to ERC of Aug. 2012) Renewed Co-leadership HCR - IRC : National level, KP/FATA, Sindh (current MOU signed in July 12) ICVA humanitarian reform project Phase 2: follows the work of the PC 2013 February: UNHCR announces intention to responsibly hand over coordination of Protection Cluster in natural disasters as soon as feasible and no later than end April-May: Protection Cluster agrees on a cluster light-weight approach (Sindh/Bal) Cluster in KP/FATA and at national level continues UNHCR phase out of coordination in natural disasters (end December 2013) 2014 Strategic response plan is launched Cluster in KP FATA continues 8

9 2. Key elements of the architecture A. Coordination Structure B. Participation Coordinators Government: PDMA/ FDMA/CPWC The Child Protection Welfare Commission (CPWC) is particularly active in the Child Protection Working Group 42 INGOs and NGOs protection cluster members C. Coordination resources (as of May 2014) 2 International positions in KP/FATA (UNHCR and IRC co lead), 1 national position (IRC co lead) CP sub-cluster and GBV Sub-cluster national coordinator (coordinator of GBV subcluster double hatted) PC in the Interagency and Humanitarian architecture in Pakistan PC represented in the HCT (cluster lead HCR rep; coordinators; Cluster co-lead in the INGO Forum) 9

10 Cluster coordinators (UNHCR and IRC) represented in National humanitarian coordination forum Cluster in provincial Coordination Structures (ICCM/HRT in KP/FATA) Return Task Force (Chair FDMA and UNHCR as agency. Cluster coordinators included) General Coordination Meeting (Government, clusters, OCHA NGOs etc) Policy and Strategy Meeting (with HC, Government, Military, OCHA, cluster represented by Head of SO Peshawar) 3. Funding overview as of May 2014 Funding in % 29% Funding Request ADTF Child Protection 48% 2% Funding Received 15% ADTF Child Protection 15% 50% Gender Based Violence Protection 35% Gender Based Violence Protection Pakistan is not anymore a priority for donors. Drastic decrease of funding and attention (Attitude of the GoP, visa issues, proliferation of appeals and sudden shift to Early Recovery cutting off humanitarian funds). As a result, protection activities are heavily penalized 10

11 The government (MFA and Economic Affairs Division) continues to oppose international appeals. If mainstreamed/ No cluster activated protection funding is even lower Protection is politically sensitive 4. Context and protection environment A. Complex emergency KP/FATA More than 1 000,000 IDPs and returnees in 2014 registered as internally displaced persons (IDPs) due to military operations against non-state actors, largely in FATA regions. 5 % are accommodated in 3 main camps in KP and FATA provinces (Jalozai, Togh Sorai in KP, New Durrani in FATA). Main areas of origin: Kyber, South Waziristan, Orakzai agencies. The situation remains volatile and new displacement cannot be excluded, if military operations continue and intensify (e.g. North Waziristan). A steady return process to areas in FATA declared safe by the Government after the conclusion of the military/ security operation continues. Humanitarian partners continue to support the Government s efforts to address protection and other basic needs of both displaced communities as well as returnees, in line with the IDP Return Framework signed by the authorities in 2009 and 2010, and committing to the principles of voluntary, safe and dignified return. Access to areas of military operations is interdicted to all actors; access to areas of return is severely limited by procedural requirements involving the scrutiny of both military and civilian authorities, Access is becoming a principle issue, as it hinders significantly humanitarian operation, protection by presence, protection monitoring and oversight on partners. Protection actors focus their activities on camps interventions, especially protective services for women and children; monitoring and referral, particularly to the SWD; support to IDP registration and grievances desk to provide advice and support to families with documentation and assistance eligibility problems. Support off-camp is challenged by lack of funding, and presence, particularly on the GBV side. Cluster actors undertake return intention surveys and are manning Grievance desks in areas of displacement/ return to counsel/advise families who may have grounds for not being (yet) able to return and advocate with authorities to consider alternative solutions. Evidence shows the need for information on situations in areas of origin, process and conditions of return (Tirah lesson). Pre-return mass information and support to Governmentled MRE community-based outreach are critical elements for a well-informed and safe return. 11

12 Monitoring/ assessment show increasing negative coping mechanisms affecting the wellbeing of children in sudden and in protracted displacement in camp and off-camp. Most vulnerable children in areas of displacement /return need access to child protective spaces/services, community-based protection mechanisms and referral systems to CP institutions 46% of the displaced and returnee population are women and girls. Consultation show that children and women may be particularly affected by psychosocial distress. Various forms of GBV are underreported but known to occur. Women and girls at risk (single HoH, abandoned women, widows, GBV survivors) in areas of displacement/ return need to access to protective spaces/services psychosocial support, RH awareness, vocational activities Registration and IVAP data indicate that older persons and PWD may represent 4% - 4.2% of IDPs/returnee population. Specialised assistance and referral to services in cooperation with / complementary to the social welfare institutions are in demand Equitable access to assistance, civil documentation, legal issues are demanded by the displaced and returnee population. Grievances desks, legal aid/ legal advice initiatives need to be maintained to provide recourse and redress The Protection Cluster and its AoRs have been able to accomplish results also through coordinated action and coordinated advocacy within the humanitarian community and with the duty bearers. Dedicated coordination roles needs to be maintained and supported B. Main achievements Advocacy and visibility products (Bulletin, specific documents for donor briefings) and bilateral approaches to donors. Continuous efforts to strongly position the cluster in the interagency context, with the aim of effectively mainstreaming protection but also to promote the relevance of stand-alone specialized protection. Thematic assessment tools in place on the return dimension, and current revisiting of the cluster specific assessment (cooperation with CP Global Cluster). A comprehensive analysis of protection secondary data ( ) has been completed. The Cluster is also active in mainstreaming protection in the specific assessment tools of the other clusters (e.g. shelter, Food Security etc). Development/ revision of tools (beneficiary selection and checklists); standards (CFS/ PLaCES endorsed by CP; WFS in the making; Cash for Work/ children labour; all by Child Protection); Guidelines (UAM/SC in Emergencies by UNICEF; Disability mainstreaming by ADTF); SOP on GBV revisited in 2012 by the GBV SC, and attempts to roll them out to the provinces (ongoing). 12

13 Finalization of a cluster-harmonized training modules/orientation sessions in several aspects of protection (finalization by the Training WG). The CP Sub-cluster has just produced a tool-kit on Child Protection in Emergency for dissemination and training. Sessions have seen conducted for sub-cluster coordinators and authorities, in particular PDMA and the Social Welfare Department. Some small success in fundraising. But these are too small to solve the chronic problem of underfunding of protection. Response in up to May ,099 children (37% G) and 21,488 women provided with protective services in 123 child protective spaces 3,600 CP committee members trained to monitor and raise awareness on child rights with outreach coverage of 136,467 community members (52% chi) 7,081 children (46% G) and 2,435 women referred to specialized service providers/ institutions 6,445 children (39% G) and 7,550 adults addressed with Mine Risk Education 58,099 children (37% G) and 21,488 women provided with protective services in 123 child protective spaces 3,600 CP committee members trained to monitor and raise awareness on child rights with outreach coverage of 136,467 community members (52% chi) 7,081 children (46% G) and 2,435 women referred to specialized service providers/ institutions 6,445 children (39% G) and 7,550 adults addressed with Mine Risk Education 17 Grievance Desks advised, referred cases addressed remedies (documentation/ registration) for almost 38,22 IDPs (18% W) Some 16,874 IDPs (43% W) received legal aid/ legal advice, particularly on civil documentation support and property-related issues 7497 IDPs (16% W) consulted on various protection-related issues and on voluntary /wellinformed return (3 Return Intention Surveys) Detailed Protection Cluster Assessment conducted in areas of return and displacement Joint Cluster monitoring missions, analysis, recommendations and evidence-based advocacy with authorities and humanitarian stakeholders in all new displacement and return movements Strengthening of referral system and of cooperation with protection-mandated authorities (PDMA /FDMA Gender Child Cell, Social Welfare Department, KP CP Welfare Commission) 13

14 Assessments are more protection-oriented Guidelines on Mainstreaming Protection in Assessments as common tool On call requests CERF 2014 UFW allocation Protection Guidelines on Beneficiary Selection Criteria Technical Guidelines checklists (shelter, health, wash) Minimum Standards for Protective Spaces for Children & Women (contextualised and endorsed by KP PDMA) Training tools and programs Thematic protection trainings for Cluster partners (referral pathways, ethical standards, MRE, ) and for other clusters- 272 session conducted, 14 trainings Overview of beneficiaries reached in January till May 2014 Response in 2013 Protection monitoring effectively used as a strategic tool for evidence-based advocacy to inform HC/HCT strategic decision on the humanitarian response 14

15 Estimated 26,800 IDPs (32% W) consulted on protection issues, needs, intentions, challenges in a participatory approach; Collaborative effort across Cluster actors (NGO participation); Detailed analysis and policy recommendations for every new displacement (5 Briefing Notes Tirah Valley; 2 Kurram); 3 Return Intention Surveys to assess voluntary /well-informed character (Tirah, SWA, Central Kurram); 5 Briefing notes on the return to Tirah and Kurram informing evidence-based HC/ HCT advocacy (HC correspondence to authorities) and humanitarian programming/ interventions (eg. MRE) Mobile teams in KP off-camp areas to conduct monitoring and referrals 22,700 displaced /returning women supported with protective spaces and services (including psycho-social support, vocational training, rights and RH awareness) 3,700 older persons and persons with disabilities offered specialized support (counseling, mobility devices, referral for assistance). 16 Grievance Desks advised, referred cases addressed remedies (documentation/ registration) for almost 17,200 IDPs (32% W) Some 35,300 IDPs (42% W) received legal aid/ legal advice, particularly on civil documentation support and property-related issues 15

16 C. Challenges and constraints Challenges for the protection cluster to assert its relevance within the humanitarian community where attention to technical sectors (food, shelter, health, WASH) prevails. Protection is frequently side-lined, despite engagement and advocacy; Refusal of the authorities to launch international appeals penalizing the entire humanitarian community. High competition for scarce funding including pooled funding (e.g emergency Relief Fund) regularly penalizes protection vis-à-vis other sectors such as food, shelter, health, WASH. The cluster has difficulties to affirm the life-saving nature of protection activities, also within the humanitarian community; Capacity of NGOs and CBOs in the field remains an issue to conduct qualitative protection work and better structured advocacy at provincial level or at national level; Need to reinforce information management capacity; protection has an inherent difficulty visà-vis the technical sectors in quantifying activities, designing assessments etc. hence more capacity and investment is needed; Capacity and engagement of local authorities especially at district level; capacity, including in coordination and soft skills ; turnover, changes, no dedicated, no resources (e.g. SWD at field level); 16

17 Growing negative attitude of the national authorities (particularly MFA and Economic Affairs Division) on the engagement of the international humanitarian community in relief activities. This culminates with the refusal of any reference to the term IDP/ Internal Displacement and the alternative use of the term Dislocated persons, as well as the constant refusal to endorse international appeals; Denial by authorities of the existence of a Conflict", with negative impact on any advocacy for protection of civilians in areas affected by military/ counter-insurgency operations and negative repercussions on humanitarian access. (see UN SC Debate on the Protection of Civilian Report in June 2012 and the reaction of Pakistan); Access: common challenge but more complex for protection (monitoring, presence, referral esp. areas of return) More information on Protection cluster in Pakistan available at: xt=&page=2 17

18 Annex 2: Administrative map of KP FATA 18

19 Annex 3: Detailed results of evaluation report Median score 1. Supporting service delivery 1.1 Provide a platform to ensure that service delivery is driven by the agreed strategic priorities 92 List of partners regularly updated 100 Regular cluster meetings organised 100 Attendance of cluster partners to cluster meetings 100 Level of decision making power of staff attending cluster meetings 100 Conditions for optimal participation of national and international stakeholders 100 Writing of minutes of cluster meetings with action points 100 Usefulness of cluster meetings for discussing needs, gaps and priorities 100 Useful strategic decision taken within the cluster 75 Attendance of cluster coordinator to HCT and ICC meetings 100 Support/engagement of cluster with national coordination mechanisms Develop mechanisms to eliminate duplication of service delivery 92 Mapping of partner geographic presence and programme activities updated as needed 100 Inputs of partners into mapping of partner geographic presence and programme activities 100 Involvement of partners into analysis of gaps and overlaps based on mapping 100 Analysis of gaps and overlaps based on mapping useful for decision-making Informing strategic decision-making of the HC/HCT for the humanitarian response 2.1 Needs assessment and gap analysis (across other sectors and within the sector) 83 Use of cluster agreed tools and guidance for needs assessments 75 Involvement of partners in joint needs assessments 100 Sharing by partners of their assessment reports Analysis to identify and address (emerging) gaps, obstacles, duplication, and cross-cutting issues 83 Analyses of situations done together with cluster partners

20 Analyses of situations identified risk 75 Analyses of situations identified needs 88 Analyses of situations identified gaps in response 88 Analyses of situations identified capacity in response 75 Analyses of situations identified constraints to respond 75 Age (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 88 Gender (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 100 Diversity - other than age and gender - (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 75 Human rights (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 100 Protection, including gender-based violence (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 100 Environment (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 75 HIV/AIDS (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 75 Disability (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses Prioritization, grounded in response analysis 88 Joint analyses supporting response planning Planning and strategy development 3.1 Develop sectoral plans, objectives and indicators directly supporting realization 77 of the HC/HCT strategic priorities Strategic plan developed 100 Partners involved in the development of strategic plan 75 Sectoral strategic plan includes objectives, activities and indicators 100 Sectoral strategic plan reviewed against host government strategy no score Age (cross-cutting issue) considered in strategic plan 100 Gender (cross-cutting issue) considered in strategic plan 100 Diversity - other than age and gender - (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 100 Human rights (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 50 Protection, including gender-based violence (cross-cutting issue) considered in strategic plan 100 Environment (cross-cutting issue) considered in strategic plan 25 HIV/AIDS (cross-cutting issue) considered in strategic plan 25 Disability (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 100 Strategic plan shows synergies from with other sectors

21 Strategic plan guided response from partners 75 Deactivation criteria and phasing out strategy formulated together with partners Application and adherence to existing standards and guidelines 75 National and international standards and guidance identified and adapted as required 50 Technical standards and guidance agreed upon and used by partners Clarify funding requirements, prioritization, and cluster contributions to HC s overall humanitarian funding considerations 92 Prioritisation of proposals against the strategic plan jointly determined with partners based on agreed transparent criteria 100 Prioritisation of proposals against strategic plan reflected interest of partners 100 Cluster supported and facilitated access to funding sources by partners 100 Regular reporting on funding status Advocacy 4.1 Identify advocacy concerns to contribute to HC and HCT messaging and action 100 Issues requiring advocacy identified and discussed together with partners Undertaking advocacy activities on behalf of cluster participants and the 75 affected population Advocacy activities agreed upon and undertaken with partners Monitoring and reporting 75 Programme monitoring formats agreed upon and used by cluster partners 75 Reports shared by partners taken into account in cluster reports 100 Regular publication of progress reports based on agreed indicators for monitoring humanitarian response 100 Regular publication of cluster bulletins 100 Changes in needs, risk and gaps highlighted in cluster reports and used for decision-making 88 Monitoring and response of the cluster taking into account the needs, contributions and capacities of women, girls, men and boys 75 21

22 6. Contingency planning/preparedness for recurrent disasters whenever feasible and relevant 100 National contingency plans identified and shared 100 Partners contributed to risk assessments and analysis 75 Partners involved in development of preparedness plan 100 Partners committed staff and/or resources towards preparedness plans 100 Early warning reports shared with partners Accountability to affected population 75 Mechanisms to consult and involve population in decision-making agreed upon and used by partners 75 Mechanisms to receive, investigate and act upon complaints on the assistance received agreed upon and used by partners 75 22