OCHA s Management Response Plan (MRP) to Evaluation of the Common Humanitarian Fund Country Report: Sudan

Transcription

1 OCHA s Management Response Plan (MRP) to Evaluation of the Common Humanitarian Fund Country Report: Sudan Prepared by: Bavo Christiaens, Pooled Fund Manager, HFRMS 18/11/2015 Cleared by: Name, Position, Unit Date Tracked by: Name, Position, Unit Date OVERALL COMMENTS: The evaluation noted the strong contributions that the CHF has made to humanitarian response and highlighted the fact that the CHF reserve allocations is the fastest mechanism to fund humanitarian response in Sudan. There was however a lack of understanding about the differences between standard and reserve allocations and many parts of the evaluation lacked solid analysis and were unable to provide clear evidence based conclusions. Overall this led to limited appreciation of the evaluation in country. EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 1 1 : The HC should invite donors back to the HCT to avoid utilizing the CHF AB as the main forum for donors strategic involvement with the humanitarian planning process. CLASSIFICATION: CRITICAL The affirmation that the CHF AB is used as the main forum for donor s involvement with the humanitarian planning process is inaccurate. Donors have been invited to all HCT meetings debating all key steps of the HNO and HRP. Furthermore, bringing back donors to the HCT is not the only solution to create strong links between operational partners and the donor community. No action required EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 2: Dissemination of CHF M&R reports should be made directly to implementing partners, as well as through the relevant sectors, to avoid delays and inconsistency in the speed of distribution. CLASSIFICATION: CRITICAL Include the workflow on the distribution of monitoring reports (as part of the monitoring standard operating procedures, in the Operational Manual. Jan 2016 CHF Technical Unit EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 3: The allocated time for the technical review phase needs to be shortened to avoid lengthy standard allocation processes. The CHF and sectors should decide locally, together with the IP, when the different processes can be sped up. [As the IPs become more familiar with the new CBPF allocation requirements and procedures, project proposals are increasingly being submitted to the required standard, and this already cuts down the overall time taken.] 1 Please consult OCHA s website on Evaluation for sample MRPs. If you need assistance in filling out the MRP, please contact Name of the Evaluation Manager, the evaluation manager for the Name of the Evaluation. 1

2 OCHA agrees on reducing the overall timeline for the standard allocation. In 2015, the technical review was already reduced to 3 weeks because the sector technical reviews were done in parallel which was not the case in Other aspects of the allocation process will also be analyzed critically and made timelier wherever possible. A workflow with an overall shorter standard allocation timeframe will be included in the Operational Manual. For instance, partner nominations and sector defenses will no longer be linked to the process. Jan 2016 CHF Technical Unit EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 4: The time taken for the preparation of PPA needs to be shortened to allow implementing partners to initiate funded activities as soon as possible after final approval has been issued. Management Response: Partially accepted Preparation of the PPA as used in the Evaluation Report, needs to distinguish between the different steps required from HC s approval of allocation to disbursement of funds each with a separate timeline. This requires clarification in the communication to partners, based on which opportunities for reducing the number of steps should be jointly identified. FMU will organize a dedicated meeting with NGO partners to review and clarify the different stages of the PPA Preparation process; FMU will develop a timeline for each stage of the preparation of the PPA process. For each allocation, actual time will be measured against the target. Mar 2016 UNDP FMU EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 5: In order to support a more timely allocation process, CHF donors should make funding commitments in the latter part of the previous year. This recommendation cannot be attributed to OCHA as it is beyond the control of OCHA. The evaluation found the reserve allocations to be very timely, and the fastest mechanism for humanitarian response in Sudan. The timeliness of the standard allocations is dependent on a number of factors, and the actions taken to address recommendations 3 and 4 above will shorten the allocation process. OCHA has consulted donors and will encourage donors to provide early funding, but some donors have indicated that their home country processes do not allow them to make commitments in the latter part of the previous years. Meeting with all CHF donors takes place every year in the latter part of the year before to discuss funding commitments and timing. Dec 2015 OCHA 2

3 EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 6: HWP/SRP strategic planning must be strengthened to allow for more targeted use of CHF funding. This recommendation is unsubstantiated and therefore cannot be actioned as the consultants do not specify what they mean by strategic. All elements of information exist and are available in the HNO and HRP for the HC, Advisory Board and technical team to make the analysis to support strategic decisions. Sector defenses which involve partners and donors are organized to review in detail funding allocation strategies. EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 7: Develop a multi-year allocation strategy for the CHF, aligned with the overall humanitarian strategy in Sudan. This change would have significant implications for the CHF, and would require that instead of using funds for life-saving assistance, some funds are set aside for the next year. This would not be a good use of emergency resources within a shrinking funding environment. This also is not aligned with the HRP or donor commitments. It is noted that the HRP includes, within a multiyear strategy, annual humanitarian projects. In chronic emergencies, a stable set of core indicators retained from year to year helps track interventions over a longer period and produce trend analysis, even when plans are adjusted annually. If there is a fundamental change of the HRP and donor commitments, the CHF AB and the Technical Unit could consider a multi-year CHF strategy. However this would need to be closely linked to financial contributions. EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 8: In connection to the above recommendation, the Sudan CHF should consider increasing the funding for resilience components and durable solutions in the region of Darfur, through the CHF standard allocation process. The HRP strongly supports strengthening resilience, not through dedicated activities, which are in essence development activities, but through a change in how humanitarian aid is programmed. As such, resilience is already streamlined and therefore included in the standard allocation in line with the HRP strategy. Funding for resilience resilience components and durable solutions in the region of Darfur will be discussed when developing allocation strategies and will be based on the priority needs and the humanitarian context at the corresponding time. 3

4 EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 9: Increase the Emergency Reserve to at least 20 percent of the annual allocation to provide sufficient resources for meeting unforeseen or increasing needs. Management Response: Partially accepted While the draft Operational Manual contains the target of 20% of annual allocations to the Reserve for Emergencies, we cannot prejudge the future humanitarian environment hence this percentage should remain flexible. In line with the CBPF operational handbook, the percentage should be determined by the current circumstances and context. When considerable critical gaps exist at the moment of organizing a standard allocation, it does make sense to address those immediately in the Standard Allocation rather than put the money aside in the Reserve for Emergencies. The size of the standard and reserve allocations will be considered during the preparation of allocation papers. Feb 2016 CHF Technical Unit/CHF AB EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 10: OCHA must ensure that the HFMRU is fully staffed at any time and no key positions remain vacant to ensure the effective management of the CHF and to reduce the high organizational risk perception among its donor base. This recommendation to ensure continuity of staffing was also included in the synthesis evaluation (recommendation 5), and the following response is included: OCHA has established a fund manager roster (at P3 and P4 level) precisely with the aim of having a pool of readily available candidates to be deployable with the right skills to manage a CBPF when required. In principle to have them available at short notice following the aftermath of any disaster or intensification of a conflict situation which required the setup of a fund or an increased staffing capacity for an enlarged fund in those locations where a CBPF is already operational. OCHA has also initiated to explore the possibility to use the Associate Surge Pool and standby partnerships arrangements to expand the number of deployable staff for the management of CBPFs. The increasing donor support to a number of CBPFs, and the enhanced range of work which the risk based approach will bring will however also require more capacity and numbers of fund managers able to surge to rapid-onset disasters for response, but also working on chronic emergencies in larger humanitarian financing units. OCHA remains committed to further strengthen its capacity for rapid deployment of staff while ensuring thorough handover remains challenging due to existing regulations. OCHA also remains committed to increase the delivery of training specifically targeting fund management requirements. It is also worth noting that increased capacity for surge and rapid deployment will also depend on the adequate level of funding available. 1. Enhanced, standardized training, through the CBPF Training Framework 2. Improved use of standby partnerships arrangements and Associates Surge Pool (ASP) 3. OCHA surge (HQ to field) is used to reduce extended vacancies (need input from ESB on actions that can be tracked) Q FCS ESB, CRD, FCS ESB, CRD, FCS 4

5 EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 11: Findings from M&R must be clearly used to underpin the planning and design of future humanitarian response strategies within the CHF and SRP framework. During the regular AB meetings which will take place minimum two times a year, the CHF TU will present best practices, lessons learned and recommendations that came out of Monitoring & Reporting of the CHF projects for consideration and future decision making. Nov 2015 CHF Technical Unit EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 12: The Sudan CHF should limit the share of passed-through funding to 7 percent of the project budget in order to filter all projects that rely heavily on sub-granting to second-level implementing partners. This recommendation is unsubstantiated and it is not clear why the evaluation recommends limiting subgranting to 7 percent of a project budget. It furthermore undermines / prevents multi-sector approaches and partnerships among organizations. As a country-based pooled fund, the CHF is in favor of direct implementation but the added value of sub-granting will be reviewed on case by case basis. EVALUATION RECOMMENDATION 13: Reinstate the Gender and Environment advisor positions to support the project planning, proposal and implementation of CHF projects CLASSIFICATION: OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT The CHF agrees that the gender and environment advice can help support the CHF and stakeholders, but the allocation of gender and environment advisor positions is outside of OCHA s control. In 2013/14 Gender and Advisory positions were deployed by IASC standby partners and Sudan is currently not on the IASC priority list for a gender advisor position, but OCHA will advocate for another advisor to be deployed. Additionally, the CHF will continue to use the tools developed by the advisors to support project planning, proposal and implementation of CHF projects. The CHF will continue to use the tools developed by the advisors (Gender marker etc) to support project assessment, planning, proposals and implementation of 2016 OCHA 5

6 CHF projects. OCHA will advocate for gender and environment advisors to be deployed to Sudan 2016 OCHA 6