Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S...

62
EVALUATION REPORT November 2018 Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee Crisis in Bangladesh VOLUME TWO ANNEXES EVALUATION OFFICE

Transcript of Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S...

Page 1: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION REPORTNovember 2018

Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee Crisis in Bangladesh

VOLUME TWO ANNEXES

EVALUATION OFFICE

Page 2: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION REPORTNovember 2018

Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee Crisis in Bangladesh

VOLUME TWOANNEXES

EVALUATION OFFICE

Page 3: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES2

Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee Crisis in Bangladesh© United Nations Children’s Fund, New York, 2018

United Nations Children’s Fund Three United Nations Plaza New York, New York 10017

November 2018

The purpose of publishing evaluation reports produced by the UNICEF Evaluation Office is to fulfil a corporate commitment to transparency through the publication of all completed evaluations. The reports are designed to stimulate a free exchange of ideas among those interested in the topic and to assure those supporting the work of UNICEF that it rigorously examines its strategies, results, and overall effectiveness.

The contents of the report do not necessarily reflect the policies or views of UNICEF. The views expressed in this report are those of the evaluators. The text has not been edited to official publication standards and UNICEF accepts no responsibility for error. The designations in this publication do not imply an opinion on the legal status of any country or territory, or of its authorities, or the delimitation of frontiers.

The copyright for this report is held by the United Nations Children’s Fund. Permission is required to reprint/reproduce/photocopy or in any other way cite or quote from this report in written form. UNICEF has a formal permission policy that requires a written request to be submitted. For non-commercial uses, the permission will normally be granted free of charge. Please write to the Evaluation Office at the address below to initiate a permission request.

This report is available online at: https://www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/index_103442.html

For further information, please contact:Evaluation OfficeUnited Nations Children’s FundThree United Nations PlazaNew York, New York [email protected]

Page 4: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

CONTENTS

TERMS OF REFERENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES IN THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS DURING THE INCEPTION PHASE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

EVALUATION MATRIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDREN FOR NUTRITION, HEALTH, WASH, CHILD PROTECTION AND EDUCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

A. Summary of the education programme components against the education CCCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

B. Summary of the child protection programme components against the child protection CCCs . . . 25

C. Summary of the health programme commitments against the health CCCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

D. Summary of the nutrition programme components against the nutrition CCCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

E. Summary of the WASH programme components against the WASH CCCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

LIST OF INTERVIEWEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

DATA COLLECTION TOOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

A. Focus group discussion protocol and guiding questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

B. Survey for UNICEF partners (programme cooperation agreements). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

C. Survey for partners of the sectors UNICEF leads or co-leads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

RESEARCH ETHICS APPROVAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

COMPOSITION OF THE TEAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

ISCG GENDER MATRIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

INTER-SECTORALITY MATRIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

SECTOR-SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

WORKS CITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES3

Page 5: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

A Rohingya refugee holds her two-month old baby, outside their shelter in the Balukhali makeshift settlement, Cox’s Bazar district, Bangladesh.

© U

NIC

EF

/UN

01

56

99

2/B

IND

RA

Page 6: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

ANNEX 1. TERMS OF REFERENCETerms of reference for the Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Crisis in Bangladesh

INTRODUCTION

This terms of reference describes the Evaluation Office’s plan to conduct an independent rapid and timely humanitarian evaluation of UNICEF’s response to the Rohingya crisis in Bangladesh. This evaluation will have a limited scope: it will assess the first six months of the response to the Level 3 emergency. This terms of reference outlines the purpose of the evaluation, its objectives, scope, the questions it will seek to answer and the approach and methods to be used. This document also describes the composition of the evaluation team, the desired profile of team members, tasks and the timeline for the evaluation.

BACKGROUNDSince the late 1970s, nearly 1 million Rohingya people have fled Myanmar, due to persecution.1 According to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), more than 87,000 Rohingya fled to Bangladesh between October 2016 when violence broke out, and July 2017.2 The influx increased dramatically in August 2017. Since then, nearly 688,000 refugees have arrived in Bangladesh, almost 400,000 of whom are children.3 With the new influx, 1.2 million people, both refugees and from Bangladeshi host communities, are in need of urgent humanitarian assistance, including critical life-saving interventions. Background information on the situation and the wider response is available on ReliefWeb4 and Humanitarian Response.5

1 ‘Who are the Rohingya?’ Al Jazeera, 18 April 2018, <www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/08/rohingya-muslims-170831065142812.html#gone>, accessed 15 November 2018.

2 Ibid.

3 United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report No. 19 (Rohingya Influx)’, UNICEF, 21 January 2018.

4 See ReliefWeb, ‘Bangladesh’, <https://reliefweb.int/country/bgd>, accessed 15 November 2018.

5 See Humanitarian Response, ‘Bangladesh’, <www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/bangladesh>, accessed 15 November 2018.

6 Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, ‘2017 Humanitarian Response Plan September 2017-February 2018: Rohingya Refugee Crisis’, OCHA, October 2017, <https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/2017_HRP_Bangladesh_041017_2.pdf>, accessed 15 November 2018.

UNICEF had begun providing humanitarian assistance since the influx in October 2016. On 20 September 2017, UNICEF formally activated the Level 3 emergency response. UNICEF issued a revised response plan that prioritized life-saving interventions to address immediate and urgent needs in affected Rohingya children, women and adolescents. Shor tly thereafter, the resident coordinator issued the Joint Response Plan (JRP), which describes how all humanitarian actors, including UNICEF, will respond.6

The focus of this evaluation is UNICEF’s response plan. It outlines six programme areas:

nn Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), which focuses on the immediate provision of safe water, basic sanitation and community engagement around hygiene practices;

nn Nutrition, which focuses on treating children with severe acute malnutrition (SAM) through community-based management of acute malnutrition using ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF) and providing infant and young child feeding (IYCF) counselling to pregnant and lactating women;

nn Health, which focuses on acute watery diarrhoea, support to a mass vaccination campaigns for cholera prevention, and immunization of children against measles and other vaccine preventable diseases;

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES5

Page 7: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES6

TERMS OF REFERENCEANNEX ONE

as well as preventative and curative health services and strengthening the health system;

nn Child protection, which focuses on delivering psychosocial support, identification and case management of unaccompanied and separated children, strengthening the existing child protection mechanisms, responding to gender-based violence and service provision for adolescents;

nn Education, which focuses on providing early learning and non-formal basic education; and

nn Communication for Development (C4D)/community engagement and accountability, a cross-cutting component which focuses on life-saving information on services and household level practices; community engagement for facilitating positive behaviour development and change; as well as increased accountability to the affected population.

UNICEF’s original appeal also proposed a component on humanitarian social protection, which was later excluded from the six-month Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP). During the emergency, there have been outbreaks of measles and diphtheria to which UNICEF has responded. Preventive measures for avoiding a cholera epidemic were also undertaken.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been assigned to coordinate the Rohingya response with support from the Bangladesh Army and Border Guard Bangladesh. UNICEF is working closely with key humanitarian actors at the national and sub-national levels, including with government line ministries.

While the cluster system has not been officially activated, sector coordination is taking place. UNICEF leads the coordination of the nutrition sector and the child protection sub-sector. It co-leads the education sector with Save the Children and co-leads the WASH sector with Action contre la Faim (ACF).

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVESThis a rapid and timely humanitarian evaluation meaning it will be completed in a short time frame with the primary purpose of generating lessons to improve UNICEF’s

response to the ongoing emergency. For this reason, the findings of the evaluation will be shared with management as they emerge. At the discretion of the team leader, the inception report will contain an annex of preliminary findings. Both missions to the country will conclude with a debriefing session with management. The evaluation team will provide a set of draft recommendations to strengthen UNICEF’s response to the current situation. The team will also lead a recommendations workshop at which the recommendations will be discussed and refined with staff from UNICEF Bangladesh, the Regional Office for South Asia (ROSA) and Headquarters. This evaluation is planned to inform the mid-year review, which will take place in June 2018. The secondary purposes of this evaluation are to help hold UNICEF accountable for its response, and to assist UNICEF, its Executive Board and the international humanitarian community to better understand how to programme in situations of rapid mass displacement and rural resettlement.

The objectives of the evaluation are as follows:

OBJECTIVE 1: Assess the adequacy of the UNICEF response in providing humanitarian assistance to vulnerable people who reside in camp settings, are integrated within Bangladeshi communities, and are in host communities.

OBJECTIVE 2: Determine how well UNICEF is working with implementing partners and other agencies and government, for both the near and medium/long terms.

OBJECTIVE 3: Identify actions to improve the response.

INTENDED USERS AND USE

The primary users of the evaluation are UNICEF staff in the Bangladesh Country Office and staff supporting the response in ROSA and UNICEF Headquarters. Other users include government stakeholders, partners and donors.

The evaluation will have a strong utilization focus and is expected to capture lessons and make conclusions that will be used to strengthen the ongoing response. To this end, an in-country debriefing session will be held to keep stakeholders abreast of what the evaluation

Page 8: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

team has learned during the data collection mission. After the draft report has been prepared, there will be a recommendations workshop, involving UNICEF managers at UNICEF Bangladesh, ROSA and Headquarters to fine tune and adjust the draft recommendations to encourage uptake and use of the findings.

SCOPE Programmatic focusThe evaluation will look at work in all sectors in which UNICEF is working. Particular attention will be paid to accountability to affected populations. Also, the evaluation will consider how well UNICEF has performed its sectoral lead or co-lead coordination role (in education, child protection, nutrition and WASH).

While this is an evaluation of UNICEF’s response, the evaluation will consider this response within the broader context. However, issues related to repatriation will be excluded.

Important note: within each sector, the programmatic scope will be further limited during the inception phase. The evaluation team, after consulting with UNICEF staff and senior management, will identify the priority areas for focused attention. For example, within nutrition, the team may focus on SAM.

Operational focusThe evaluation will look at how well supply, funding and human resources contributed to the overall response.

© U

NIC

EF

/UN

01

47

31

4/B

RO

WN A group of newly arrived Rohingya

refugees walk to the nearest refugee registration and aid distribution point in the coastal village of Shamlapur, Cox’s Bazar region, Bangladesh, Saturday 11 November 2017.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES7

TERMS OF REFERENCEANNEX ONE

Page 9: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES8

TERMS OF REFERENCEANNEX ONE

© U

NIC

EF

/UN

015

81

82

/SU

JAN

Geographic and population focusThe geographic focus of the evaluation will be Cox’s Bazar, particularly the makeshift camps and host communities located in Leda, Kutupalong, Shamlapur, Balukhali, Ukhia and Teknaf. This will include Rohingya who have arrived since 2016, those who reside in camp settings, those integrated within Bangladeshi communities and vulnerable host communities in identified locations.

We note that UNICEF’s response to the Rohingya crisis extends beyond the borders of Bangladesh to Rakhine State in Myanmar. However, the focus of this evaluation will be limited to evaluating the Level 3 response that was declared only in Bangladesh.

Temporal focusThe evaluation will focus primarily on the response from the end of August 2017 when the influx of Rohingya to Cox’s Bazar increased dramatically to the present.

EVALUATION QUESTIONSThe following questions may be revised or refined during the inception phase of the evaluation.

1. What has been UNICEF’s contribution to the wider effort to provide humanitarian assistance to vulnerable people who reside in camp settings, are integrated within Bangladeshi communities and are in host communities? How has the wider effort impacted UNICEF’s work?

OBJECTIVE 1: Assess the adequacy of the UNICEF response in providing humanitarian assistance to vulnerable people who reside in camp settings, are integrated within Bangladeshi communities and are in host communities.

2. UNICEF’s ability to address the needs of increasing numbers of refugees:

nn How prepared was UNICEF for the influx of refugees?

nn From September 2017, what has been UNICEF’s ability to meet its commitments compared to the calculated need [coverage]?

7 The CCCs are a global framework for humanitarian action for children undertaking by UNICEF and partners. United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Core Commitments for Children in Humanitarian Action’, UNICEF, May 2010, <www.unicef.org/publications/files/CCC_042010.pdf>, accessed 15 November 2018.

nn What factors contributed to or hindered the ability to grow alongside the increased caseloads?

nn Looking ahead from March 2018, what is UNICEF’s ability to deliver on its commitments versus present and projected caseloads [including against potential shifts noted in the United Nations risk assessments]?

3. The appropriateness of UNICEF’s strategy and programmatic choices:

nn How relevant are UNICEF’s present and planned interventions to the needs of the population? To take account of UNICEF’s mandate, commitments (e.g., the Core Commitments for Children in Humanitarian Action (CCCs)7 and the division of labour established though relevant coordination mechanisms.

nn Are there gaps in UNICEF’s current programming response against the established or projected needs?

A Rohingya refugee boy arrives for classes at UNICEF’s Kokil Learning Centre at the Unchiprang makeshift settlement in Teknaf, Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh.

Page 10: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

nn If so, what are the reasons for the gaps and what is needed to close them?

4. The quality of and use of information used to guide the response:

nn What is the quality of the situation analyses and needs assessments (whether inter-agency or UNICEF led) used to estimate caseloads and project future needs?

nn Are the monitoring systems, reviews and assessment exercises sufficiently comprehensive and accurate to guide UNICEF and partners?

nn How comprehensive are the participatory approaches used to secure Rohingya and other stakeholder inputs in the different information gathering efforts? Is the voice of the affected populations obtained in an effective, pro-active and culturally respectful way?

nn How well are these diverse information sources being used to inform and adapt the response?

5. The quality of the programming response. To what extent has the response:

nn Been effective? (in achieving stated objectives)

nn Been timely and proportionate? (in scaling up for adequate coverage)

nn Been of high quality? (consistent with relevant standards and policies, i.e., the CCCs and Sphere Standards)

nn Delivered for different groups? (according to disability, gender, adolescents, ethnicity, religion, caste, refugee/host-community)

nn Been accountable to affected populations? (in an effective, pro-active and culturally respectful way)

nn Been efficient? (compared to alternatives)

6. Managerial support to the programmatic response, with a focus on the Level 3 Simplified Standard Operating Procedures:8

nn Are the accountabilities among offices (especially the Cox’s Bazar Field Office, UNICEF Bangladesh, ROSA, UNICEF Geneva, the Supply Division and Headquarters) clear? Did this arrangement work well?

8 United Nations Children’s Fund, UNICEF Simplified Procedures in Emergencies, UNICEF, <www.unicefinemergencies.com/procedures/level-3.html>, accessed 15 November 2018.

nn How well did human resources support the response? Are there skills/staffing needs required to meet its commitments that UNICEF has not identified or moved to secure? If so, why has this situation arisen?

nn How well was the response supported by funding and funds management, including risk-informed projections? How did funding affect results?

nn How well is the supply function, including considerations of coping with the obstacles in the working environment, able to deliver necessary supplies on time and at the locations needed?

OBJECTIVE 2: Determine how well UNICEF is working with implementing partners and other agencies and the Government, for both the near- and medium-/long-terms.

7. System-wide coordination, leadership and advocacy:

nn When UNICEF has the cluster lead role (or nearest structural equivalent), how well is it fulfilling its role as cluster/sector lead? To include necessary consideration of how the wider humanitarian effort has impacted UNICEF’s work.

nn When UNICEF does not have the cluster lead (or there is no cluster mechanism), how well is UNICEF using and promoting the Principles of Partnership?

nn How well is UNICEF managing relations with the Government of Bangladesh through the several channels employed? How well is it able to balance and coordinate the different roles with which it engages the Government [advocate, technical partner, cluster lead, etc].

8. Working with implementing partners to deliver the programmatic response:

nn Does UNICEF have a set of partners able to execute the present and pending programmes to the necessary scale, timing and quality?

nn To what extent did UNICEF provide adequate training/

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES9

TERMS OF REFERENCEANNEX ONE

Page 11: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES10

TERMS OF REFERENCEANNEX ONE

capacity building, monitor and address partner performance and establish minimum standards?

nn In which ways are UNICEF or United Nations partnership processes facilitating or constraining effective programmatic response?

9. Efforts to address long-term goals while responding to the current challenges:

nn Is the UNICEF team effectively planning or actually initiating actions linking the emergency response to longer-term development goals? How effective are these efforts, (particularly in education and child protection)? What are the constraints? To pay special attention to steps to strengthen resilience and preparedness in national/local systems.

nn How is the programme in UNICEF Bangladesh being adjusted to the new context and needs of the population in Bangladesh? What are the difficulties, including opportunity costs, if any, encountered internally and externally (i.e., UNICEF internal structure and processes, donor requirements)?

OBJECTIVE 3: Identify actions to improve the response.

nn What actions are required in order to improve the response and to prepare for future needs?

APPROACH AND METHODS

This evaluation will use a methodology that the Evaluation Office called rapid and timely humanitarian evaluations. In rapid and timely humanitarian evaluations, the phases of more traditional evaluations are compressed. Essentially, there are three phases: 1) scoping, inception and preliminary data collection; 2) data collection and verification, which will result in the sharing of preliminary findings; and 3) report writing, recommendation development and dissemination. All three phases will take place within three months of contracting consultants. An additional element of rapid and timely humanitarian evaluations is that an Evaluation Office staff member will be embedded in the evaluation team, as a team member.

9 ‘Core Commitments for Children in Humanitarian Action’.

The evaluation will rely, where relevant, on the CCCs as its framework.9 It will primarily use qualitative methods and quantitative methods to answer the evaluation questions, taking care to verify data and triangulate all findings.

While recognizing the constraints of time and being sensitive to the burden an evaluation can place on staff response, it will start with existing information and analysis. This will include undertaking a document review of programme reports, monitoring data, situation analyses, existing baseline data, meeting minutes, situation reports, the after action review, notes from staff missions, and programme information that is available at UNICEF Bangladesh, ROSA or within headquarters divisions. In addition to the document review, the evaluation will collect qualitative primary data. This will include qualitative and quantitative data collection from the affected communities as well as key informant interviews with current and former staff and partners in Headquarters, ROSA, UNICEF Bangladesh and the Cox’s Bazar Field Office. The methods and sampling framework will be developed during the inception phase.

LIMITATIONS OF THE EVALUATIONThe following limitations of the evaluation can be identified at this early stage:

nn The evaluation is limited to the response in Bangladesh where the Level 3 has been declared, which means it will not be able to provide UNICEF with a complete picture with regard to its response to the overall Rohingya crisis.

nn Despite the fact that repatriation is an important issue for future programming, it falls outside the scope of this evaluation.

nn Monsoon season may affect the evaluation team’s ability to travel to Cox’s Bazar and the availability of staff to meet with the evaluation team might be reduced. During the inception phase a contingency plan will be developed.

Page 12: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

© U

NIC

EF

/UN

02

03

36

6/S

OK

OL

MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS

Given that the Rohingya crisis has been declared a Level 3 emergency, the Evaluation Office will manage the evaluation but in in close collaboration with UNICEF Bangladesh, ROSA and relevant headquarters divisions, per the forthcoming Evaluation Policy. The senior evaluation specialist for humanitarian evaluation will manage this process, under the guidance of the evaluation director. The Evaluation Office will commission a team of external independent consultants to undertake the evaluation. The team will be supported by an evaluation specialist from the Evaluation Office. The Evaluation Office is ultimately responsible for the process and final quality of the evaluation.

A small reference group for the evaluation has been established to ensure the relevance, accuracy and thus

10 United Nations Evaluation Group, ‘Norms and Standards for Evaluation’, UNEG, 2016, <www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/1914>, accessed 15 November 2018.

credibility and utility of the evaluation. The reference group’s main responsibility will be to review and comment on key evaluation outputs (i.e., this terms of reference, the inception report, emerging findings and the draft and final reports). However, it will play an advisory role only; final decisions on the evaluation process and quality assurance of outputs rest with the Evaluation Office. The reference group will communicate primarily through email. When necessary, virtual meetings will be organized.

UNICEF Bangladesh will be responsible for hosting the evaluation team, providing a work space and arranging interviews with key stakeholders. It will also assist with locating documentation and materials.

ETHICS The evaluation team will adhere to the United Nations Evaluation Group Norms and Standards for Evaluation,10 the

An overview of a portion of Balukhali camp for Rohingya refugees in Cox’s Bazar District, Bangladesh on 4 March 2018. Rohingya people have been responsible for the majority of construction inside the camps where they are currently sheltering.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES11

TERMS OF REFERENCEANNEX ONE

Page 13: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES12

TERMS OF REFERENCEANNEX ONE

United Nations Evaluation Group Ethical Guidelines11 and the UNICEF Procedure for Ethical Standards in Research, Evaluation, Data Collection and Analysis.12 It should be noted that because the evaluation team will collect data from vulnerable groups, the methodology and associated data collection tools (described in the inception report) will be reviewed by an ethical review board. The Evaluation Office will facilitate this process.

11 United Nations Evaluation Group, ‘UNEG Ethical Guidelines’, UNEG, June 2008, <www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/102>, accessed 15 November 2018.

12 United Nations Children’s Fund Division of Data, Research and Policy, ‘UNICEF Procedure for Ethical Standards in Research, Evaluation, Data Collection and Analysis’, UNICEF, 1 April 2015, <www.unicef.org/supply/files/ATTACHMENT_IV-UNICEF_Procedure_for_Ethical_Standards.PDF>, accessed 15 November 2018.

13 United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Global Evaluation Reports Oversight System’, UNICEF, 28 August 2018, <www.unicef.org/evaluation/index_GEROS.html>, accessed 15 November 2018.

QUALITY ASSESSMENT Per the Evaluation Office procedures, the final report with will shared with and rated for quality by an external body as part of the Global Evaluation Reports Oversight System.13

TIMEFRAME, TASKS AND DELIVERABLES The evaluation will be undertaken from March 2018 to June 2018. The table on the following page shows the dates for various tasks and deliverables.

DATES TASKS AND DELIVERABLES RESPONSIBLE

February Compiling of documentary archive Evaluation Office to lead and ask for assistance, when necessary, from ROSA and UNICEF Bangladesh

February Dissemination and use plan developed Evaluation Office with help of reference group

Team contracted – March 17

Background reading and desk review Evaluation team with assistance of the Evaluation Office

March 17 Desk review, plan for inception mission including data collection tools, inception report outline submitted.

Evaluation team

March 17 –March 30 BangladeshMarch 30 – April 3 Nepal

Inception mission to UNICEF Bangladesh and Cox’s Bazar Field Office (possibly also ROSA), including presentation to all key stakeholders. Photos and videos produced to assist with dissemination.

Evaluation team, Evaluation Office staff member, UNICEF Bangladesh and Cox’s Bazar Field Office to host

April 6 Draft inception report submitted, data collection begins Evaluation team

April 6 – 13 Review and comment on inception report Evaluation Office, Reference Group

April 17 Final inception report submitted, sent to ethical review board Evaluation team

April 23 – May 4 Data collection mission to UNICEF Bangladesh and Cox’s Bazar Field Office (possibly also ROSA), concluding with onsite debriefingPhotos and videos produced to assist with dissemination.

Evaluation team, Evaluation Office staff member, and possibly reference group member, UNICEF Bangladesh and Cox’s Bazar Field Office to host

May 5 – 29 Data analysis and report writing Evaluation team

May 30 First draft report submitted Evaluation team

May 30 – June 6 Review and comment on draft report Evaluation Office, Reference Group

June 8 Address feedback in draft report, team leader to organize and lead a workshop to discuss report and finalize recommendations

Evaluation team, participation in workshop: all

Week of June 11 Final report Evaluation team

Page 14: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION TEAM COMPOSITION AND RESPONSIBILITIES UNICEF will recruit a team of six external consultants to conduct the evaluation: one team leader, three senior evaluators and two national consultants. Individuals that meet the following requirements, and are available for the evaluation period indicated, are invited to apply. Individual contracts will be issued to each team member.

The team leader will commit to working on this evaluation full time from March until June. S/he will be awarded a contract for 60 days. S/he will be responsible for managing and leading the evaluation team, in designing the evaluation, undertaking the data collection and analysis, conducting the debriefing session and recommendations workshop and preparing the evaluation deliverables and reports.

The three senior evaluators will be awarded contracts for 50 days each. They will be responsible for helping design the evaluation, undertaking the data collection and analysis and drafting elements of the report.

The two national consultants will be awarded contracts for 30 days each. They will be responsible for carrying out data collection in the field and assist with data analysis. They will also be responsible for translation, where required.

REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS Team leader

nn Extensive experience in emergency response, preferably with a United Nations agency

nn Experience evaluating humanitarian action, evaluating Level 3 emergencies preferred

nn Knowledge of latest methods and approaches in humanitarian evaluation, especially participatory methods and accountability to affected populations

nn Familiarity with UNICEF’s emergency response, including the CCCs preferred

nn Excellent oral and written communication skills

nn Knowledge of qualitative and quantitative methods

nn Experience evaluating refugee response preferred

nn Experience working in South Asia preferred

nn Experience managing a team

nn Experience with the ethics of evidence generation, experience collecting data from vulnerable groups and familiarity with ethical safeguards

Three senior evaluatorsnn Extensive knowledge of one or more of the sectors

or themes being evaluated

nn Extensive experience in emergency response, preferably with a un agency, including knowledge of human resources, supply, budget management, etc.

nn A minimum of five years’ experience evaluating humanitarian action

nn Knowledge of latest methods and approaches in humanitarian evaluation (as evidenced by recent publications about new methods or evaluations that employ new methods)

nn Familiarity with UNICEF’s emergency response, including the CCCs

nn Knowledge of qualitative and quantitative methods

nn Experience with the ethics of evidence generation; experience collecting data from vulnerable groups; familiarity with ethical safeguards

Two national consultants nn Experience working on research, studies or evaluations

nn Experience in primary data collection in affected communities, including leading focus group discussion and participatory methods

nn Qualitative data analysis skills

nn Experience in programme monitoring

nn Fluency in Rohingya and Chittagong languages is an advantage

nn Experience with the ethics of evidence generation, experience collecting data from vulnerable groups and familiarity with ethical safeguards

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES13

TERMS OF REFERENCEANNEX ONE

Page 15: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES14

ORIGINAL EVALUATION QUESTION CHANGE

1. What has been UNICEF’s contribution to the wider effort to provide humanitarian assistance to vulnerable people who reside in camp settings, are integrated within Bangladeshi communities, and in host communities?

nn This is seen as an overarching question that will inform all of the evaluation’s work, but not be specifically answered. It is therefore not part of the matrix.

2. UNICEF ability to address the needs of increasing numbers of refugees. a. How prepared was UNICEF for the influx of refugees? b. From September 2017, what has been UNICEF’s ability to meet its commitments

compared to the calculated need [coverage]? c. What factors contributed to or hindered the ability to grow alongside the increased

caseloads? d. Looking ahead from March 2018, what is UNICEF’s ability to deliver on its commitments

versus present and projected caseloads [including against potential shifts noted in the UN risk assessments]?

nn Sub-question a has been retained and is new question 1.

nn Sub question b is similar to question 5b about how timely and proportionate UNICEF’s response has been (in scaling-up for adequate coverage) and will be answered there.

nn The scale of the crisis and congestion in the camps have been and continue to be major hindrances. Therefore, the point of sub-question c) on factors that contributed or hindered the scale up will be taken in wider context. Scale-up will be addressed in the timeliness of the response (5b).

nn Given the forward-looking element of sub-question d), this is included in question 10.

3. The appropriateness of UNICEF’s strategy and programmatic choices. a. How relevant are UNICEF’s present and planned interventions to the needs of the

population? To take account of UNICEF’s mandate, commitments (e.g. the CCCs) and the division of labour established though relevant coordination mechanisms.

b. Are there gaps in UNICEF’s current programming response against the established or projected needs?

c. If so, what are the reasons for the gaps and what is needed to close them?

nn Sub-question b) funding for the response, which seems to have been only an issue in the first two months of the response, will be addressed under gaps in the response, which is covered in new Q2, under gaps.

4. The quality of and use of information used to guide the response a. What is the quality of the situation analyses and needs assessments (whether inter-

agency of UNICEF led) used to estimate caseloads and project future needs? b. Are the monitoring systems, reviews and assessment exercises sufficiently

comprehensive and accurate to guide UNICEF and partners? c. How comprehensive are the participatory approaches used to secure Rohingya and

other stakeholder inputs in the different information gathering efforts? Is the voice of the affected populations obtained in an effective, pro-active and culturally respectful way?

d. How well are these diverse information sources being used to inform and adapt the response?

nn No changes

ANNEX 2. DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES IN THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS DURING THE INCEPTION PHASE

Page 16: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

ORIGINAL EVALUATION QUESTION CHANGE

5. To what extent has UNICEF’s response in child protection, education, WASH nutrition and healtha. Been effective? (in achieving stated objectives) b. Been timely and proportionate? (in scaling-up for adequate coverage) c. Been of high quality? (consistent with relevant standards & policies i.e. CCCs and Sphere

Standards) d. Delivered for different groups? (according to disability, gender, adolescents, ethnicity,

religion, caste, refugee/host-community) e. Been accountable to affected populations? (in an effective, pro-active and culturally

respectful way) f. Efficient? (compared to alternatives)

nn Changes in wording: To what extent does UNICEF’s response in the sectors of child protection, education, WASH, nutrition and health meet the following criteria.

6. Managerial support to the programmatic response, with a focus on the L3 SSOPs6 a. Are the accountabilities among offices (especially CXB, BCO, ROSA, Geneva, SD, and

HQ) clear and adequate? Did this arrangement work well? b. How well did human resources support the response? Are there skills/staffing needs

required to meet its commitments that UNICEF has not identified or moved to secure? If so, why has this situation arisen?

c. How well was the response supported by funding & funds management, including taking into account risk-informed projections? How did funding affect results?

d. How well is the Supply Function—including considerations of coping with the obstacles in the working environment-- able to deliver necessary supplies on time and at the locations needed?

nn No changes

7. System-wide coordination, leadership and advocacy a. When UNICEF has the cluster lead role (or nearest structural equivalent), how well is it

fulfilling its role as cluster/sector lead? To include necessary consideration of how the wider humanitarian effort has impacted UNICEF’s work.

b. When UNICEF does not have the cluster lead (or there is no cluster mechanism), how well is UNICEF using and promoting the principles of partnership?

c. How well is UNICEF managing relations with the Government of Bangladesh through the several channels employed? How well is it able to balance and coordinate the different roles with which it engages the GoB [advocate, technical partner, cluster lead, etc].

nn Reformulated into “wider context” separating UNICEF’s sectoral (technical) from general coordination, leadership and advocacy, and putting the sectoral coordination and partnership in a separate question (new question 7.)

8. Working with implementing partners to deliver the programmatic response a. Does UNICEF have a set of partners able to execute the present at pending programs to

the necessary scale, timing, and quality? b. To what extent did UNICEF provide adequate training/capacity building, monitor and

address partner performance and establish minimum standards? c. In which ways are UNICEF or UN partnership processes facilitating or constraining

effective programmatic response?

nn No changes

9. Efforts to address long term goals and relationships while responding to the current challenges a. Is the UNICEF team effectively planning or actually initiating actions linking the

emergency response to longer-term development goals? How effective are these efforts, (particularly in education and child protection)? What are the constraints? To pay special attention to steps to strengthen resilience and preparedness in national/local systems.

b. How is the programme in Bangladesh CO being adjusted to the new context and needs of the population in Bangladesh? What are the difficulties—including opportunity costs, if any--encountered internally and externally (i.e. UNICEF internal structure and processes, donor requirements…)?

nn Question 9 has been split and the parts have been deleted or moved to various sections. The forward-looking element comes under Q 10 but the element of development goals has been reworded.

nn Sub-question b will be answered in part by question 7c which will address how UNICEF balanced the different roles it engages in with the GoB. The internal adjustments will be noted in the final report but not evaluated. Due to the constraints of time and because this question is less germane to the Rohingya response than the others, this part of the question has been removed.

10. Recommendations What actions are required in order to improve the response and to prepare for future needs

nn Part of this is in question 9 and will be further elaborated in relation to new question 10.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES15

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES IN THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS DURING THE INCEPTION PHASEANNEX T WO

Page 17: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES16

ANNEX 3. EVALUATION MATRIX

EVALUATION OBJECTIVES AND QUESTIONS ANALYSIS SOURCES FOR EVIDENCE,

TOOLS AND BENCHMARKS

OBJECTIVE 1: ASSESS THE ADEQUACY OF THE UNICEF RESPONSE IN PROVIDING HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO VULNERABLE PEOPLE WHO RESIDE IN CAMP SETTINGS, ARE INTEGRATED WITHIN BANGLADESHI COMMUNITIES AND ARE IN HOST COMMUNITIES.

1. How prepared was UNICEF for the influx of refugees?

Describe activities that were occurring in the makeshift and refugee camps before the crisis.Analyse UNICEF’s preparedness and contingency planning including commentary on the predictability of the scale and rapidity.Make a judgement of the scale-up against the organization’s own plans.

nn Situation reportsnn Meeting minutes nn Humanitarian Action for Children (HAC) appeals

nn Preparedness planning, including pre-positioned stocks

nn Key informant interviews/emails nn Direct observation

2. The appropriateness of UNICEF’s strategy and programmatic choices:

a. How relevant were UNICEF’s planned interventions to the needs of the population?

b. Are there gaps in UNICEF’s current programming response against the established or projected needs? (past, present and forecasts)

c. If so, what are the reasons for the gaps and what is needed to close them?

Compare plans against programmatic CCCs and HRP/JRP.Compare response against Sphere Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards, other relevant minimum humanitarian standards, the Refugee Protection Framework (due to refugee setting), as well as other key standards within the sectors, taking into account what other agencies are doing.Assess how gender has been dealt with in strategies.

nn CCCsnn Sphere Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards

nn Minimum Standards for Child Protection in Humanitarian Action

nn Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies Minimum Standards for Education

nn HRP/JRP and country programme strategynn Key informant interviews/emailsnn Meeting minutes nn Direct observation

3. The quality and use of information used to guide the response:

a. What is the quality of the situation analyses and needs assessments (whether inter-agency of UNICEF-led) used to estimate caseloads and project future needs?

b. Are the monitoring systems, reviews and assessment exercises sufficiently comprehensive and accurate to guide UNICEF and partners?

c. How comprehensive are the participatory approaches used to secure Rohingya and other stakeholder inputs in the different information gathering efforts? Is the voice of the affected populations obtained in an effective, pro-active and culturally respectful way?

d. How well are these diverse information sources being used to inform and adapt the response?

Identify needs assessment deficiencies through interviews and reports and seek evidence of adequate needs assessments. Compare inter-agency and UNICEF sector needs assessments and against global cluster needs assessment guidance.Using expert evaluative judgment, assess to what degree needs assessments within UNICEF sectors contain disaggregated data and reliable numbers and focus on relevant information.Assess the extent to which monitoring systems provided accurate and timely data about the quality and quantity of the response.Document efforts to involve refugees’ and host communities’ input and compare against good practice in refugee protection guidance (e.g., UNHCR Emergency Handbook). Through interviews, identify if adequate information was available for decision-making and if it was used.

nn Humanitarian Needs Overviewnn HRP/JRPnn Needs assessments nn Global cluster needs assessment guidance nn Key informant interviews/emailsnn Spatial data, maps nn UNHCR Emergency Handbook

Page 18: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OBJECTIVES AND QUESTIONS ANALYSIS SOURCES FOR EVIDENCE,

TOOLS AND BENCHMARKS

4. To what extent does UNICEF’s response in the sectors of nutrition, health, WASH, child protection and education14 meet the following criteria:

a. Effectiveness (achieving stated objectives);

b. Timeliness and proportionality (in scaling-up for adequate coverage) (and why);

c. Quality (consistent with relevant standards and policies, i.e., CCCs and Sphere Standards);

d. Equity (i.e., delivered for different groups);

e. Accountability to affected populations (in an effective, pro-active and culturally respectful way); and

f. Efficiency (compared to alternatives).

By sector, describe performance against indicators over time. Map UNICEF’s interventions against growing needs. Compare with relevant sectoral guidance and standards (CCCs, Sphere, Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies, Minimum Standards for Child Protection in Humanitarian Action, etc.). Assess the extent to which plans were made to address inequities (identifying most vulnerable cases by when); data about particularly vulnerable populations were collected and used; and inequities were addressed in implementation.Assess the degree to which refugees’ voices are collected and used in planning and adjustments.Where possible and relevant (using evaluative judgement), use an efficiency perspective to identify the optimal (and sub-optimal) arrangements.

nn HAC/UNICEF response plan(s) nn HRP/JRPnn Key informant interviews with staff, implementing partners, the Government and others

nn Focus group discussions15nn 4Ws (who, what, where, when)nn UNICEF project documentsnn Inter Sector Coordination Group (ISCG) documents and maps

nn Communicating with Communities (CwC)/C4D reports on participation

5. Managerial support to the programmatic response, with a focus on the Level 3 Simplified Standard Operating Procedures:

a. Did UNICEF’s structural arrangements work well? (especially Cox’s Bazar Field Office, UNICEF Bangladesh, ROSA, UNICEF Geneva, the Supply Division and Headquarters)?

b. How well did human resources support the response? Are there skills/staffing needs required to meet its commitments that UNICEF has not identified or moved to secure? If so, why has this situation arisen?

c. How well is the supply function, including considerations of coping with the obstacles in the working environment, able to deliver necessary supplies on time and at the locations needed?

Identify the application of the Level 3 Simplified Standard Operating Procedures, levels of staff awareness of them and how well they worked. Describe perceptions of effectiveness of structure and accountability lines. Map human resources strategies and efforts, assess performance against the CCCs; assess against standard human resource indicators (e.g., % of unfilled posts); and assess the extent to which UNICEF had the skills to meet the needs of the programme sectors. Describe available funding over time and assess against needs. Assess the ability of supply (from ordering to delivery to partners) against the benchmarks in the CCCs and related supply standards

nn Key informant interviews/emails, supply dashboard

nn Spot check a few critical items, (e.g., Lime, High Test Hypochlorite RUTF)

nn Key informant interviews with programme and operations staff, implementing partners and others

nn CCCs for supply

14 The evaluation will also review C4D. It will do this primarily through the lens of the sectors, rather than evaluating C4D as a sector on its own. C4D is closely related to accountability to affected communities (see also 4e).

15 See example for guiding questions in Annex 4 Data Collection Tools

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES17

EVALUATION MATRIXANNEX THREE

Page 19: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES18

EVALUATION MATRIXANNEX THREE

EVALUATION OBJECTIVES AND QUESTIONS ANALYSIS SOURCES FOR EVIDENCE,

TOOLS AND BENCHMARKS

OBJECTIVE 2: DETERMINE HOW WELL UNICEF IS WORKING WITH IMPLEMENTING PARTNERS AND OTHER AGENCIES AND THE GOVERNMENT, FOR BOTH THE NEAR- AND MEDIUM-/LONG-TERM

6. Wider context: a. How did the wider coordination efforts

affect UNICEF’s ability to deliver? b. What steps did UNICEF take to

advocate for improved coordination? c. How did the congestion in camps affect

UNICEFs ability to deliver? d. How did UNICEF use its leadership to

address congestion?

Describe perceptions of coordination structures and accountability lines. Assess the extent to which UNICEF staff involved in sector coordination understand their roles. Document effects of this on programme delivery.Describe efforts of leadership to take action on coordination.Describe congestion against the Sphere Standards.Document effect of this on UNICEF’s performance. Understand efforts of leadership to take action on congestion.

nn Advocacy and communication strategynn Public and private advocacy documentationnn Reported and documented positions (and shifts in these positions) that are attributable to UNICEF and other’s advocacy efforts

nn Key informant interviews/emails

7. Sector leadership: a. Has UNICEF fulfilled its roles and

responsibilities in leading the sectors for which it has responsibilities? To include necessary consideration of how the wider humanitarian effort has impacted UNICEF’s work.

b. How well is UNICEF using and promoting the Principles of Partnership?

Review and compare sector documentation (i.e., terms of reference for the sectors, coordinators).Assess the timely production and sharing of strategies, plans and standards.Assess sector partners’ perceptions of UNICEF leadership.Compare with Principles of Partnership and Transformative Agenda protocols for cluster performance (among other standards and guidance).

nn Sector coordinator terms of reference (UNICEF and other agencies) and (inter-agency and sector) organograms

nn Coordination meeting minutesnn Key informant interviews with co-leads, the ISCG and key sector agencies

nn Sector documentationnn SurveyMonkey survey16nn United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) refugee coordination guidance and Transformative Agenda protocols for cluster performance

nn Principles of Partnership

8. Working with implementing partners to deliver the programmatic response:

a. Does UNICEF have a set of partners able to execute the present and pending programmes to the necessary scale, timing and quality?

b. To what extent did UNICEF provide adequate training/capacity building, monitor and address partner performance and establish minimum standards?

c. In which ways are UNICEF or United Nations partnership processes facilitating or constraining effective programmatic response?

Assess justifications of UNICEF in selecting implementing partners, including the military. Look for evidence of capacity building, monitoring and follow up of initial partner selection.Examine the time period between contract conversations and signing.Develop an inventory of constraints for partners: was there built-in flexibility to change and adapt? Are there noticeable differences between UNICEF and other United Nations agencies in their partnerships with non-governmental organizations (NGOs)?Understand the efforts made to move partnership beyond contractual terms to genuine partnership, including UNICEF’s advocacy efforts on FD7s for its partners.

nn Documentation related to partner selection and meeting minutes

nn SurveyMonkey survey for implementing partners17

nn Minutes or reports of joint workshops and training seminars

nn Key informant interviews/emailsnn Principles of Partnership

16 See Annex 4 for survey for sector partners.

17 See Annex 4 for survey.

Page 20: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

© U

NIC

EF

/UN

014

38

50

/BIN

DR

A

EVALUATION OBJECTIVES AND QUESTIONS ANALYSIS SOURCES FOR EVIDENCE,

TOOLS AND BENCHMARKS

OBJECTIVE 3: IDENTIFY ACTIONS TO IMPROVE THE RESPONSE.

9. Considering immediate risks and challenges: What actions has UNICEF taken to prepare for the immediate future, especially the seasonal monsoon rains and relocation of refugees?

Review what scenarios have been used for future planning.

nn Preparedness plansnn Advocacy efforts

10. Assessing risks and challenges through the end of the JRP and beyond:

a. Is UNICEF effectively planning or actually initiating actions linking the emergency response to longer-term perspectives?

b. How effective are these efforts, including in education and child protection, and in relation to host communities?

c. What actions are required in order to improve the response and to prepare for future needs?

Assess adequacy of longer-term planning. Look at efforts taken in developing a longer-term perspective and in what way these are linked with UNICEF’s regular (development) work in Bangladesh.Based on the answers to the above questions, identify what is needed to better respond

nn Exchange with key staff members in real-time what the evaluation is finding

nn Recommendations workshopnn Key informant interviews/emails

Adolescent girls meet at a UNICEF-supported adolescent group where they are able to socialize, play and get support from outreach workers as they settle into their new shelters, in Balukhali makeshift settlement, near Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES19

EVALUATION MATRIXANNEX THREE

Page 21: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES20

A. SUMMARY OF THE EDUCATION PROGRAMME COMPONENTS AGAINST THE EDUCATION CCCS

Commitment 1: Effective leadership is established for education cluster/inter-agency coordination (with co-lead agency), with links to other cluster/sector coordination mechanisms on critical inter-sectoral issues.

nn The sector leadership for education was ensured in a timely and continued manner. The Global Education Cluster conducted a mission and supported the sectors at critical moments (e.g., in facilitating the co-leadership, resolving coordination issues between UNICEF and UNHCR, organizing and carrying out the joint rapid needs assessment with the Child Protection Area of Responsibility and developing the education capacity self-assessment).

Aug 2017

9/1/2017 – 10/5/2017

10/5/2017 – 11/13/2017

10/25/2017 – 11/13/2017

11/17/2017 – 12/22/2017

1/10/2018 – 4/30/2018

Sept 2017 Oct 2017 Nov 2017 Dec 2017 Jan 2018 Feb 2018 Mar 2018 Apr 2018 May 2018

EDUCATION SECTOR COORDINATORS

Saltanat Builasheva

Kaisa Leena Juvonen

Maria Agnes Giordano

Veronica (Hyo Rim) Lee

Risto Sakari Ihalainen

EDUCATION GLOBAL CLUSTER

SUB SECTOR COORDINATOR

nn The Education Sector contributed to enhancing the quality of the education response by providing technical guidance and standards on temporary learning spaces/centres in terms of safe site selection, structures (including water and sanitation facilities) and basic equipment and supplies. It also supported the development of a standard teachers’ code of conduct and salary scale. Materials for basic teacher trainings were shared with the sector members, even though a standard training for teachers and Burmese language instructors still needs to be developed.

nn The sector played a crucial role in monsoon preparedness. A sector plan for preparedness was developed on time and implemented. By the end of April 2018, the level of risk of temporary learning spaces/centres was assessed and at-risk structures were either reinforced or closed down.

nn The information management system has only recently been consolidated. Parallel systems between the mapping used at the coordination level (REACH) and the UNICEF mapping made it difficult to have a detailed 4W picture for a long time. The arrival of a dedicated information management officer in April is resolving this issue. An additional challenge was that the UNICEF reporting system was not aligned with the 4Ws, which made it difficult to compile a full picture of coverage and gaps at the sector level.18

18 Sector age groups are 3 to 5, 6 to 14 and 15 to 17 and 18 to 24. The UNICEF reporting system uses different age groups: 4 to 14 and 15 to 18.

ANNEX 4. SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDREN FOR NUTRITION, HEALTH, WASH, CHILD PROTECTION AND EDUCATION

Page 22: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

Commitment 1: Effective leadership is established for education cluster/inter-agency coordination (with co-lead agency), with links to other cluster/sector coordination mechanisms on critical inter-sectoral issues.

nn In the first months of the response, considerable time and efforts were put into discussing the roles and responsibilities of UNICEF and UNHCR in sector coordination. Key informants reported that the coordination discussions detracted from the technical discussions.

nn An important shortfall in education sector coordination was UNICEF’s neutrality. Documents19 and key informant interviews highlighted difficulties in distinguishing the UNICEF role as sector leader from the UNICEF programme, particularly through December 2017. Examples mentioned were UNICEF’s exclusive management of the Education Cannot Wait proposal,20 reluctance to recognize Save the Children as a co-lead, and the role of UNHCR in the sector. The Global Protection Cluster supported the resolution of these issues with a mission in November.21 Reports indicate that the quality of sector coordination has drastically improved since the beginning of 2018.22

nn Another example of the weak consultative process highlighted in key informant interviews is the development of the Learning Competency Framework and Approach (LCFA). The LCFA was primarily designed by UNICEF Bangladesh with the support of ROSA and UNICEF Myanmar and was only submitted to education sector members in January. In key informant interviews, LCFA was often referred to as “a product developed by UNICEF and offered to the sector”. It has to be noted that the LCFA includes child protection and psychosocial competency outcomes, but the child protection section in Bangladesh (Cox’s Bazar and Dhaka), ROSA and the child protection sub-sector were not involved in its development.

nn The Global Education Cluster and the Child Protection Area of Responsibility have promoted the interconnectedness and importance of education as a key gateway for child protection. In December 2017, with the support of the Global Education Cluster and the Child Protection Area of Responsibility, the education sector and the child protection sub-sector facilitated the education-in-emergencies and child protection-in-emergencies joint rapid needs assessment.23 The needs assessment included a number of recommendations on increasing effectiveness in child protection-in-emergencies and education-in-emergencies approaches,24 in line with the advice of the Global Protection Cluster and the Global Education Cluster. The evaluation could not find evidence that these recommendations have been followed up on. Discussions on ways to better integrate the two sectors do not seem to be on the education sector agenda (e.g., on how to address education opportunities for adolescents in a way that is acceptable to the Government of Bangladesh).

nn The education sector, the Global Education Cluster and UNICEF have jointly supported the capacity assessment exercise25 for key local education partners. The assessment highlights some critical gaps in partners’ capacities and suggests a capacity development plan.

nn An education sector strategy is not yet in place.26 Some sector members assume that the latest Education Cannot Wait proposal is the sector strategy.

19 Ad Interim Chief of Field Office handover notes / mission report from 16 September to 18 November 2017: “Neutrality of UNICEF when it comes to sectoral coordination is key. Partners have difficulties to understand the concept of sectoral coordination when they have the perception that UNICEF Program is leading the sector. UNICEF is only one partner of the sector, at the same level as ACF, Save the Children (SCI), or any national NGO. There is a need to raise awareness among UNICEF CO [country office] staff to clearly understand the difference between the Cluster Lead Agency mandate to create an enabling environment for the sector and the UNICEF programme mandate to be a sector partner.”

20 The Education Cannot Wait First Response Window application proposal was developed by UNICEF without other sector members including UNHCR. On 27 October, this led the Education Cannot Wait Executive Committee, which is composed of the Department for International Development, the Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies, the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Dubai Cares and UNHCR, to write a note of concern on the scarce consultative process behind the US$3 million. “The key concern raised by all participants was that of process and the fact that it did not include UNHCR given the refugee dimension. It highlighted the issue that coordination is critical and needs to be central, including in emergency moments, to our collective approach. Constructive feedback on the concerns from ECW [Education Cannot Wait] and ExCom members on the inadequate consultative process will be fed through to partners in Bangladesh by the ECW Secretariat. ….. the proposal should proceed to approval as it stands, given the pressing needs on the ground, the relatively small amount ($3million) and the urgent need to start implementing with the proviso that UNHCR in-country is immediately brought on-board by the ECW funded partners in Bangladesh to be fully involved in the design, planning and implementation of the current phase of the project (Components 1 and 2) and particularly on the in-depth needs assessment (component 3).”

21 Global Education Cluster Coordinator Maria Agnese Giordano’s mission objectives: 1) support partnership and coordination for Education Cannot Wait grant, in particular facilitate collaboration with UNHCR through strengthened coordination of the education sector; 2) develop recommendations on the role of the Government in leading the coordination of the education sector, and provide overall strategic advice; 3) support education sector coordination capacities and provide recommendations, including on co-leadership with Save the Children, to ensure effective operational and strategic coordination.

22 Key informant interviews.

23 The assessment was supported by the Global Education Cluster and the Global Protection Cluster Child Protection Area of Responsibility and was carried out between 4 and 6 December 2017.

24 Global Education Cluster and Global Protection Cluster Child Protection Area of Responsibility, “Child-Protection and Education-in-Emergencies Increase Effectiveness”. [date unknown].

25 United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Education Capacity Self-Assessment: Transforming the Education Humanitarian Response of the Rohingya Refugee Crisis’ (working document), UNICEF, BRAC and the Global Education Cluster, Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, March 2018.

26 According to the Guide to Developing Education Cluster Strategies shared by the Global Education Coordinator on 16 March 2018.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES21

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Page 23: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES22

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Commitment 2: Children, including pre-school-age children, girls and other excluded children, access quality education opportunities.

Access27

nn For refugee children, the only education opportunity available is non-formal education for children aged 4 to 14. Education sector partners report that the enrolment rate for children over age 10 is extremely low. The same has been noticed in observations in the camps.28 Insufficient coverage and location of temporary learning centres is also a barrier for children aged 4 to 14, especially for children with mobility problems. The lack of adolescent, youth and adult education is a critical gap in the education response. Out-of-school children are more vulnerable to violence, trafficking, child labour, child marriage and exploitation.

nn For host communities,29 the de-prioritization of education due to the financial situation of the family is a key barrier. The increase in prices due to the latest refugee influx further exacerbated the already precarious financial situations of families in the Teknaf and Ukhia upazilas, resulting in increasing drop-out rates and child labour.

nn The joint education-in-emergencies and child protection-in-emergencies rapid needs assessment carried out in December 2017 for both refugees and host communities highlights key barriers to education. However, besides coverage, these barriers have not been sufficiently analysed and addressed (e.g., social norms restricting girls’ access to school after puberty or during menstruation; integration of children with mobility problems and learning difficulties; and integration of working children and children who are heads of households).

nn The Education Cannot Wait Round 3 proposal30 is an attempt to address some of these access issues. However, links with child protection and other sectors, as well as potential innovations and alternatives to traditional school-based education, have not been explored.

nn The learning needs of parents, teachers and various other groups in the refugee community have not been sufficiently explored (no strategy or plan has been developed to address these groups).

nn Restrictions imposed by the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education on age groups, language and type of education are key barriers to adolescent and adult education. There is limited evidence of UNICEF strategies and plans to overcome these restrictions, other than its advocacy work31 (e.g., working with other sectors to incorporate non-formal education opportunities).

Curriculann As a component of the Country Programme, well before the 25 August influx, UNICEF supported the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education to design and roll out the Ability Based Accelerated Learning package for out-of-school Bangladeshi children. The package provides basic literacy, numeracy and life skills at the primary education level. The package/curricula have been used for Rohingya education in the registered camp supported by UNHCR and UNICEF after the 2016 influx. Until October 2017, UNICEF and the education sector envisaged an education response based on the Ability Based Accelerated Learning curricula adapted to the local context. In October 2017, the Government’s restriction on the use of language instruction and the Ability Based Accelerated Learning package with new arrivals, led UNICEF to develop a condensed, basic two-level bilingual curriculum covering pre-primary and Grades 1 and 2 while developing an ad hoc curriculum for children aged 4 to 14 (the LCFA).

nn UNICEF underestimated the complexity and length of the process of developing and rolling out the LCFA.32 The LCFA will not be operational for children until the beginning of 2019 and no phased plan seems to exist to improve the quality of learning during this interim phase.

nn Besides its comprehensive structure, the LCFA has an important longer-term value. It is compatible with both the Bangladesh and Myanmar education systems, thus making it easy for Rohingya children to integrate into any of the two systems. It also creates the conditions for standardized learning assessment leading to recognized certification of learnings.

nn The basic two-level (pre-primary and combined Grades 1 and 2) bilingual curriculum currently being implemented in the temporary learning centres includes 2.5 hours of daily instruction covering basic literacy, numeracy and Burmese language. Hygiene promotion and recreational activities (songs) are included for the pre-primary level only.

nn The lack of textbooks is a major gap. nn Standard UNICEF supplementary material is in place.nn Life-skills emergency curriculum for all ages has not yet been developed and standardized. nn Emergency life-skills and learning needs of parents, teachers and different groups in the community are not included in the education response.

27 No analysis could be made on the retention and enrolment rate by age as the education monitoring system does not provide sufficient information.

28 Observation carried out in different locations between 10am and 3pm.

29 Education in the host community in Cox’s Bazar District was weak before the crisis. The district performs below the national average on almost every indicator. The average literacy rate of children living in the host communities is only 39 per cent (compared to 52 per cent nationally); the primary school net intake rate is 52 per cent (compared to 67 per cent nationally); and only 59 per cent of those who enrol in Grade 1 reach Grade 5 (compared to 80 per cent nationally). As the situation becomes protracted, building on previous education gains will become more challenging. The influx has contributed to an increase in commodity prices, while also introducing competition in the informal labour sector. This is further challenged by increased stress on resources, including schools, roads, water and natural resources. As these pressures increase on host communities, prioritizing education will become more challenging for some families.

30 United Nations Children’s Fund, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Education Cannot Wait Proposal Round 3.

31 Advocacy for adolescent and youth education includes: ‘Beyond Response, Resilience: Advocacy narrative for education of Rohingya refugees’, 25 March 2018.

32 See Annex 1.

Page 24: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

Commitment 2: Children, including pre-school-age children, girls and other excluded children, access quality education opportunities.

Teacher recruitment and selectionnn UNICEF and partners face difficulties with the recruitment and retention of teachers and Burmese language instructors due the lack of qualified teachers in host and refugee communities.33

nn Precarious teaching conditions, weak gender-sensitive planning and low salaries lead to a high rate of teacher drop-out, especially for female teachers (e.g., time used to travel, non-existent WASH facilities, travel to remote areas and return at night, low salaries in relation to other employment opportunities in the camps). There is also a lack of symbolic recognition of Rohingya instructors as educational actors (e.g., they don’t have identification cards and aren’t recognized as teachers), which is demotivating and impacts their performance.34

nn UNICEF and the sector have developed a harmonized salary scale.Teacher training, professional development and supportnn The minimum package of training for teachers includes five days of training on basic education (four days for early learning). The minimum package for Burmese language instructors is three days. Both teachers and Burmese language instructors receive monthly follow-up sessions and refreshers.35

nn Training packages are not standardized among UNICEF partners and within the education sector. Critical areas such as psychosocial support and life-saving information (e.g., health and hygiene education) are not consistently included in teacher training.36

Commitment 3: Safe and secure learning environments that promote the protection and well-being of students

Facilities and servicesnn Temporary learning spaces/centres are safe and secure spaces for children in the camps and have greatly contributed to supporting children to cope with the traumatic experiences they have experienced, by re-establishing routines, facilitating socialization and offering learning in their own language.

nn Most of the temporary learning centre structures are not yet in line with expected standards of safety and well-being.37 Access to safe water is a great concern and sanitation facilities are not appropriate in many cases.38 Menstrual hygiene management is not implemented in the temporary learning centres.

nn With the support of UNICEF and partners, standards for the temporary learning centres were developed at the sector level, covering the layout of the structures, water and sanitation facilities, standard equipment and supplies. Teachers and Burmese language instructors adhere to a code of conduct for the protection and well-being of their students.

nn Learning centre management committees have been established for each temporary learning centre and meet regularly in the large majority of the centres.39

nn In a key component of the monsoon preparedness plan, both for UNICEF and for the education sector, the level of risk of temporary learning centres and spaces was assessed and at-risk structures were either reinforced or closed.

nn The link between temporary learning centres and other services is not structured and clear referral pathways do not seem to exist (e.g., for the identification and referral of health cases). However, in many cases, learning centre management committees discuss issues such as hygiene and diphtheria vaccination.40

nn Teachers are not trained in child protection, health, hygiene promotion and identification and referral of children at risk and medical cases.

Commitment 4: Psychosocial and health services for children and teachers are integrated in educational response.

nn Resumption/availability of education activities has largely contributed to supporting children to cope with distress through re-establishing routines and helping them socialize and learn in their own language. However, given the extent of children’s traumatic experiences, this may be insufficient.

nn Teachers are not trained in mental health, psychosocial support41 and the identification and referral of health cases.nn Psychosocial support and care for teachers and Burmese language instructors is not provided.42

nn The link between temporary learning centres and health services is poor and no referral pathways exist between temporary learning centres and health centres for health cases.43

nn Some examples of good practices in referring children from temporary learning spaces to child-friendly spaces exist, though these are not standardized.

33 Key informant interviews and ‘Education Capacity Self-Assessment’.

34 Ibid.

35 ‘Non-formal basic education for UMN Project, Cox’s Bazar: Need-based training plan (for 3 months)’; Mukti, ‘Teachers’ Refresher Schedule (Burmese Instructors)’, March 2018; and Mukti, ‘Teachers’ Refresher Schedule (host teachers)’, March 2018.

36 Key informant interviews and ‘Education Capacity Self-Assessment’.

37 According to the Education Section Field Monitoring Report No. 1 of March 2018, “26 (56%) had first aid kits and 9 (22%) had fire-fighting equipment”.

38 According to the Education Section Field Monitoring Report No. 1 of March 2018, “Availability of WASH and safety facilities and supplies gave mixed results. While 24 (59%) of LCs [learning centres] were reported to have safe drinking water, the actual level is much lower as only 5 (12%) of LCs had treated water in a container with a lid to prevent dust contamination. 17 of the 24 reports of ‘safe drinking water’ were untreated water (no chlorination, filtration or boiling) from tubewells. This demonstrates both poor water treatment practices and poor understanding of what constitutes ‘safe drinking water’. 14 (34%) had facilities for handwashing with soap. Understanding that the approach was only to construct latrines in non-temporary LCs, only 8 LCs have latrines compared to 11 strongly built LCs”.

39 Key informant interviews and Education Section Field Monitoring Report No. 1 of March 2018.

40 Ibid.

41 ‘Education Capacity Self-Assessment’.

42 Ibid.

43 Ibid.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES23

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Page 25: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES24

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Commitment 5: Adolescents, young children and caregivers access appropriate life-skills programmes and information about the emergency, and those who have missed out on schooling, especially adolescents, receive information on educational options.

nn Education for adolescents and caregivers is a critical gap in the education response. Despite the inclusion of targets in the revised 2018 HAC, as of the end of April 2018, no initiatives had taken place.

nn On 21 April 2018, the child protection sub-sector released an advocacy note on adolescents noting the lack of education opportunities as one of the factors putting adolescents at risk.

Working with other sectors to increase the quality of the response44

Water and sanitationnn In temporary learning centres, access to safe water is a great concern and sanitation facilities are often not appropriate.45 menstrual hygiene management is not implemented in temporary learning centres.

Child protection nn Links between education and child protection are critically weak, though some examples of good practices in referring children from temporary learning spaces to child-friendly spaces have been observed.

nn There is no evidence of joint programming towards adolescents, especially girls; inclusion of children with disabilities is weak; teachers are not trained on psychosocial support and the identification and referral of child protection cases; learning centre management committees are not linked to child protection committees; and the psychosocial support-social and emotional learning component of the LCFA has not been developed with the assistance of the child protection section.

Healthnn The link between temporary learning centres and health services is poor and no referral pathways for health cases exist between them.46 In October 2017, the centres were involved in cholera messaging.

nn Teachers are not trained on the identification and referral of health cases.nn Overall, there is a missed opportunity of using temporary learning centres as gateways for nutrition and health.

Nutritionnn Links with nutrition are also found to be weak. nn Nutrition education is not provided as part of the life-skills framework.nn High energy biscuits/school feeding as incentives to increase attendance are in place but blanket support needs to be provided across all temporary learning centres. Key informants raised the concern that fortified biscuits are not distributed in all centres and became a criterion for families to enrol their children in the centres.

nn Overall, there is a missed opportunity of using temporary learning centres as gateways for nutrition and health.

C4Dnn Good practices of inter-sectorial cooperation between C4D and education: nn CODEC piloted the development and dissemination of visual aid to support the quality of teaching and learning. Good practices in teaching and learning were video-recorded and circulated between teachers in coaching sessions.

nn The C4D campaign on awareness of education opportunities, including sensitization of different targets (including children, families, teachers, religious leaders and communities).

44 The CCCs do not clearly identify inter-sectorality and synergies between programme components in different sectors as key to the quality of a response. The evaluation deems this a crucial factor to highlight.

45 According to the Education Section Field Monitoring Report No. 1 of March 2018, “Availability of WASH and safety facilities and supplies gave mixed results. While 24 (59%) of LCs were reported to have safe drinking water, the actual level is much lower as only 5 (12%) of LCs had treated water in a container with a lid to prevent dust contamination. 17 of the 24 reports of ‘safe drinking water’ were untreated water (no chlorination, filtration or boiling) from tubewells. This demonstrates both poor water treatment practices and poor understanding of what constitutes ‘safe drinking water’. 14 (34%) had facilities for handwashing with soap. Understanding that the approach was only to construct latrines in non-temporary LCs, only 8 LCs have latrines compared to 11 strongly built LCs”.

46 ‘Education Capacity Self-Assessment’.

Page 26: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

B. SUMMARY OF THE CHILD PROTECTION PROGRAMME COMPONENTS AGAINST THE CHILD PROTECTION CCCS47

Commitment 1: Effective leadership is established for both the child protection and gender-based violence48 cluster areas of responsibility, with links to other cluster/sector coordination mechanisms on critical inter-sectoral issues. Support is provided for the establishment of a mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) coordination mechanism.

Child protection sub-sector leadership MHPSS coordination mechanismsnn The MHPSS coordination mechanisms have been particularly weak. A psychosocial support task force exists in the child protection sub-sector but it does not meet regularly. A MHPSS working group also exists under health, co-lead by WHO and ACF. However, the “coordination” between the psychosocial support task force under the child protection sub-sector and the MHPSS working group is limited to the fact that UNICEF participates in both the task force and working group meetings.

nn Until April 2018, no MHPSS assessment – including information on positive and negative copying mechanisms – has been carried out. This is a key gap considering the extent of the trauma that Rohingya refugees have experienced.

nn The psychosocial support task force produced inadequate guidelines and standards to strengthen the quality of the response. nn UNICEF invested consistent efforts in training partners on child protection, psychosocial support and psychological first aid. Nonetheless, these capacity development efforts were not commensurate to the scale of the technical capacity needed.

Suggested way forward:ÇÇHealth sector/MHPSS working group, child protection sub-sector/psychosocial support task force and UNICEF: Organize an assessment on the status of the MHPSS well-being of children and their families, including coping mechanisms.ÇÇChild protection sub-sector/psychosocial support task force and UNICEF: Considering the limited technical capacities of the child protection sub-sector members and UNICEF partners, minimum standards for psychosocial support activities are needed to enhance the quality of the response.ÇÇChild protection sub-sector/psychosocial support task force and UNICEF: Develop a capacity development strategy for the child protection sector members embedded in a wider capacity development strategy for the MHPSS working group.

Commitment 2: Monitoring and reporting of grave violations and other serious protection concerns regarding children and women are undertaken and systematically trigger response (including advocacy).

nn Even if beyond the scope of this evaluation, we acknowledge the timeliness and critical relevance of the Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism operation both in Bangladesh and Myanmar.

47 Findings and conclusions are based on: 1) review of the timeline of the child protection response derived from situation reports and dashboards; 2) child protection assessments and strategy documents; 3) mission and trip reports of relevant UNICEF staff; 4) key informant interviews with UNICEF child protection staff and partners; 5) focus group discussions with Rohingya refugee children and adolescents; and 6) observations in the camps.

48 Since May 2017, UNICEF is no longer leading the Gender-Based Violence Area of Responsibility.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES25

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Page 27: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES26

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Commitment 3: Key child protection mechanisms are strengthened in emergency-affected areas.

Preventing and responding to major child protection risksnn Until January 2018, prevention and response to major protection risks49 was guided by very limited and unsystematically collected information. UNICEF relied on information and monitoring feedback from its own programme more than on formal assessments. In January 2018, a joint education-in-emergencies and child protection-in-emergencies rapid needs assessment provided an overview of the top perceived risks disaggregated by gender. These include: separation from family, safety concerns, trafficking, domestic violence and psychosocial distress for both boys and girls; child marriage, sexual harassment and physical and sexual violence for girls; and child labour, exploitation and domestic violence for boys. Children and adolescents with disabilities are found to be at higher risk.

nn So far, UNICEF has prioritized preventing and responding to family separation (see Commitment 4), psychosocial distress (see Commitment 6) and gender-based violence (see Commitment 5 – including children born out of rape). Although good practices have been observed on the inclusion of children with disabilities in child-friendly spaces, no clear strategy on inclusion has been spelled out.

nn Up-to-date child-specific information, and more detailed accounts of the types of issues faced and key trends are still needed to develop evidence-based response strategies, particularly on:

The incidence of exploitation and sexual- and gender-based violence among young girls and boys.Psychosocial distress and mental disorders, including the status of MHPSS well-being and coping mechanisms.Child trafficking, particularly numbers and mechanisms.Child labour and exploitation, particularly types of work and related dangers.Child marriage and other coping mechanisms.Justice for children, particularly documentation and registration.Vulnerability analysis and analysis of inter- and intra-community dynamics, including in host communities. Potential radicalization and children associated with armed groups.Child protection risk profiling in host communities.

nn A timely vulnerability analysis has been slowed down by the delayed agreement on protection information sharing protocols and systems between UNICEF and UNHCR. This is a major gap in the response, particularly affecting the most marginalized children (e.g., children with disabilities and mobility issues, especially girls).

Suggested way forward:ÇÇUNICEF and UNHCR: Develop a global agreement and protocol for data sharing that is automatically enforced when coordination mechanisms are activated, with no need for further negotiations.ÇÇUNICEF and the child protection sub-sector: Conduct a secondary analysis review to identify child-specific information gaps on the major risks listed above. ÇÇUNICEF and the child protection sub-sector: Conduct child protection risk profiling for children in host communities.ÇÇUNICEF and the child protection sub-sector: Develop clear inclusion guidelines and targeted activities for children with disabilities and mobility issues, especially girls.

49 According to the Minimum Standards for Child Protection in Humanitarian Action, these are: dangers and injuries; physical violence and other harmful practices; sexual violence, psychosocial distress and mental disorders; children associated with armed forces and armed groups; child labour; unaccompanied and separated children; and justice for children.

Page 28: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

Commitment 3: Key child protection mechanisms are strengthened in emergency-affected areas.

Building child protection systemsnn Since the beginning of the response, UNICEF has supported the efforts of the Ministry of Women and Children Affairs and the Ministry of Social Welfare Department of Social Services to invest in strengthening the identification and referral systems, focusing on the specific risks faced by refugee children, to enhance the existing capacity of national case management systems. This should address all child protection concerns of Rohingya children and children in host communities. The Government has already deployed 38 social workers and a coordination mechanism for all partners was established with UNICEF technical support.

nn UNICEF is also contributing to strengthening existing information management systems to support case management and referrals for services while ensuring appropriate confidentiality and safety, in line with the Minimum Standards for Children Protection in Humanitarian Action.

nn Given the weak technical capacities of the social work force and partner staff supporting the emergency response, UNICEF invested consistent efforts in training partner staff and Department of Social Services staff on child protection, case management, gender-based violence, psychosocial support and psychological first aid. However, these capacity development efforts have not been commensurate with the scale of the technical capacity needed. This has resulted in the poor technical quality of the response.

nn Community-based child protection committees were established in the camps early in the response. However, focus group discussions with refugees showed a limited awareness of these committees and their functions.

Suggested way forward:ÇÇUNICEF: Develop a capacity development strategy for the Department of Social Services that is aligned with the child protection sub-sector strategy and includes knowledge and experience exchange between the Department of Social Services and NGOs. ÇÇUNICEF and child protection sub-sector: Develop a sustainable capacity development strategy for UNICEF partners and members of the child protection sector.ÇÇUNICEF and child protection sub-sector: Urgently boost community-based child protection mechanisms, including building the capacity of parents, caregivers and teachers in refugee and host communities to protect and support children and deal with distress.

Establishing safe environments for the most vulnerablenn Child-friendly spaces: The child-friendly spaces approach is one of the key features of the UNICEF child protection response to the Rohingya crisis. Child-friendly spaces were already operational prior to the 25 August 2017 influx, in response to the 2016 influx and in host communities.

nn The use of the child-friendly spaces approach has been highly valuable in a situation where congestion, precarious living conditions and limitations imposed on education activities by the Government of Bangladesh might have left children and adolescents with no safe and inclusive spaces to re-establish routines, play, socialize and cope with their trauma. Child-friendly spaces have also offered opportunities to identify children who were more severely affected by the events and in need of focused and specialized psychosocial support.

nn Standards for child-friendly spaces were developed at the sector level with the support of UNICEF and partners.nn Child-friendly spaces were not conceived as hubs for services and the functional link with other sectors could have been stronger, especially with health and nutrition.

Suggested way forward:nn UNICEF: Develop a gradual exit strategy or shift away from the child-friendly spaces model. This could include establishing community-based psychosocial support and strengthening community-based child protection committees; incorporating some of the functions of the child-friendly spaces into temporary learning centres (e.g., identification of child protection cases and referral to case management; and psychosocial support and resilience-building activities). The exit strategy should consider the needs and education services available for adolescents and prioritize the space for them.

Women safe spaces nn The implementation of this component of the response was critically delayed. The scale-up plan developed in November 2017 included 35 women safe spaces to be operational by February 2018. Only two were operational by April 2018.50 Allocation of space for women-friendly spaces was challenged by camp congestion and cumbersome camp site management coordination.

50 United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report No. 30 (Rohingya influx)’, UNICEF, 22 April 2018.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES27

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Page 29: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES28

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Commitment 4: Separation of children from families is prevented and addressed, and family-based care is promoted.

nn Identification, documentation, tracing and reunification for unaccompanied and separated children and alternative care have been focuses of the response. In the early weeks of the response, the quality of the case management for unaccompanied and separated children was challenged by the lack of lack of a shared definition of unaccompanied and separated children among relevant actors, including the Department of Social Services, and consequent overestimation of the targets. Investments have been made with partners in creating a standardized case management system at the sector level.

nn The main factors impacting the quality of the response in the first two months of the crisis were:Weak preparedness: After the 2016 influx, the response to predictable child protection risks was weak and not adequately prioritized in terms of systems development.51 The limited establishment of a shared case management system resulted in inefficiencies and delays,52 with UNICEF and partners having to invest significant time and effort in developing identification, documentation, tracing and reunification procedures, advocating and establishing alternative care systems and developing mechanisms to prevent family separation, while also responding to the emergency.Technical knowledge of UNICEF staff: despite the strategic focus on unaccompanied and separated children, no experts on the care and protection of unaccompanied and separated children were deployed.

nn Despite these challenges, UNICEF succeeded in establishing an effective case management system and alternative care, including with the development of cash-based assistance for foster families.

nn An important quality aspect of the response was the strong engagement with the Department of Social Services throughout the response, including their involvement in developing the case management procedures; carrying out robust and successful advocacy for family-based care; and facilitating capacity development with Department of Social Services social workers. This work has paved the way for extending the case management systems to other vulnerabilities and risks for both refugees and host communities.

Commitment 5: Violence, exploitation and abuse of children and women, including gender-based violence, are prevented and addressed.

nn Despite early indications that large numbers of women and girls had suffered from gender-based violence during their flight, and that female-headed households, including those headed by adolescent girls, are extremely vulnerable, the UNICEF programmatic response in this area has been limited and delayed (e.g., in the establishment of women-friendly spaces and the distribution of dignity kits).

nn Women-friendly spaces, a key approach to gender-based violence prevention and response, have been critically delayed, with only two women-friendly spaces operational in April 2018. The quality of the services remains weak, with limited partner technical capacity and poor understanding of privacy and confidentiality protocols essential to assisting gender-based violence survivors. Allocation of space for women-friendly spaces was challenged by the congestion in camps and the cumbersome camp site management coordination.

nn Alarmingly, gender-based violence awareness is not integrated into child protection adolescent programming, though gender-based violence messaging is part of C4D awareness-raising activities.

nn Human resource gaps, limited technical capacity of national partners, limited possibility for UNICEF traditional gender-based violence international partners (e.g., the International Rescue Committee) to operate, inefficient contract management53 and lack of a UNICEF gender-based violence capacity development strategy led to delays, inefficiencies and the poor quality of the overall gender-based violence response.

The gender-based violence sub-sector was also slow and had limited reach in the overall response. Major gaps in service delivery were highlighted by the gender-based violence sub-sector strategy (January 2018),54 as follows:Insufficient access to sexual and reproductive health services (including clinical management of rape)Limited multi-sector response (security, justice/legal, livelihoods are highly insufficient)Insufficient gender-based violence prevention and response for children, including adolescents, and men and boysInsufficient engagement with men, boys and religious leaders to address gender-based violenceInsufficient human resources/skillsets to respond to the complexity and scale of gender-based violenceInsufficient information about the quality of the response and the steps required for improvements

nn The gender-based violence sub-sector has established a gender-based violence integration task force to ensure that gender-based violence is consistently integrated across the sectors.

Suggested way forward:nn UNICEF: As a matter of urgency, invest in the gender-based violence response with adequate staffing and develop a sustainable capacity development strategy embedded in the gender-based violence sub-sector. The capacity development strategy should include an assessment of gaps and needs in partner capacities and the development of standard training contents, training sessions, training guidelines and training of trainer programmes. Training contents and materials should be available in all relevant languages.

51 Despite the establishment in late March 2017 of a technical working group within the child protection cluster/sector, which includes UNICEF, UNHCR, Save the Children and the Bangladesh Red Crescent Society, identification, documentation, tracing, unification/family tracing and reunification services were not sufficiently developed and shared with the Government, other agencies and NGOs to guide the response.

52 For example, the large overestimation of the number of unaccompanied and separated children by the Government and agencies due to the lack of a shared definition of unaccompanied and separated children, and the consequent time and effort invested in developing shared definitions and common case management procedures.

53 In October 2017, given the unclear/cumbersome process for international NGOs to register with the Government to operate in Bangladesh, UNICEF planned to launch an international bid for an institutional consulting agency for capacity development on child protection and gender-based violence. The International Rescue Committee was pre-selected as one of the strongest NGOs working on child protection and gender-based violence, and was already providing technical support in-country while awaiting registration. Unfortunately due to long and complicated internal procedures, the bid was never launched.

54 United Nations Population Fund, Protection Cluster, ‘Cox’s Bazaar Gender-Based Violence Sub-Sector Strategy 2018’, January 2018.

Page 30: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

Commitment 6: Psychosocial support is provided to children and their caregivers.

nn Psychosocial support has been provided from the onset of the crisis through a child-friendly space approach.nn The use of this approach has been highly valuable in a situation where congestion, precarious living conditions and limitations imposed on education activities by the Government of Bangladesh might have left children and adolescents with no safe and inclusive spaces to re-establish routines, play, socialize and cope with their trauma. Child-friendly spaces also offered the opportunity to identify children who were more severely affected by the events and in need of focused and specialized psychosocial support.

nn The life-skills programme for adolescents is valuable in raising awareness around key child protection risks and equipping adolescents, especially girls, with skills for resilience.

nn However, the provision of specialized MHPSS and non-specialized psychosocial support (3rd and 4th level of the MHPSS Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) intervention pyramid) has been weak. This is a major gap given the extent of violence and traumatic experiences that children and their families have suffered. Limited partner capacities and the limited number of agencies providing mental health services have been a concern throughout the response.

nn A comprehensive psychosocial support strategy has not been developed.nn UNICEF made an important effort to develop the capacities of partners to deliver a quality psychosocial support response. However, these efforts were not commensurate with the scale of the technical capacity needed. This has resulted in the limited technical quality of the response.

Suggested way forward:nn UNICEF and the child protection sub-sector: Develop a comprehensive psychosocial support strategy, including all levels of the IASC MHPSS intervention pyramid for children and their families, taking vulnerabilities into account.

nn UNICEF and the child protection sub-sector: Develop community-based psychosocial support for recreational activities while investing in partners’ professional staff for focused non-specialized support. Consider implementing resilience-building activities for children of all ages and develop psychosocial support-social and emotional learningurriculum within education to maximize coverage.

nn UNICEF and the child protection sub-sector: Develop standards for psychosocial support activities along with trainings and trainings of trainers for sector members and UNICEF partners.

Commitment 7: Child recruitment and use, as well as illegal and arbitrary detention, are addressed and prevented for conflict affected children.

nn No specific actions have been taken to prevent and address child recruitment. However, the adolescent groups established early in the response and the recent adolescent participatory assessment indicating strategic directions for adolescent programming, are contributing to limiting adolescents’ involvement in extremism.

nn Support to children in contact with law was not addressed in the emergency response programming. However, support for the strengthening of the child justice system55 is included in the child protection humanitarian-development strategy56

Commitment 8: The use of landmines and other indiscriminate or illicit weapons by state and non-state actors is prevented, and their impact is addressed.

nn Not included in the current response.

Suggested way forward:nn UNICEF Bangladesh and UNICEF Myanmar: Support preparedness for return scenario; and build capacities for surveillance and mine risk education in Bangladesh and Myanmar.

Working with other sectors to increase the quality of the response57

nn Child protection was able to establish good synergy with C4D on providing protection messages to be disseminated through model mothers and volunteers. However, it is unclear how C4D feedback influences child protection programming.

nn Child-friendly spaces were not used as hubs for services, especially those relating to antenatal and natal care, nutrition, health and hygiene promotion.

nn A positive example of inter-sectoral coordination was the coordinated strategy with education for requesting space for learning centres and child-friendly spaces. The joint education and child protection rapid assessment is another example of a good practice in coordination between child protection and education.

nn While referral mechanisms between child-friendly spaces and temporary learning centres exist to ensure enrolment and for psychosocial support, much more could be done to strengthen the synergies with education. For example, supporting teacher training on child protection, early identification and referral of cases and psychosocial support; supporting in the development of a psychosocial support-social and emotional learning curriculum; establishing referral mechanisms for children at risk; and developing standard training packages on child protection.

nn In the latest child protection humanitarian-development strategy (April 2018) the links with other sectors, particularly with education, are poorly spelled out.

55 Establishing and supporting children’s court, coordination among judicial actors and law enforcement officers, a diversion scheme and police capacity to deal with gender-based violence/child protection child affairs desks in police stations.

56 27 April 2018.

57 The CCCs do not clearly identify inter-sectorality and synergies between programme components in different sectors as key to the quality of the response. The evaluation deems this a crucial factor to highlight.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES29

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Page 31: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES30

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

C. SUMMARY OF THE HEALTH PROGRAMME COMMITMENTS AGAINST THE HEALTH CCCS

HEALTH COMMITMENTS BENCHMARKS FINDING

Commitment 1: Inter-agency coordination mechanisms in the health sector (e.g., cluster coordination) are supported and enhanced with links to other cluster/sector coordination mechanisms on critical inter-sectoral issues.

Benchmark 1: Health programme initiated by UNICEF and its partners contributes to the development of inter-agency strategy and implementation plans and ensures that activities are in line with it.

Benchmark met.UNICEF’s health commitments and activities support the sector-wide strategy and commitments outlined in the HRP and JRP.UNICEF has played an active and supportive role in health sector coordination and has developed a good relationship with WHO.

Commitment 2: Children and women access life-saving interventions through population- and community-based activities (e.g., campaigns and child health days).

Benchmark 2: 95 per cent coverage of measles vaccination, vitamin A and deworming medication in the relevant age group of the affected population. All families in the affected area receive two insecticide-treated bed nets in malaria-endemic areas.

Benchmark met.106 per cent targeted population reached with measles, rubella and vitamin A through mass campaign.Malaria not a public health risk so second benchmark not applicable

Commitment 3: Children, adolescents and women equitably access essential health services with sustained coverage of high-impact preventive and curative interventions.

Benchmark 3: 90 per cent of children aged 12–23 months fully covered with routine Expanded Programme on Immunization vaccine doses. No stock-outs of antibiotics (tracer for health), oxytocin (tracer for basic emergency obstetric and newborn care services), iron/folic acid (tracer for antenatal care) and antiretrovirals (tracer for prevention of mother-to-child transmission) in health centres in affected areas.At least one basic emergency obstetric care facility per 100,000 people.

Achievement of CCC benchmark indicators has been constrained by external and internal factors. 90 per cent coverage of the Expanded Programme on Immunization is yet to be achieved. Programme scale-up was restricted for the Rohingya until approval for the approach granted by the Government and delays in the recruitment of vaccinators and mass campaigns restricted the availability of human resources for routine service provision.However, population targets have been met, for example 106 per cent of the targeted population was reached with measles vaccination, albeit through mass campaigns rather than routine immunization.UNICEF health implementing partners aimed to meet the standard of 1 basic emergency obstetric care facility per 100,00 people, but achievement of the benchmark has been constrained due to delays in the procurement of supplies and restrictions on 24/7 care.UNICEF health implementing partners have provided 1 health centre per 6,000 population.There is no specific data on stock-outs, but some initial delays to the procurement of supplies reported by UNICEF partners, primarily due to restrictions on the importation of pharmaceuticals in Bangladesh.

Commitment 4: Women and children access behaviour-change communication interventions to improve health care and feeding practices.

Benchmark 4: All affected populations are exposed to key health education/promotion messages through multiple channels.

UNICEF implementing partners have provided behaviour change communication through individual counselling at facility and community levels and messaging at the community level through community health volunteers. Multiple channels have also been used for vaccination campaigns, including radio, majis, posters and megaphones. To date, messaging has been the predominant approach, with stronger positive efforts on community engagement to address social mobilization challenges within vaccination campaigns.

Page 32: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

D. SUMMARY OF THE NUTRITION PROGRAMME COMPONENTS AGAINST THE NUTRITION CCCSThe table below summarizes findings regarding the implementation of UNICEF’s response against the each of the CCCs for nutrition. More detail is provided for the treatment of SAM and IYCF in the following sub-sections.

NUTRITION COMMITMENTS BENCHMARK FINDINGS

Commitment 1: Effective leadership is established for nutrition cluster inter-agency coordination with links to other cluster/sector coordination mechanisms on critical intersectoral issues.

Benchmark 1:Coordination mechanism provides guidance to all partners regarding common standards, strategies and approaches, ensuring that all critical nutrition gaps and vulnerabilities are identified; also provides information on roles, responsibilities and accountability to ensure gaps are addressed without duplication.

The nutrition sector is well represented in the HRP and JRPThe nutrition sector strategy includes a multi-sectoral approach but overall realization of this has been limited to date.The coordination mechanism has provided a useful information sharing platform but can be used more effectively for decision-making and harmonizing standard approaches across partners within the sector. Community-based management of acute malnutrition tools have been developed, but common standards and guidelines have not been finalized on time.Draft emergency IYCF response plan have been developed, but a standardized package of quality interventions is yet to be finalized.Sector leadership needed to be stronger to facilitate a continuum of care for acute malnutrition.The sector has required the support of dedicated community-based management of acute malnutrition and IYCF specialists.

Commitment 2: Timely nutritional assessment and surveillance systems are established and/or enforced

Benchmark 2:Quality assessments are reported on in a timely fashion and provide sufficient information for decision-making, including the scope and severity of the nutrition situation, the underlying causes of malnutrition and contextual factors.

Nutrition surveys have been conducted in a timely fashion and have provided critical information on the prevalence of acute malnutrition to support the estimation of caseloads, and establish a need for using weight-for-height z-scores and mid-upper-arm circumference as admission criteria.

Commitment 3: Support for appropriate IYCF is accessed by affected women and children.

Benchmark 3:All emergency-affected areas have an adequate number of skilled IYCF counsellors and/or functioning support groups.

Achievement of benchmark constrained. Number of integrated and standalone spaces for IYCF is increasing but gaps in coverage remain. The number of skilled IYCF counsellors and functioning support groups is insufficient.

Commitment 4:Children and women with acute malnutrition access appropriate management services.

Benchmark 4:Effective management of acute malnutrition (recovery rate is >75 per cent and mortality rates are <10 per cent in therapeutic care and <3 per cent in supplementary care) reaches the majority of the target population (coverage is >50 per cent in rural areas, >70 per cent in urban areas and >90 per cent in camps).

Benchmark has been met but continuum of care has been a significant gap.

Commitment 5: Children and women access micronutrients from fortified foods, supplements or multiple micronutrient preparations

Benchmark 5: Micronutrient needs of affected populations are met: >90 per cent coverage of supplementation activities or >90 per cent have access to additional sources of micronutrients for women and children.

Not assessed in this evaluation.

Commitment 6: Children and women access relevant information about nutrition programme activities

Benchmark 6:Communication activities providing information on nutrition services (including how and where to access them) and entitlements are conducted in all emergency-affected areas.

Benchmark has been met but moving forward, communication activities need to focus more on community engagement and dialogue rather than the provision of information.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES31

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Page 33: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES32

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

The quality of UNICEF’s response in nutrition in terms of the management of acute malnutrition and IYCF has been assessed against the CCCs in more detail in the following sub-sections.

Treatment of SAM:

CCC: Children and women with acute malnutrition access appropriate management services.

Benchmark: Effective management of acute malnutrition (recovery rate is >75 per cent and mortality rates are <10 per cent in therapeutic care and <3 per cent in supplementary care) reaches the majority of the target population (coverage is >50 per cent in rural areas, >70 per cent in urban areas and >90 per cent in camps).

RESPONSE ACTIONS FOR UNICEF CCCS ON SAM FINDING EVIDENCE

Support existing capacity for the management of SAM for children at the community and facility levels.

Limited existing capacity at the outset.Limited number of partners with limited experience with nutrition-in-emergencies and/or community-based management of acute malnutrition. UNICEF moved quickly to provide support to national NGOs and international NGOs to scale up services.

No national guidelines for community-based management of acute malnutrition using ready-to-use therapeutic food.Programme Division agreements with implementing partners signed within days of submission.

Initiate and support additional therapeutic feeding as required to reach the estimated population in need.

Rapid scale-up of treatment of SAM through establishing new outpatient therapeutic feeding programme sites with integrated IYCF, but some duplication of services in some areas while other geographical areas remained underserved or services were not functional.Timely procurement and supply of ready-to-use therapeutic food but no clear forecasting or transparency and collaboration with other pipeline agencies with risk of oversupply in country.

Targets of estimated population in need were met.4Ws show very close proximity of several outpatient therapeutic feeding programmes.Rapid assessment of nutrition centres identified only 7 per cent as functional and 9 per cent as partially functionally (includes supplementary feeding programmes as well as outpatient therapeutic feeding programmes).No agreements.

In collaboration with WFP, ensure appropriate management of moderate acute malnutrition for children and supplementary feeding for vulnerable groups, including pregnant and lactating women, according to identified needs.

There has been insufficient collaboration with WFP and other actors to establish a coordinated approach to providing a continuum of care for acute malnutrition.

No letter of understanding between WFP and UNICEF.Outpatient therapeutic feeding programmes and target supplementary feeding programmes/blanket supplementary feeding programmes were not established in close physical proximity.Weak referral mechanisms between stabilization centres, outpatient therapeutic feeding programmes and supplementary feeding programmes.The nutrition sector community-based management of acute malnutrition weekly programme database shows a mismatch between the number of discharges from SAM treatment and the number of new admissions to moderate acute malnutrition treatment.

Support and establish systems for community mobilization, as well as for the identification and referral of acute malnutrition.

Each outpatient therapeutic feeding programme has community outreach workers conducting screenings, referrals and follow-up, but community engagement and two-way dialogue is limited.

Accountability to affected population mechanisms are limited to complaint boxes.

Page 34: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

E. SUMMARY OF THE WASH PROGRAMME COMPONENTS AGAINST THE WASH CCCSWASH COMMITMENTS BENCHMARK FINDINGS

Commitment 1: Effective leadership is established for WASH cluster/inter-agency coordination, with links to other cluster/sector coordination mechanisms on critical inter-sectoral issues.

Benchmark 1:Coordination mechanism provides guidance to all partners on common approaches and standards; ensures that all critical WASH gaps and vulnerabilities are identified; and provides information on who is doing what, where, when and how, to ensure that all gaps are addressed without duplication.

Effective coordination cell established in Cox’s Bazar District and good working relationships have been established with the government counterpart, the Department of Public Health Engineering, and ACF.The WASH sector is well represented in the HRP and the JRP and there are WASH strategy documents that underpin this.Coordination mechanisms have been slow to provide some basic information management products, namely camp level coordination gap analysis.Sector leadership was not sufficiently supported by UNICEF WASH programme communication and engagement in sector forums.The sector required the support of a dedicated hygiene promotion specialist who only arrived in April.The faecal sludge management (FSM) strategy is weak.

Commitment 2: Children and women access sufficient water of appropriate quality and quantity for drinking, cooking and maintaining personal hygiene.

Benchmark 2:Children and women have access to at least 7.5–15 litres each of clean water per day.

The JRP targets for water are as per the CCCs and planned to be achieved by the end of the JRP period (end of December 2018).

Commitment 3: Children and women access toilets and washing facilities that are culturally-appropriate, secure, sanitary, user-friendly and gender-appropriate.

Benchmark 3:A maximum ratio of 20 people per hygienic toilet or latrine squat hole; users should have a means to wash their hands after defecation with soap or an alternative (such as ash).

The JRP targets for the number of latrines are as per the CCCs and are planned to be achieved by the end of the JRP period (end of December 2018). However, massive over-congestion in some areas may prevent this. To date, many latrines do not meet the needs of many girls and women. Finally, in the context of massive desludging and sometimes unsafe treatment/disposal, it is questionable whether the excreta management chain is always hygienic.

Commitment 4:Children and women receive critical WASH-related information to prevent child illness, especially diarrhoea.

Benchmark 4:Hygiene education and information pertaining to safe and hygienic child care and feeding practices are provided to 70 per cent of women and child caregivers.

Hygiene promotion has been provided through WASH and C4D channels. Despite the massive over-congestion, diarrhoeal disease has largely been prevented, suggesting that the totality of WASH interventions, including hygiene promotion, have worked. However, community engagement (not a stated part of this commitment) has been weak and as this links to latrines that do not always meet the needs of girls and women, the weakness of hygiene promotion as a whole is apparent.

Commitment 5: Children access safe WASH facilities in their learning environment and in child-friendly spaces.

Benchmark 5: In learning facilities and child-friendly spaces, 1–2 litres of drinking water per child per day (depending on climate and individual physiology); 50 children per hygienic toilet or latrine squat hole at school; users have a means to wash their hands after defecation with soap or an alternative; and appropriate hygiene education and information are provided to children, guardians and teachers.

In line with the JRP, this commitment was undertaken as part of the education response, not the WASH response. Latrines and water and handwashing facilities were not systematically mapped by the WASH sector as this was the responsibility of the education sector. No macro level data were available at the time of writing this report that documented the extent of the coverage. Ad hoc visits to a handful of learning centres showed WASH facilities had been installed.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES33

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE AGAINST THE CORE COMMITMENTS FOR CHILDRENANNEX FOUR

Page 35: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES34

ANNEX 5. LIST OF INTERVIEWEES

Edouard Beigbeder Representative

Sheema Sen Gupta Deputy Representative

Dzidula Masiku Chief of Operations

Jean-Jacques Simon Chief of Communications

Shairose Mawji Chief of Field Service

Maya Vandenent Chief of Health

Anuradha Narayan Chief of Nutrition

Jean Lieby Chief of Child Protection 

Pawan Kucita Chief of Education

Saltanat Builasheva Education Specialist

Srikanth Srinivasan Chief of Supply and Procurement

Maki Robinson Planning and Monitoring Specialist

Dara Johnston  Chief of WASH

Neha Kapil  Chief of C4D

Ranya Kargbo Chief of Human Resources

In Hye Sung  Emergency Specialist, Field Services

Madhuri Banerjee Programme Specialist, Chittagong Field Office

Golam Morshed  WASH Specialist

Shayera Sania Supply and Procurement

UNICEF BANGLADESH

Ranjini Paskarasingam Child Protection Sector Coordinator

Risto Sakari Ihalainen Education Sector Coordinator

Ingo Neu Nutrition Sector Coordinator

Muhammad Abu Bakr Siddique

Nutrition Officer Information Management Nutrition Sector

Paryss Kouta C4D Sector Coordinator

Abigael Nyukuri Nutrition Cluster Coordinator

Henry Sebuliba Nutrition Sector Coordinator (former)

Louise Enevoldsen Nutrition Sector Coordinator (former)

Jean-Ludovic Metenier Chief of Field Office

Badreddine Serrokh Emergency Programme Coordinator

Bill Fellows Senior WASH Adviser

Adam Christophe Tibe Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Manager

Robert Eddie Education Specialist

Martin Worth WASH Manager

Yulia Widiati Health Specialist

Mukeshkumar Prajapti Emergency Health Specialist

Saira Khan Nutrition Specialist

Musa Dammeh Hygiene Promotion

Eddie Dutton Education Specialist

Shaila Parveen Child Protection Officer

Jannatul Ferdous Ruma Child Protection Officer

Rafit Salih WASH

William Kollie Child Protection Manager

Wayne David Bleier Psychosocial Specialist

Kirsten (Krissie) Hayes Standby Partner: Child Protection-in-Emergencies Specialist

Carina Hickling Standby Partner: Gender-Based-Violence-in-Emergencies Specialist

Sharmin Afrose Administrative Assistant

Purna Kumar Yonjan Logistics Officer

Francis Kaunda Operations Manager

Nazzina Mohsin Communications Officer

Peta Barns Logistics Manager

Mohammad Alamgir C4D

Viviane Van Steirteghem Chief of Field Office (former)

Luc Chauvin Regional Emergency Adviser (former)

Anthea Moore Planning and Monitoring Specialist

UNICEF COX’S BAZAR FIELD OFFICE (CURRENT AND FORMER)

Page 36: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EXTERNAL

ACAPS Sean Ng Senior Data Analyst

ACF Abu Naim Md. Shafiullah Talukder Team Leader

ACF Emilie Rivier Health and Nutrition Emergency Coordinator

ACF Abu Naim WASH Sector Co-Lead

ACF Eshita Farhnana Rahma Mental Health and Psychosocial Support Working Group Lead

ACF Sytske Anneke Berendine Claassen Emergency WASH Coordinator (former)

BRAC Khan Mohammad Ferdous Project Coordinator

BRAC Bebek Kanti Das Programme Manager

BRAC Sumon Chandra Debnath  Project Manager

BRAC Kinana Qaddur Education Technical Advisor

BRAC Josephine Waruguru Kiguru Child Protection Focal Point

BRAC (C4D) Rashadul Hasan C4D Specialist

CARE Mahbubur Rahman Senior Team Leader

CARE (gender-based violence) Clementine Novales Gender-Based Violence Advisor

CARE Bangladesh Mahbubur Rahman Senior Team Leader

CODEC Fatema Kaniz Focal Person for UNICEF

CODEC Lutfor Rahman Communication Officer

CODEC Fatema Kaniz Focal Person for UNICEF

Jean Gough Global Emergency Coordinator and Regional Director

Philippe Denis Cori Deputy Regional Director

Antonio Marro WASH Specialist

Harriet Torlesse Regional Nutrition Adviser

Sam Bickel Regional Evaluation Adviser

Gaizka Mentxaka Programme Specialist

Diane Summers C4D Regional Adviser

Paul Rutter Regional Health Adviser

Andreas Hasman Health Specialist – Immunization

Urmila Sakar Education Regional Adviser

Kendra Gregson Child Protection Regional Adviser

Anne-Sophie Bonnefeld Regional Chief of Communications

Sheeba Harma Regional Gender Advisor

Therese Dooley WASH Adviser

Naqib Safi Regional Emergency Adviser a.i.

Overtoun Mgemezulu Emergency Regional Adviser (officer-in-charge)

REGIONAL OFFICE FOR SOUTH ASIA

Manuel Fontaine Director, Office of Emergency Programmes (EMOPS)

Geoff Wiffin Senior Adviser, EMOPS

AK Musse Emergency Specialist (Emergency Response Team)

Sara Bordas Eddy Chief, EMOPS

Ted Chaiban Director, Programme Division

Vidhya Ganesh Deputy Director, Programme Division

Sanjay Wikesekera Associate Director, WASH

Cornelius Williams Associate Director, Child Protection

Noreen Khan Gender Planning and Programme Specialist

Catherine Poulton  Child Protection Specialist

Sanjana Quazi Senior Adviser, Public Partnership Division

Paloma Escuerdo Communications Director

Diane Holland Nutrition Specialist

Dick Chalma Health Specialist

Tim Grieve Senior WASH Adviser

June Kunugi Representative, UNICEF Myanmar

NEW YORK HEADQUARTERS/GENEVA/COPENHAGEN/MYANMAR

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES35

LIST OF INTERVIEWEESANNEX F IVE

Page 37: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES36

LIST OF INTERVIEWEESANNEX F IVE

EXTERNAL

CODEC Lutfor Rahman Communication Officer

CODEC Mohammad Rashad Shah Document and Data Analysis Officer

CODEC Selim Uddin Sikder Training Officer

CODEC Farida Yasmin Child-Friendly Space Centre Manager

CODEC Nasir Uddim Project Manager

CODEC (child protection) Nasir Uddin Project Manager

CODEC (education) A. K. M Humayun Kabir Project Coordinator

CODEC (joint project with education and C4D) Taswir Islam Emergency Officer, Communication and Development

Concern Worldwide Md. Alimul Islam and team Technical Manager

DanChurchAid (gender-based violence) Sebastien Delhoume Area Manager

Department for International Development (United Kingdom)

Omar Farook Christa Rader Humanitarian Advisor

Department of Public Health Engineering Monir Ibrahim Chief Engineer (Disaster Response)

Department of Public Health Engineering A.K.M. Ibrahim Chief Engineer (Planning)

Danish Refugee Council Tess Elias Country Director

Dushtha Shasthya Kendra (WASH) Azizul Haque Team Leader

Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid

Rene De Vries

Global Child Protection Area of Responsibility Petra Heusser Rapid Response Team Coordinator

Global WASH Cluster Dominique Porteaud Global WASH Cluster Coordinator

Global Education Cluster Maria Agnese Giordano Global Education Cluster Coordinator

Global Nutrition Cluster Josephine Ippe Global Nutrition Cluster Coordinator

International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh

Dr. S. M. Rafiqul Islam Programme Manager

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

Ewinur Machdar WASH Delegate Cox’s Bazar

IOM Peppi Siddique Programme Manager, Deputy

IOM Abdusattor Esoev

IOM (Sojib) MA Rahman WASH coordinator Cox’s Bazar

IOM Joe Ashmore Site Planner

ISCG Sumbul Rizvi Senior Humanitarian Coordinator

ISCG Orla Clinton Inter-Agency Preparedness Planning

Japanese Embassy Takeshi Saito

Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief Mohammad Kalam Refugee, Relief and Repatriation Commissioner

Ministry of Social Welfare Abu Abdullah Wali Ullah Deputy Director, Department of Social Services

Ministry of Social Welfare Mohammad Al Amin Jamali Social Service Officer

Médecins Sans Frontières Operational Centre Amsterdam Sam Turner Emergency Coordinator, Cox’s Bazar

Médecins Sans Frontières Operational Centre Amsterdam Pavlo Kolovos Head of Mission, Dhaka

Médecins Sans Frontières Operational Centre Barcelona Athens

Nicholas Papachrysostomou Emergency Coordinator, Cox’s Bazar

Mukti Shawkat Education Officer

Mukti Shantanu Shekor Roy Education Officer

Mukti (education) Nasir Uddin and team Project Coordinator

Mukti (joint project with education and C4D) Shantanu and team Technical Officer

Netherlands Embassy Leonie Ceulenaere Ambassador

Page 38: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EXTERNAL

NGO Forum Zahidul Islam Mamun

Norwegian Refugee Council Courtney Lare Education Project Manager

Oxfam Andy Bastable Global WASH Cluster Coordinator

Oxfam Peter Streuff

Oxfam Michelle Farrington

Oxfam (WASH) Tata Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning Officer

Partners in Health Development Jamirul Islam

Plan International (child protection and gender-based violence)

Julie Bodin Specialist, Child Protection-in-Emergencies

Relief International Ricardo Vieta Perez and team Emergency Response Director

Research, Training and Management International Muktadir Hossain Program Manager

Social Assistance and Rehabilitation for the Physically Vulnerable

Sujit Chandra Das Project Coordinator

Save the Children Sian Long Education-in-Emergencies Program Manager

Save the Children Megan Gayford Senior Humanitarian Nutrition Adviser

Save the Children Alice Burrell Humanitarian Surge Team Adviser

Save the Children Anne Marie Kueter Nutrition Technical Adviser

Save the Children Sian Long Education Sector Co-Lead

Save the Children Heather Carrol Education Technical Advisor

Save the Children Nicki Connell Senior Humanitarian Nutrition Adviser

Save the Children (child protection and gender-based violence)

Lucie Eches Child Protection Technical Advisor

Save the Children (child protection and gender-based violence)

Clare Back Child Protection Manager

Society for Health Extension and Development Md. Ziaur Rahman Project Coordinator

Solidarites Yves Bertrand WASH Coordinator

Switzerland Embassy Rene Holenstein Ambassador

Switzerland Embassy Beate Elisaesser Deputy Head of Mission

Switzerland Embassy Thomas Fisler Humanitarian Emergency Coordinator

United Nations Mia Seppo Resident Coordinator

United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) Saba Zariv Sector Coordinator (Cox’s Bazar)

UNHCR Bernadette Castel

UNHCR Caroline Wilkinson Senior Nutrition Officer

UNHCR Emmet Bernard Chainey FST UNHCR

UNHCR Jaqueline Strecker Education Officer

UNHCR Maria Ferrante Protection Officer

WASH Sector John Allen Co-chair Faecal Sludge Management Technical Working Group

WASH Sector Jason Searle Information Manager

WaterAid Zahidul Islma Mamun Cox’s Bazar Programme Manager

WaterAid (WASH) Md Wahidul Islam Team Leader, Cox’s Bazar

World Food Programme (WFP) Monique Beun Head of Nutrition

World Health Organization (WHO) Selma Sevkli Mental Health and Psychosocial Support Technical Officer

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES37

LIST OF INTERVIEWEESANNEX F IVE

Page 39: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES38

A. FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION PROTOCOL AND GUIDING QUESTIONS

nn Focus group discussions (held separately for females and males, girls and boys) will be used to inform the evaluation. Covered below are questions related to WASH and child protection. Some questions related to health and nutrition may be added at a later date.

Preparation and introduction nn UNICEF staff and partners will assist in the selection

of beneficiaries, the identification of community volunteers for the focus group discussion and related preparations (finding a space to meet, etc.). This may include a limited number of adolescents.

nn It should be stressed that participation is entirely voluntary and has no bearing on whether households will be included in future UNICEF programmes.

nn Men/boys and women/girls will be separated into separate groups for these discussions.

nn Names and addresses will not be taken.

At the focus group meeting nn Before the meeting starts, explain the purpose of

the exercise and ask if there are any questions from the participants.

nn Describe the purpose of the exercise. We are conducting a review for UNICEF to help it learn about its response to improve. From the beneficiaries, we mainly want to understand 1) their defection practices; 2) how they seek help if they know someone is in danger.

nn Explain the independence of the exercise: We are working on behalf of UNICEF but are not ourselves UNICEF staff members. A written report will be produced for UNICEF, an edited version of which may subsequently be published.

nn Explain that notes will be taken but views expressed will not be attributed to individuals. Participants should feel free to speak freely, and we would ask them not to repeat outside the group what others have said during the discussion.

nn We suggest that the focus group discussion last 45 minutes to an hour but obtain agreement from the participants based on a suggested length.

nn Check that those present consent to being part of the process as described (e.g., in the form of a verbal question such as “are you content to be part of this discussion as we have described it?”).

WASH PURPOSE OF THE FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

nn To understand what girls/women were doing at the outset regarding defecation

nn To understand use of gender-disaggregated versus shared family latrines

nn To supplement areas where data not available from other sources

GUIDING QUESTIONS 1. How did you manage your daily toilet practice

after you arrived in Bangladesh in the months

of September and October? (survey participants should be able to answer 1 or more options)

a. Going in the shelter? (yes/no) If yes did you have a bucket for this? (yes/no) If not would a bucket for this have helped you? (yes/no)

b. Using a latrine in the day? (yes/no)

c. Using a latrine at night? (yes/no)

d. Going in the open? (yes/no)

2. What would you have preferred for your daily toilet practice at the start? (open question)

ANNEX 6. DATA COLLECTION TOOLS

Page 40: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

© U

NIC

EF

/UN

014

38

62

/BIN

DR

A

3. Do you now have access to a latrine? (yes/no)

4. If yes, is this for: (select one option only)

a. Just your family

b. Shared with other families

c. For girls/women only

5. Which of these do you prefer? Please note agencies are not planning individual family latrines which might be the preference so this option has deliberately NOT been included. (select one option only)

a. A latrine shared with one or two other families

b. A latrine only for use by girls and women, with separate latrines only for use by boys and men

(Child) protection PURPOSE OF FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION

nn To understand what type of community-based protection mechanisms exist and are used to protect children

nn To understand if the UNICEF-supported community-based child protection committees are known to people, used and useful to protect children

GUIDING QUESTIONS 1. What do you do if you hear that a child or a

young boy or girl is in danger (e.g., not being cared for, being separated from the family, being abused, being asked to do heavy work, being forced to marry or being sexually abused)? In what ways you seek help?

2. Have you heard about community based child protection committees? What do they do?

3. Are you involved or know someone who is involved? How many people?

4. Have you heard of any child and their family who was helped by these committees? Can you give examples?

An outreach worker at a UNICEF-supported adolescent group records information from a group of teenage girls in Balukhali makeshift settlement, near Cox’s Bazar.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES39

DATA COLLECTION TOOLSANNEX SIX

Page 41: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES40

DATA COLLECTION TOOLSANNEX SIX

B. SURVEY FOR UNICEF PARTNERS (PROGRAMME COOPERATION AGREEMENTS)

This survey will be sent to UNICEF partners with a programme cooperation agreement using SurveyMonkey.

As you may know, UNICEF’s response to the Rohingya crisis in Bangladesh is the subject of a rapid and timely evaluation at the moment. We would like to seek your cooperation in this evaluation by answering the following eight or nine questions. These questions are put in the

form of statements with which we ask you to agree or disagree. Your answers would be very helpful for us in understanding your perceptions of your partnership with UNICEF. If your organization has more than one agreement with UNICEF for different sectors, we would like to ask you to fill it in for the different sectors by the person responsible for the sector in your organization. We will not share your answers with UNICEF other than in a generalized and anonymized form (i.e., without mentioning your agency name).

You are a UNICEF partner in

WASH

Health

Nutrition

Education

Child protection and gender-based violence

1. The programme document/programme cooperation agreement (contracting) process with UNICEF went smoothly.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

2. The time between the first conversations and the signing of the programme document/programme cooperation agreement was acceptable.

1=strongly disagree (it took more than 12 weeks)

2=disagree (it took between 8 and 12 weeks)

3=disagree nor agree (it took between 4 and 8 weeks)

4=agree (it took between 2 and 4 weeks)

5=strongly agree (it took less than 2 weeks)

Please comment:

3. The project funding arrived very quickly after the conclusion of the contract and according to the payment schedule.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

4. There was/is a noticeable intention on the part of UNICEF to develop this contractual partnership into a longer-term operational partnership.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

Page 42: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

5. The reporting requirements from UNICEF have been reasonable from the start of the programme cooperation agreement.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

6. For those who answered 1-3 on the previous question, we have seen improvements in the reporting requirements from UNICEF.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

7. The support from UNICEF in terms of technical assistance, guidance and training has been adequate.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

We did not receive any offers for training

My organization would benefit from capacity strengthening support that involved more than only training

Please comment (especially if you ticked one or both boxes above):

8. The supplies received from UNICEF arrived on time and were adequate.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

We did not receive supplies from UNICEF

Please comment (especially if you ticked the box above):

9. UNICEF has demonstrated leadership and vision in this response and this has helped us in developing a common strategy for UNICEF and partners.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

In case you would like to provide us with your thoughts and experiences in working with UNICEF as a partner, please feel free to summarize your experiences. Your points could also include suggestions on what could be improved, and how, in the partnership arrangement; ideas you might have on training or capacity building; and any other recommendations for UNICEF.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES41

DATA COLLECTION TOOLSANNEX SIX

Page 43: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES42

DATA COLLECTION TOOLSANNEX SIX

C. SURVEY FOR PARTNERS OF THE SECTORS UNICEF LEADS OR CO-LEADS

This survey (using SurveyMonkey) will be circulated to agency representatives that participate in the sectors for which UNICEF has assumed (co-)lead responsibility, including child protection, education, nutrition and WASH. For the latter, it will be shared with partners who are part of the strategic advisory group. The evaluation experts covering these sectors may wish to add specific questions related to their sector(s).

Survey questionsAs you may know, UNICEF’s response to the Rohingya

crisis in Bangladesh is currently the subject of a rapid and timely evaluation. We would like to seek your cooperation in this evaluation by answering the following nine questions. These questions are put in the form of statements with which we ask you to agree or disagree. Your answers would be very helpful for us in understanding your perceptions of the way in which UNICEF has fulfilled its responsibilities in relation to the sectors for which it has taken a (co-)leadership role. We will not share your answers with UNICEF other than in a generalized and anonymized form (i.e., without mentioning your agency name).

You are

UNICEF implementing partner

Sector partner

1. UNICEF has done its best to ensure that the sector is a platform for ensuring that service delivery is driven by strategic priorities.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

2. UNICEF’s (co-)leadership in the sector has been essential in developing strategic planning and setting direction.

1= strongly disagree

2=disagree

3= disagree nor agree

4=agree

5= strongly agree

Please comment:

3. Thanks to UNICEF’s (co-)leadership role, the sector is very well represented in the JRP.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

I do not know as I was not around at the time of the JRP planning.

Please comment:

Page 44: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

4. Thanks to UNICEF’s (co-)leadership role, the sector meetings are well-managed with a clear agenda and objectives for the meeting and are an efficient use of my time.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

5. Thanks to UNICEF’s (co-)leadership role, the sector is effective in managing available data and developing analysis in terms of gaps in the response.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

6. Thanks to UNICEF’s (co-)leadership role, the sector monitoring, based on clear standards and indicators, is well functioning.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

7. Thanks to UNICEF’s (co-)leadership role, the sector has developed joint messages or agencies have coordinated their advocacy on sector priorities.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

8. Thanks to UNICEF’s (co-)leadership role, the sector has undertaken effective emergency preparedness and contingency planning.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

9. Thanks to UNICEF’s (co-)leadership role, the sector has the communication with refugees and affected host communities (CwC) as a priority.

1=strongly disagree

2=disagree

3=disagree nor agree

4=agree

5=strongly agree

Please comment:

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES43

DATA COLLECTION TOOLSANNEX SIX

Page 45: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES44

ANNEX 7. RESEARCH ETHICS APPROVAL

HML Institutional Review Board 1101 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 450

Washington, DC 20036 USA +1.202.753.5040

[email protected] www.hmlirb.com US Department of Health & Human Services, Office of Human Research Protections IRB #00001211

Research Ethics Approval 18 April 2018 Ed Schenkenberg van Mierop Teamleader c/o Evaluation Office Room-1488 3 United Nations Plaza New York, NY 10017 RE: Ethics Review Board findings for: Rapid and Timely Humanitarian Evaluation of

UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Crisis in Bangladesh

Dear Mr. Schenkenberg van Mierop, Protocols for the protection of human subjects in the above study were assessed through an ethics review by HML Institutional Review Board on 16 – 18 April 2018. This study’s human subjects’ protection protocols, as stated in the materials submitted, received IRB approval. Please inform this IRB if there are any changes to your human subject protection protocols. Sincerely,

D. Michael Anderson, Ph.D., MPH Chair & Human Subjects Protections Director, HML IRB cc: Laura Olsen, Koorosh Raffii, Jane Mwangi, Penelope Lantz, [email protected]

Page 46: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

ANNEX 8. COMPOSITION OF THE TEAM

Ed Schenkenberg van Mierop, Team Leader: Ed is responsible for leading the evaluation and ensuring that it meets the objectives and addresses the evaluation

questions. He has extensive experience in refugee situations and undertaking real-time reviews.

Francesca Ballarin, child protection and education expert: Francesca Ballarin has extensive experience in

humanitarian aid, protection, child protection and education in emergency and post-conflict situations.

Anne Bush, public health and nutrition expert: Anne has extensive experience working in emergency response,

including in refugee contexts. She is a co-author of UNICEF’s publication: ‘Committed to Nutrition: A toolkit for action: Fulfilling UNICEF’s Core Commitments to Children in Humanitarian Action’.

Richard Luff, WASH expert: Richard’s extensive experience in working in a variety of roles from

programme positions, to general coordination and management in the humanitarian sector also includes specializations in

humanitarian coordination, WASH and management.

Laura Olsen, Evaluation Specialist: Laura is a UNICEF staff member in the Evaluation Office and is an embedded evaluation team member. She has worked

with the Evaluation Office humanitarian portfolio since 2015.

Sahjabin Kabir, Evaluation Team Member: Sahjabin is a development and humanitarian expert who

specializes in education, women’s empowerment and livelihood management in conflict situations. She has extensive

research and field experience on the Rohingya crisis.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES45

Page 47: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES46

ANNEX 9. ISCG GENDER MATRIX58

58 Please note that the ISCG matrix was not completed for WASH.

CROSS-SECTORAL ACTIONS

ACTION COMMENTS STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION

Menstrual hygiene management assessment as part of WASH knowledge, attitudes, behaviours and practices survey.

Relevant sections/sectors WASH section/sector; child protection; education; nutrition; health

Gender-based violence risk mitigation and integration task force established under the gender-based violence sub-sector but open to all sectors.

WASH requesting a standby partner to implement innovative menstrual hygiene management/ gender/gender-based violence project.

Completed

GBV considerations are included in field monitoring checklist. The next step is to analyze the data to identify GBV risks in each section. The periodical change is needed as the situation changes to well capture GBV risks.

Relevant sections/sectors PME; All sections

The gender-based-violence-in-emergencies/child protection team is getting support from an information management specialist hosted by UNICEF for the Inter-Agency Reference Group on the Gender-Based Violence Guidelines.

Ongoing

Develop a Multi-sectoral strategy to support children who are born out of rape.

Relevant sections/sectors Child protection section including gbv /sub-sector; health; education

Established and led by the gender-based-violence-in-emergencies specialist. It is the primary coordination mechanism in Cox’s Bazar for all work pertaining to and responding to women, girls and babies; capacity development of staff, including foster care arrangements (child protection and gender-based violence case managers and health staff); and advocacy and information messages.

Completed

Ensure that all partners have code of conduct with community based front-line workers and provide PSEA and GBV referral training.

Relevant sections/sectors All sections

Assessment of training on gender-based violence and prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse, including the referral pathway, is underway with Transition International. Terms of reference developed. Code of conduct/inclusion in programme cooperation agreement document is requested and handled by Headquarters. Notes from phone conversation attached.

Ongoing

Integrate GBV consideration into all cash programme design and indicators to mitigate risks of GBV and also measure impact of cash intervention.

Relevant sections/sectors WASH, CP (GBV), social policy

Cash/gender-based violence proposal addressing this is under development but has been agreed to in principal. An additional standby partner has been agreed to in principle, and will train cash and gender-based violence service providers.Draft proposal developed.

Initial stages/no actions taken

Page 48: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

ACTION POINTS FOR SECTIONS

C4D

ACTION COMMENTS STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION

Train all IFC volunteers and model mothers on GBV referral and PSEA with support from GBV specialist. If the partner does not have a specific Code of Conduct for volunteers, UNICEF share a sample Code of Conduct.

Needs assessment for prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse conducted on 8-9 May 2018 across eight information and feedback centres. Based on the findings, training is planned for PULSE for 4-7 June and will cover training information service providers and social mobilization officers on gender-based violence referral and prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse. The training will follow a cascade approach. Culturally-sensitive information, education and communication/social and behaviour change communication materials and resources under development for gender-based violence and prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse. Further discussions to be held with gender-based-violence-in-emergencies and C4D specialists)

Ongoing

If the partner does not have a specific code of conduct for volunteers, UNICEF share a sample code of conduct.

BRAC submitted the code of conduct (Bengali). PULSE provided with the UNICEF code of conduct template.

Completed

Remove GBV component and the individual data (name, household number etc) from the IFC database. Informed consent is necessary if individual data is continued to be collected

Gender-based violence component removed from the database. Discussions on creating a safe space within the information and feedback centres to ensure confidentiality.

Completed

Request BRAC to ensure 800 community volunteers are trained on PSEA and GBV referral and are signed Code of Conduct.

BRAC training immediately after PULSE training (June onwards), following the cascade model.

Ongoing

CwC specialist and PSEA focal point need to discuss further on community based complainant mechanism – potential SEA reporting entry points.

Prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse included in the CwC joint community feedback system protocol for information hubs. Initial meetings have been held with the prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse focal point and continued collaboration is planned.

Ongoing

EDUCATION

ACTION COMMENTS STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION

Conduct a joint assessment with CP as a follow up from the EiE/CP joint rapid assessment to have better understanding of children’s risks in and on the way to learning centers.

Not planned Initial stage/no actions taken

Discuss with female participants of the learning centre management committee if they feel comfortable participating in a mixed group. Based on the discussion, make necessary changes of the structure for learning center management committee to ensure meaningful participation of women (WASH management committee might be a good reference to find a suitable structure)

Due to time congestion in the learning centres, partners are arranging learning centre management committee meetings with a separate sitting arrangement within the same group. But a separate mother group is proposed.

Ongoing

Ensure that all teachers/instructors sign the Code of Conduct and are trained on PSEA and GBV referral. This should be a minimum requirement for teachers/instructors.

Code of conduct is being developed by the Education Sector Standard Working group.

Ongoing

Incorporate GBV into training and capacity building strategy for teachers and life-skills in collaboration with the GBV specialist

Gender-based violence training will be incorporated within the upcoming LCFA roll-out plan.

Initial stage/no actions taken

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES47

ISCG GENDER MATRIXANNEX NINE

Page 49: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES48

ISCG GENDER MATRIXANNEX NINE

ACTION POINTS FOR SECTIONS

HEALTH

ACTION COMMENTS STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION

Integrate care for GBV (not only rape) survivors into all primary health care services.

Partners are encouraged to be part of/actively participate in gender-based violence and sexual and reproductive health sub-working group. Partners are taking the opportunity to take advantage of training organized by sub-sectors.

Ongoing

Make use of the traditional healers and Rohingya doctors (not certified doctors) and Rohingya health workers (trained in Myanmar/Cox’s Bazar) as health information points/referral points.

Partners do not have Rohingya doctors, but the majority of the community health workers/volunteers/mobilizers are Rohingya. Some of them received training in Myanmar, but many also received training here. Continuous sensitization and advocacy is ongoing.

Ongoing

Increase numbers of female medical staff. Not always possible to have both female and male medical doctors in one clinic but partners are encouraged to do so.

Ongoing

Include at least one female medical staff for the mobile health team and where possible and necessary include a female social worker in the team to respond to GBV survivors.

Not always possible but is encouraged. Ongoing

Organize a GBV sensitization/main streaming workshop in case required

One workshop organized in February. Discussions to be held with gender-based violence focal point on the need for another.

Completed

CHILD PROTECTION

ACTION COMMENTS STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION

Expand and strengthen GBV services. As GBV integration into other sectors increased the demand for GBV specialized services may be increased. More GBV services and support will be required.

Additional partnership with CARE and dedicated fundraising

Completed

Lead the GBV integration working group in the GBV sub-sector. Gender-based violence risk mitigation and integration task force (gender-based violence sub-sector) established and led by UNICEF.

Completed

Consider implementing community engagement to address negative social norms (UNICEF Communities Care programme model) as one of GBV intervention.

Discussion with health partner is ongoing Ongoing

Strengthen CP services including case management, PSS, alternative care arrangement for child abuse cases including care for sexual violence (both boys and girls) and children of GBV survivors including rape and IPV.

Terms of reference for institutional consulting agency approved and launched. In process of signing a contract with Transition International

Completed

NUTRITION

ACTION COMMENTS STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION

Strengthen a referral between nutrition and CP/GBV. Provide GBV referral pathway training for nutrition frontline workers in collaboration with GBV specialist.

Currently looking at a) integrating into planning; and b) begin implementation into service delivery as soon as possible.

Initial

Jointly work between Nutrition/CP including GBV to make use of CFS/WFS (disseminate nutrition message) and IYCF/breast feeding group (disseminate GBV messages (available services, dialogue).

As above Initial

Page 50: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

© U

NIC

EF

/UN

013

57

12/N

YB

O

On 19 September 2017, newly arrived Rohingya refugees from Myanmar walk through paddy fields and flooded land after they fled over the border into Cox’s Bazar district in Bangladesh.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES49

ISCG GENDER MATRIXANNEX NINE

Page 51: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES50

  EDUCATION HEALTH NUTRITIONCHILD PROTECTION AND GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE

WASH

Education   nn No health education provided in temporary learning centres

nn Nutrition education is being provided in temporary learning centres (nutrition is part of the life-skills framework)

See below nn Mixed links with WASH – good examples of working WASH facilities in temporary learning centres but hygiene promotion is a critical gap

nn Menstrual hygiene management not implemented in temporary learning centres

Health  See above nn Concrete referral pathways between different services (ongoing)

nn In primary health care, mid-upper arm circumference screening and referral for acute malnutrition in children under 5

nn Concrete referral pathways to be strengthened, including from antenatal care to target and blanket supplementary feeding programmes

nn Capacity building on anthropometric measurements and IYCF counselling can be strengthened for primary health care and neonatal care

nn Integrating outreach work/streamlining community messaging across sectors

nn Acute watery diarrhoea plan includes protocol for screening and referral and treatment of SAM with or without complications/ diarrhoea (completed)

nn Integrate care for gender-based violence (not only rape) survivors into all primary health care services (ongoing)

nn Make use of the traditional healers and Rohingya doctors (not certified doctors) and Rohingya health workers (trained in Myanmar/Cox’s Bazar) as health information points/referral points (ongoing)

nn Increase numbers of female medical staff (ongoing)

nn Include at least one female medical staff in the mobile health team and where possible and necessary include a female social worker in the team to respond to gender-based violence survivors (ongoing)

nn Organize a gender-based violence sensitization/ mainstreaming workshop if required (completed)

nn Extent of WASH services available at health centres not quantified at macro level by health sector; facilities observed during visits

ANNEX 10. INTER-SECTORALITY MATRIX

Page 52: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

  EDUCATION HEALTH NUTRITIONCHILD PROTECTION AND GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE

WASH

Nutrition See above nn Immunization coverage and basic morbidity included in nutrition assessment surveys (completed)

nn Concrete referral pathways to be defined and strengthened

nn Training nutrition workers on detection of common infectious diseases (e.g., measles) and referral

nn Integrate outreach work/streamlining community messaging across sectors

nn Concrete linkages/referral pathways between stabilization centres, outpatient therapeutic feeding programmes and targeted and blanket supplementary feeding programmes

nn Nutrition staff oriented on child protection issues and appropriate handling of potential cases (e.g., linkages with community child protection focal points)

nn Strengthen referrals between nutrition and child protection/gender-based violence services (initial)

nn Provide gender-based violence referral pathway training for nutrition front-line workers in collaboration with gender-based violence specialist (initial stages)

nn IYCF support groups disseminate gender-based violence messages (e.g., on available services) (initial stages)

nn WASH facilities provided in outpatient therapeutic feeding programmes and stabilization centres (ongoing but standards currently vary)

nn Key WASH messages incorporated into IYCF counselling and community messaging by Community Volunteers, including: handwashing at critical times, food preparation and hygiene, disposal of child faeces (ongoing, variable quality)

Child protection and gender-based violence

Children attending child-friendly spaces are referred to temporary learning centres for enrolmentAdolescent clubs are not linked with adolescent education59 (non-formal or informal)

nn Limited health messaging in child-friendly spaces

nn Health messaging in women-friendly spaces

nn Animators are not trained on detection of common infectious diseases and referral

nn Nutrition messaging in child-friendly and women-friendly spaces, IYCF counselling/ support groups within women-friendly spaces

nn Animators in child-friendly spaces are not trained in mid-upper-arm circumference screening

nn Infant feeding for abandoned newborns (initial stages)

  nn Child-friendly and women-friendly spaces equipped with appropriate WASH facilities

nn Hygiene messaging included in child-friendly and women-friendly spaces

nn Inadequate latrine facilities for some girls and women, leading to increased risk of gender-based violence

WASH  See above  See above nn Acute watery diarrhoea plan includes protocol for screening and referral and treatment of SAM with or without complications/ diarrhoea (completed)

nn Appropriate IYCF practices in the context of acute watery diarrhoea (initial stages)

 See above

59 Adolescent education is officially restricted by the Government of Bangladesh. Nonetheless, informal education activities could have been developed and included within child protection adolescent programming (e.g., cultural activities, reading clubs, English classes, etc.)

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES51

INTER-SECTOR ALIT Y MATRIXANNEX TEN

Page 53: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES52

In addition to the recommendations outlined in the report, the evaluation team has identified the following sector-specific recommendations for various offices in UNICEF and for the sectors UNICEF leads or co-leads.

A management response is not required for these recommendations. Rather, they are suggestions for UNICEF to consider.

CHILD PROTECTION

RECOMMENDATION WHO

Develop a global agreement and protocol for protection data sharing that can enter into force automatically when coordination mechanisms are activated with no need of further negotiations.

UNICEF and UNHCR

Develop a gradual exit strategy or a shift from the CFS model. Ways to do that could be through establishing CB Psychosocial Support and strengthening CB Child Protection Committees; incorporating some of the functions of the CFS into TLC (e.g. identification of CP cases and referral to case management; psychosocial support and resilience building activities incorporated in the education activities). The exit strategy should take into consideration needs and education services available for adolescents and prioritise the space for them.

BCO, in consultation with RO and PD

Develop a comprehensive PSS strategy, including all levels of the IASC MHPSS Pyramid of intervention for children and their families, taking vulnerabilities into account.

UNICEF and CP Sub-sector

Develop Community Based Psychosocial Support for recreational activities while investing on partners’ professional staff for Focussed Non-specialised support. Consider implementing resilience building activities for children all ages and develop PSS-SEN curriculum within Education to maximise the coverage.

UNICEF and CP Sub-sector

Develop standards for PSS activities along with trainings and training of trainers for sector members and UNICEF partners UNICEF and CP Sub-sector

Consider a co-leadership role for a national or an international NGO to increase the coordination capacity (Given complexity and variety of technical issues and related coordination fora to deal with, the sub-sector is understaffed)

CP sub-sector

EDUCATION

RECOMMENDATION WHO

Advocate for adolescent education also as a way to protect children and youth from exploitation, trafficking, child marriage and possible radicalisation.

UNICEF, UNHCR, ISCG and Donors

As a matter of urgency identify, pilot and select alternative and innovative learning modalities to address the learning needs of excluded children (e.g. girls after puberty, learners with disabilities, child-headed households, working children, adolescent girls and boys)

UNICEF and Education Sector

as a matter of urgency develop a phased plan to improve the quality of teaching and learning (in terms of contents, learning process and methodologies) until the LCFA is implemented at TLC level.

UNICEF and Education Sector

Ensure that a comprehensive capacity development plan is in place for key national NGOs in the education response. The plan developed within the Education self-capacity assessment is an optimal base to start with.

UNICEF and Education Sector

Expand the learning contents to include critical life skills such as health and hygiene promotion, child protection and psychosocial skills/skills for resilience, protection skills related to specific risks, disaster risk reduction and life –saving skills, as appropriate. Consider establishing synergies with CFS for an increase coverage of the contents.

Education Sector

ANNEX 11. SECTOR-SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS

Page 54: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EDUCATION

RECOMMENDATION WHO

As a matter of urgency develop a standard package of induction, training and follow up workshops for teachers and Burmese language instructors, making sure that besides the core subject knowledge at least the following aspects are considerednn critical aspects of education in emergency are taken into consideration (e.g. psychosocial support, health and hygiene education, child protection and identification and of child protection cases, disaster risk reduction etc.)

nn Inclusive teaching methodologies, participatory approaches and classroom managementnn Structured learning; lesson plan development; adapting teaching methodologies to needs and levels of the learners

Education Sector

INTER-SECTORAL EDUCATION AND CHILD PROTECTION

RECOMMENDATION WHO

strengthen inter-sectoral links between Education Sector and Child Protection Sub-Sector and develop an Education-CP integration plan. Ways integrate child protection within education could be supporting in integrating resilience building programmes in the curriculum, support teachers training on child protection and identification of children at risk, establishing links between CB CPC and parents and teachers’ committees, use adolescent clubs as gateway for alternative education –especially for girls and children with mobility problems

UNICEF Education and CP sections

As a matter of urgencynn Develop PSS-SEN curriculum within the education activities. nn Develop standard teachers training on psychosocial wellbeing and supportnn Develop a staff care and psychosocial support for teachers, especially Burmese language instructors.

UNICEF Education and CP Sections

Discuss options to better integrate and synergise services and function offered to children, adolescents, families and community by TLC and CFS. This should aim at a more efficient use of space, increased coverage and strengthening the links with other services (e.g. health, nutrition). In particular, the role of the teachers as key to identify children at risk and child protection cases should be considered, as well as ways to involve families and community (for example linking up parents’ groups with community based child protection committees)

UNICEF Education and CP Sections

Advocate for adolescent education also as a way to protect children and youth from exploitation, trafficking, child marriage and possible radicalisation.

UNICEF, UNHCR, ISCG and Donors

HEALTH

RECOMMENDATION JUSTIFICATION WHO

Improve the referral system between child protection and healthnn Capacity building for health IPs counsellors in GBV referral and ‘danger signs’

Stronger referral mechanisms support the scale up integration of GBV

CXB health and GBV teams

Strengthen referral pathways between nutrition centres and health postsnn Capacity building of health IP counsellors in identification and referral of SAM cases

nn Capacity building of OTP workers to recognize and refer sick children to health posts

nn Mapping of catchment areas and closest referral centres between partners

Supports continuity of care and integrated approach for treatment of acute malnutrition, ensuring better outcomes

Nutrition SectorCXB health and nutrition teams

Extend positive involvement of C4D in health response to broader MNCH and Nutrition activitiesnn C4D and Health teams to identify priority areas for positive collaboration and develop action plan for implementation

Improved community engagement and two-way dialogue important in improving health and nutrition practices, including health seeking behaviours, and the quality of the response

BCO and CXB C4D and health teams

Improve the use of existing data systems for the emergency responsenn Undertake Review of existing systems, including recommendations on how to improve use within and implementation of these

Extensive data systems for health exist in Bangladesh, better use of them will avoid duplication of effort

BCO and CXB health teams

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES53

SECTOR-SPECIF IC RECOMMENDATIONSANNEX ELEVEN

Page 55: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES54

SECTOR-SPECIF IC RECOMMENDATIONSANNEX ELEVEN

HEALTH

RECOMMENDATION JUSTIFICATION WHO

Improve health team understanding of supply and procurement processesnn Orientation by supply division for health team

To avoid future bottlenecks in procurement and supply of key supplies

BCO and CXB supply and health teams

NUTRITION

RECOMMENDATION JUSTIFICATION WHO

Strengthen continuum of care for acute malnutritionnn Develop agreements between relevant UN agencies

Currently nutrition services for SAM (inpatient and outpatient) and MAM are disconnected and tend to operate in silos. Referral mechanisms between SC – OTP – TSFP/BSFP are weak

UNICEF – WFP – UNHCR facilitated by Nutrition Sector Coordinator

Improve quality and coverage of IYCF-E response, including integration of GBVnn In-depth assessment of IYCF practices, barriers and boosters and services available

nn Capacity mapping of partners in IYCF and subsequent development and implementation of capacity building strategy for IYCF

nn Strengthen links with GBV SS and health partnersnn Community engagement on IYCF

Gaps remain in quality, consistency and coverage of IYCF interventions. IYCF is a priority area to improve survival and protection, as well as, prevent malnutrition

IYCF -WG supported by UNICEF Programme and Nutrition Sector coordination team

Ensure experienced dedicated technical capacity for IYCF-E nn Recruitment of dedicated IYCF-E technical expert for 6+ months to support sector

To date, efforts and achievements of external IYCF technical advisors have not been sustained once missions completed due to lack of human resources time and capacity

Cox’s Bazar/Dhaka

Enhance nutrition monitoring and reporting systems, including IYCF reporting, and consolidated reporting among partners and agenciesnn Reporting by site, rather than partnernn Use of web-based system

Weaknesses in current reporting and monitoring systems have resulted in inaccurate data that doesn’t support planning and decision making in the response

CXB coordination team, IM specialist

Strengthen coordination between nutrition, C4D and CwC to enhance engagement and two-way communication with communitiesnn Initiate discussions between C4D and Nutrition sections and with partnersnn Nutrition team to link with CwC WG

Communication to date has been limited to messaging. Enhanced dialogue and engagement with communities is needed to improve the quality of the response, particularly but not only for IYCF

C4D, nutrition section heads

Improve supply chain management of nutrition suppliesnn Ensure regular meetings and clear communication channels between pipeline agencies.

nn Include updates on forecasting, stock status etc on sector meeting agendann Develop agreements between agencies to facilitate access to UNICEF supplies

Multiple pipelines for nutrition supplies, unclear forecasting and lack of transparency between procuring agencies

Nutrition sector coordinator, UNICEF head of nutrition

Improve coordination with Government at national and sub-national level in emergency responsenn Establish regular meetings schedule with government. Encourage regular participation of GoB in nutrition cluster/sector meetings

nn Conduct joint site visits to refugee and host community programmes

Limited engagement and coordination with government to date resulting in lack of integration

Nutrition cluster/sector and section heads at CXB and BCO

Page 56: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

WASH

RECOMMENDATION JUSTIFICATION WHO

UNICEF strengthen its communication between Dhaka and CXB and to the sector, share all emergent plans with the sector, be fully active within coordination platforms to fully engage and support WASH sector coordination.

UNICEF WASH programme has not been sufficiently committed to sector coordination nor communicated its plans in a timely way to the sector.

WASH BCO, CXB

Fully support all efforts to strengthen HP within WASH programme to both address known weak hygiene behaviours and to ensure needs of girls and women are more fully met – in essence to have hear the voice of women.

HP has been consistently recognised to be weak, under resourced and marginalised, leaving girls and women in particular at greater hygiene and protection risk.

WASH CXB

Expand WASH section staff capacity to handle significant programme spend, bringing in longer term contracts with aim to reduce staff turnover.

Staff turnover too great and capacity too small for such a large programme, especially when compared to normal AWP of WASH section.

WASH BCO, CXB

Working through the WASH sector; nn Review WASH capacity of key actors namely IOM, UNHCR to gauge collective WASH capacity and total planned programme to establish/reaffirm required UNICEF targets till end 2018 in light of revised HAC, paying particular attention to host community work.

nn Review the modality by which community engagement and HP are best delivered in the medium term, though HP as part of WASH and/or C4D. The evaluation team suggestion is that C4D work within the WASH sector rather than alongside WASH as part of CwC.

There remains potential WASH oversupply given UNICEFs stated 50% target in light of those of other actors; IOM, UNHCR and BRAC notably, though monsoon and decommissioning may balance this out.Given weakness of HP and its limited influence in WASH it is important HPis not further diluted by moving to a UNICEF C4D default modality of delivery against sector preferences.

WASH and C4D CXB

Strengthen latrine provision and other WASH issues to better meet the needs of girls and women by drawing together evidence based and enforceable gender guidance, particularly on latrine siting and construction.

Latrine provision remains an area of critical and chronic concern, often mirrored across many other responses, and needs the best minds applied to this.

WASH sector (DPHE and UNICEF/ACF – at CXB lead) (drawing upon other key sector actors).

Prioritise WASH sector coordination at camp (rather than area) level in support of CiCs using data, camp level IM products, analysis and meetings.

While there is a move towards WASH sector coordination at camp level with new sector IM products, UNICEF/IOM/UNHCR in particular need to support this rather than service their own (area) coordination needs.

WASH sector (DPHE and UNICEF/ACF – at CXB lead) (drawing upon other key sector actors).

Consider undertaking a number of small improvements in WASH sector preparedness plans, giving particular attention to supply of chemicals, well chlorination “fire drills”, FSM/latrine emptying and environmental clean-up capacity.

Preparedness plans remain untested and there was a clear sense of trepidation about readiness. The consequences of unforeseen weaknesses could be very high so warrant leaving “no stone unturned”.

WASH sector (DPHE and UNICEF/ACF – at CXB lead) (drawing upon other key sector actors).

Strengthen CXB level coordination by using the SAG to more fully engage UN agencies and transcend differences, boosting and expanding roles of TWGs and clarify HP information flows and decision making.

Sector coherence has been weak at times, UNICEF not fully engaged, and there are competitive tensions between UN agencies in particular.

WASH sector (CXB) (drawing upon SAG).UNICEF WASH manager (CXB).

Prepare clear and quantified impact of congestion, weak spatial planning & terrain constraints on WASH, particularly on gender and safe excreta management, working with other sectors to prepare a more complete and robust advocacy case for decongestion. (This case will be strengthened if undertaken across all sectors).

The specific impact of extreme congestion has not been well quantified which limits the ability to plan properly and does not build a strong advocacy position for WASH, in particular about the impact of congestion on women.

WASH sector (CXB) working through ISCG.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES55

SECTOR-SPECIF IC RECOMMENDATIONSANNEX ELEVEN

Page 57: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES56

SECTOR-SPECIF IC RECOMMENDATIONSANNEX ELEVEN

© U

NIC

EF

/UN

014

816

3/B

RO

WN

WASH

RECOMMENDATION JUSTIFICATION WHO

Working fully with UNICEF WASH programme, UNHCR, IOM and others (through the SAG) initiate a process of preparing a WASH sector post JRP plan, paying particular attention to overall WASH sector capacity, FSM and HP, using life cycle costing for 2 and 5-year planning horizons.

There is widespread, albeit unofficial recognition that the refugees will remain quite some time, which necessitates a medium-term approach to planning approach. However, this will easily be lost given very high ongoing workloads of most staff.

WASH sector (CXB) (drawing upon other key sector actors, UNHCR in particular who are likely to be champions of this).UNICEF WASH programme manager (CXB).

Develop more robust means to improve QA across using a range of ways such as: paying particular attention to gender and latrines/ bathing and their design /construction/siting, using 3rd party monitoring and CwC feedback and other ways to enhance QA.

QA at the outset was very poor, particularly with non-traditional actors. It still remains a challenge to get gender and WASH right. It is an issue that the GWC is grappling with and is highlighted once again to add weight to these efforts.

Global WASH Cluster coordinator.

Work with site planning cluster/sector to find ways to review Bangladesh experience to understand how to synergise WASH (and Nutrition, education etc) service provision into site planning approaches, tools, mapping. The emphasis must be on more real time good enough approaches for rapid onset situations,

Site planning to incorporate services was “tested to destruction” at the outset in the camps and the unacceptably high level of decommissioning is one measure of how badly this has compromised the whole response.

Global WASH Cluster coordinator, (with global shelter cluster).

A Rohingya refugee washes items in one of the many man made dams in Balukhali makeshift settlement, Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh.

Page 58: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

Advisory Commission on Rakhine State, ‘Towards a Peaceful, Fair and Prosperous Future for the People of Rakhine: Final report of the Advisory Commission on Rakhine State’, August 2017, <www.rakhinecommission.org/app/uploads/2017/08/FinalReport_Eng.pdf>, accessed 5 November 2018.

‘BRAC in Business’, The Economist, 18 February 2010, <www.economist.com/node/15546464>, accessed 13 November 2018.

Directorate-General for European Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations, ‘Humanitarian Protection: Improving protection outcomes to reduce risks for people in humanitarian crises’, no. 9, European Commission, May 2016.

Global Education Cluster and Child Protection Area of Responsibility, ‘Options for NHF Capacity Building’, 13 November 2017.

HERE-Geneva, ‘Real-Time Response Review of the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) Emergency Appeal for People Fleeing Myanmar: Responding to the needs of refugees and host communities – Review of the DEC phase 1 responses’, DEC, UK Aid and HERE-Geneva, March 2018.

Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Myanmar, A/HRC/37/70, 9 March 2018.

Human Rights Watch, ‘Burma/Bangladesh, Burmese Refugees in Bangladesh: Still no durable solution’, HRW, vol. 12, no. 3, 2000.

Humanitarian Response, ‘Bangladesh’, <www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/bangladesh>, accessed 15 November 2018.

Hume, Tim, Ivan Watson and Kocha Olarn, ‘Migrant Boat Re-enters Malaysian Waters after Refusing to Offer to Land: Thai officials’, CNN, 17 May 2015, <https://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/15/asia/thailand-malaysia-rohingya-refugees/index.html>, accessed 5 November 2018.

Inter Sector Coordination Group, ‘Bangladesh: Rohingya situation in Cox’s Bazar – Situation report 1-30 June 2017’, ISCG, June 2017.

Inter Sector Coordination Group, ‘Gender in Humanitarian Action Brief No. 2: Rohingya refugee crisis response’, ISCG, 31 March 2018.

Inter Sector Coordination Group, ‘Gender Profile No. 1: Rohingya refugee crisis response’, ISCG, 3 December 2017.

Inter Sector Coordination Group, ‘ISCG Situation Report: Rohingya refugee crisis, Cox’s Bazar’, ISCG, 24 May 2018.

Inter Sector Coordination Group, ‘JRP for Rohingya Humanitarian Crisis March-December 2018’, ISCG, 2018.

Inter Sector Coordination Group, ‘Monsoon Preparedness and Response: Cox’s Bazar Rohingya refugee crisis’, ISCG, 13 June 2018.

Inter Sector Coordination Group, ‘Situation Report: Rohingya refugee crisis’, ISCG, 10 May 2018.

Inter-Agency Standing Committee, ‘Gender Handbook for Humanitarian Action’, IASC, March 2018.

Inter-Agency Standing Committee, ‘Reference Module for Cluster Coordination at Country Level’, IASC, 2015.

International Committee of the Red Cross, Professional Standards for Protection Work: Carried out by humanitarian and human rights actors in armed conflict and other situations of violence, 3rd edition, ICRC, 2018.

International Council of Voluntary Agencies, ‘Principles of Partnership: A statement of commitment’, ICVA, <www.icvanetwork.org/principles-partnership-statement-commitment>, accessed 13 November 2018.

International Organization for Migration, ‘Bangladesh’, IOM, issue 1, March 2015.

International Organization for Migration, ‘Emergencies and Stabilization’, IOM, <https://bangladesh.iom.int/emergencies-and-stabilization>, accessed 21 November 2018.

Kälin, W., ‘Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: Annotations’, Studies in Transnational Legal Policy, no. 38, American Society of International Law, Washington, D.C., 2008.

Kiragu, Esther, Angela Li Rosi and Tim Morris, ‘States of Denial: A review of UNHCR’s response to the protracted situation of stateless Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh’, UNHCR PDES, 2011.

Musyoki, Andrew and Anuradha Narayan, ‘Bangladesh Nutrition Cluster: A case in preparedness’, ENN, <www.ennonline.net/fex/52/bangladeshnutritioncluster>, accessed 5 November 2018.

Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, ‘2017 Humanitarian Response Plan September 2017-February 2018: Rohingya refugee crisis’, OCHA, October 2017, <https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/2017_HRP_Bangladesh_041017_2.pdf>, accessed 15 November 2018.

ANNEX 12. WORKS CITED

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES57

Page 59: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES58

WORKS C ITEDANNEX T WELVE

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Convention on the Rights of the Child’, OHCHR, <www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx>, accessed 5 November 2018.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Myanmar: UN expert calls for accountability over violence in Rakhine State’, OHCHR, Geneva, 12 March 2018, <www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=22793&LangID=E>, accessed 2 November 2018.

ReliefWeb, ‘Bangladesh’, <https://reliefweb.int/country/bgd>, accessed 15 November 2018.

Steets, et al., ‘Cluster Approach Evaluation 2: Synthesis report’, IASC, April 2010.

Solomon, Ben C., ‘Race Against the Rains’, The New York Times, 30 May 2018, <www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/30/world/asia/rohingya-monsoon-bangladesh.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=photo-spot-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news>, accessed 14 November 2018.

‘UN Human Rights Chief Points to ‘Textbook Example of Ethnic Cleansing’ in Myanmar’, UN News, 11 September 2018, <https://news.un.org/en/story/2017/09/564622-un-human-rights-chief-points-textbook-example-ethnic-cleansing-myanmar>, accessed 2 November 2018.

‘UNICEF: Rohingya children refugees face ‘hell on earth’, Associated Press, 20 October 2018, <www.apnews.com/2745fc4515df4228b966dfb851b37bc9>, accessed 5 November 2018.

United Nations, Strengthening of the Coordination of Humanitarian Emergency Assistance of the United Nations, A/RES/46/182, General Assembly, 78th Plenary Meeting, 19 December 1991.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh’, Humanitarian Action for Children 2018, January 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh’, Humanitarian Action for Children 2017, UNICEF, May 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report’, 30 August 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report (Monsoon Floods)’, UNICEF, 1 September 2017.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report No. 1’, UNICEF, May 2017.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report No. 19 (Rohingya Influx)’, UNICEF, 21 January 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report No. 23 (Rohingya influx)’, UNICEF, 18 February 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report No. 30 (Rohingya influx)’, UNICEF, 22 April 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report No. 31 (Rohingya influx)’, 6 May 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report No. 32 (Rohingya influx)’, UNICEF, 20 May 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report No. 33 (Rohingya influx)’, UNICEF, June 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Humanitarian Situation Report (Rohingya influx)’, UNICEF, 5 September 2017.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh Revised Response Plan’, UNICEF, October 2017, <https://reliefweb.int/report/bangladesh/unicef-bangladesh-revised-response-plan-rohingya-crisis-october-2017>, accessed 5 November 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Bangladesh: Rohingya influx’, Humanitarian Action for Children, UNICEF, 21 October 2017.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Child Protection Strategy: Rohingya response – Cox’s Bazaar, Bangladesh’, UNICEF, March 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Core Commitments for Children in Humanitarian Action’, UNICEF, New York, May 2010.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Education Capacity Self-Assessment: Transforming the education humanitarian response of the Rohingya refugee crisis’ (working document), UNICEF, BRAC and the Global Education Cluster, Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, March 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Education Scale Up Plan’, UNICEF, November 2017.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan’, UNICEF, Cox’s Bazar, May 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Evaluation of UNICEF’s Cluster Lead Agency Role in Humanitarian Action’, UNICEF, December 2013, <www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/files/UNICEF_CLARE_Final_Report_FINAL.pdf>, accessed 5 November 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Gender-Based Violence in Emergencies Six Month Strategy: Rohingya response – Cox’s Bazaar, Bangladesh’, UNICEF, November 2017.

Page 60: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Global Evaluation Reports Oversight System’, UNICEF, 28 August 2018, <www.unicef.org/evaluation/index_GEROS.html>, accessed 15 November 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Lives in Limbo: No end in sight to the threats facing Rohingya children’, UNICEF, February 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Outcast and Desperate: Rohingya refugee children face a perilous fate’, UNICEF, October 2017.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Simplified Standard Operating Procedures (SSOP) for Corporate Emergency Activation Procedure in Level 3 Emergencies’, UNICEF, March 2012.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Understanding and Addressing the Needs of Survivors and their Children Born of Sexual Violence’, Inter-Agency Action Meeting Notes, Cox’s Bazar, 25 February 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘UNICEF Bangladesh Response Plan’, UNICEF, October 2017.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘UNICEF Gender Action Plan 2014-2017’, UNICEF Executive Board Annual Session 2014, E/ICEF/2014/CRP.12, 15 April 2014.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘UNICEF Gender Action Plan, 2018–2021’, UNICEF Executive Board Second Regular Session 2017, E/ICEF/2017/16, 12-15 September 2017, <www.unicef.org/gender/files/2018-2021-Gender_Action_Plan-Rev.1.pdf>, accessed 5 November 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘UNICEF’s Mission Statement’, UNICEF, 25 April 2003, <www.unicef.org/about/who/index_mission.html>, accessed 5 November 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘UNICEF Response Plan for Rohingya Children in Bangladesh, 2017–2018’, UNICEF, 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘UNICEF Scaling Up its Emergency Response in Bangladesh’, UNICEF, Dhaka, 31 August 2017, <www.unicef.org/media/media_100718.html>, accessed 5 November 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘UNICEF Simplified Procedures in Emergencies’, UNICEF, <www.unicefinemergencies.com/procedures/level-3.html>, accessed 15 November 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund, ‘Way Forward: UNICEF work in Cox’s Bazar – 4 key strategies and way forward summary’ (internal), UNICEF, 28 April 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund Bangladesh, ‘Bangladesh Rohingya Crisis: After action review – summary report’, UNICEF, 18 December 2017.

United Nations Children’s Fund Bangladesh, ‘Programmatic Visit Report’ (internal), UNICEF, February 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund Division of Data, Research and Policy, ‘UNICEF Procedure for Ethical Standards in Research, Evaluation, Data Collection and Analysis’, UNICEF, 1 April 2015, <www.unicef.org/supply/files/ATTACHMENT_IV-UNICEF_Procedure_for_Ethical_Standards.PDF>, accessed 15 November 2018.

United Nations Children’s Fund Programme Division, ‘Mission Report of the Global Nutrition Cluster and UNICEF Nutrition Programme Visit to Cox’s Bazar 12-23 March 2018’, UNICEF, March 2018.

United Nations Environment Programme, ‘A Precarious Environment for the Rohingya Refugees’, UNEP, 14 May 2018, <www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/precarious-environment-rohingya-refugees>, accessed 2 November 2018.

United Nations Evaluation Group, ‘Norms and Standards for Evaluation’, UNEG, 2016, <www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/1914>, accessed 15 November 2018.

United Nations Evaluation Group, ‘UNEG Code of Conduct for Evaluation in the UN System’, UNEG, March 2008, <www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/100>, accessed 2 November 2018.

United Nations Evaluation Group, ‘UNEG Ethical Guidelines’, UNEG, June 2008, <www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/102>, accessed 15 November 2018.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, ‘Camp Planning Standards (Planned Settlements)’, in Emergency Handbook, 4th edition, UNHCR, 2015.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, ‘Relocation of Refugees to Bhasan Char Island’, UNHCR, April 2018.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, ‘Rohingya Refugee Crisis: Relocation to Bhasan Char Island’, UNHCR, April 2018.

United Nations Population Fund, Protection Cluster, ‘Cox’s Bazaar Gender-Based Violence Sub-Sector Strategy 2018’, January 2018.

World Population Review, ‘Populations in Cities in Bangladesh (2018)’, <http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/bangladesh-population/cities/>, accessed 2 November 2018.

Why are Elephants Wrecking a Refugee Camp, video, BBC News, 4 May 2018, <www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-43991691/why-are-elephants-wrecking-a-rohingya-refugee-camp>, accessed 5 November 2018.

Who are the Rohingya?’ Al Jazeera, 18 April 2018, <www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/08/rohingya-muslims-170831065142812.html#gone>, accessed 15 November 2018.

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES59

WORKS C ITEDANNEX T WELVE

Page 61: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES60

© U

NIC

EF

/UN

012

015

2/B

RO

WNA Rohingya refugee skips

near a UNICEF supported Child-Friendly Space in Kutupalong Makeshift Settlement for Rohingya refugees in Ukhiya, a sub-district of Cox’s Bazar district, Bangladesh.

Page 62: Evaluation of UNICEF’s Response to the Rohingya Refugee ...€¦ · 6 EVALUATION OF UNICEF’S RESPONSE TO THE ROHINGYA REFUGEE CRISIS IN BANGLADESH n VOLUME 2: ANNEXES ANNEX ONE

For further information, please contact:Evaluation OfficeUnited Nations Children’s FundThree United Nations PlazaNew York, New York [email protected] www.unicef.org/evaluation

© United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) November 2018