Cluster Working Group on

Early Recovery

Cluster Working Group on Early Recovery (CWGER)

Cluster members: 19 UN and non-UN entities from humanitarian and development communities:FAO, ICRC, IFRC, ILO, IOM, ISDR, OCHA, OHCHR, UNDGO, UNDP, UNEP, UNFPA, UN-HABITAT, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNOSAT, UNV, WFP, WHO

Creation of NGO Reference Group for ER

Humanitarian phase Development phase

RECOVERYEarly

Recovery

International CoordinationMechanisms

National Coordination Mechanisms

Humanitarian Coordinator(HC)

Resident Coordinator

(RC)

UN Development Group(UNDG)

International Financial Institutions

(IFI)

Transition and development Funds

Inter-Agency Standing Committee

(IASC)

Consolidated Appeal Process(CAP)

Flash Appeals

Humanitarian Funds(e.g. CERF)

Country specific Recovery &

Development Frameworks(e.g.UNDAF)

Strategic Framework

• Text

• Text

Changes in working culture

• Increased acceptance by traditionally humanitarian agencies to include ER in their work

• Strategic partnerships between cluster members have evolved

Conceptual clarity promoted

• Improved understanding of early recovery

• Rationalization efforts with UNDG/ECHA Working Groups on Transitions

• Development of Early Recovery network model

Humanitarian phase Development phase

RECOVERYEarly

Recovery

International CoordinationMechanisms

National Coordination Mechanisms

Humanitarian Coordinator(HC)

Resident Coordinator

(RC)

UN Development Group(UNDG)

International Financial Institutions

(IFI)

Transition and development Funds

Inter-Agency Standing Committee

(IASC)

Consolidated Appeal Process(CAP)

Flash Appeals

Humanitarian Funds(e.g. CERF)

Country specific Recovery &

Development Frameworks(e.g.UNDAF)

Early Recovery Network

SHELTER

HEALTH

FOOD SECURITY

WASH

NUTRITION

PROTECTION

Early Recovery Network

SHELTER

HEALTH

FOOD SECURITY

WASH

NUTRITION

PROTECTION

LIVELIHOODS

GOVERNANCE

RULE OF LAW

LAND & PROPERTY

COORDINATION

Early Recovery Network

SHELTER

HEALTH

FOOD SECURITY

WASH

NUTRITION

PROTECTION

LIVELIHOODS

GOVERNANCE

RULE OF LAW

LAND & PROPERTY

COORDINATION

Tools and methodologies adapted/developed

• Guidance & How-to:• Overarching ER Guidance Note• ER in transition• Sectoral guidance

– on post-crisis land tenure and property rights– on return and reintegration in ER context– on child protection, wash, health, nutrition, education in an ER

context • Needs assessment tools• Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) as framework• Sectoral Assessments

– Livelihood Assessment Toolkit– initial shelter needs assessment– inclusion of satellite based mapping tools

• Framework for integrated local-level/area-based programming

Capacity for ER at country level increased

• Training Package:

• Training for IASC country teams

• Training for ER Coordinator surge pool

• Training on tools application

• Specialized sectoral training

Country-level response

• Deployment of ER Coordinators to support RCs in set-up of ER network and strategic planning for ER

• ER Coordinators network• Facilitate timely deployment of inter-agency

expert teams• Support country-level resource mobilization• Establishing field presence with sub-offices

Cross-cutting issues mainstreamed

• Mainstreaming cross-cutting issues into ER: gender, environment and HIV/AIDS

• Mainstreaming ER into all other clusters – ER network

• Common framework for inclusion of cross-cutting issues in cluster approach

Capacity and sustainability issues

• ER Team at CLA established – including dedicated CWGER secretariat staff

• Cluster members have expanded their capacity in ER area and dedicated staff to clusters

• Some activities only require one-time funding, examples include:– Tools development– Development of training materials– Establishment of surge-capacity mechanism

• Recurrent costs can then be mainstreamed

Capacity and sustainability issues (cont.)

• ER Coordinators: never part of global appeal, funding through country level appeals so far not possible, currently supported by CLA

• Mainstreaming of ER into existing clusters as proposed by the ER network model

Challenges & way forward

• Large cluster (19 members) dealing with cross-cutting issues

• Still need to work on transfering conceptual clarity into operational effectiveness at field level

• common methodologies and tools take time to develop – but need to react to crises now

• Still inadequate response to ER needs in existing appeal mechanisms

• Engagement with IFIs• Lack of human resources

Challenges & way forward

• Low government involvement sometimes leading to weak operational linkage between cluster and government mechanisms

• Cross-cutting nature makes it hard to identify one counterpart agency within national and local authorities

• Need for recovery planning in addition to response planning at country level

Challenges & way forward

• Lack of reliable baseline information

• “Rush” back to normality competes with time required for an effective participatory process

• Inclusion of conflict prevention/risk reduction into response

• Need to improve M&E aspects of Early Recovery programmes

Cluster Working Group on Early Recovery

Thank you