Transcript ALNAP Update

th
17
Biannual Meeting
at The Hague
Overview of Current
Work-plan Activities
Financial and Funding Update
1. Year 2004-05



Fully funded
27 Full Member funders
Carry over funds, due mainly to savings made
on non-recruitment of one full time staff
member
2. Year 2005-06

27 funding requests sent out in April
3. TEC funding

Funds required now
Communications
1. New ALNAP Bulletin every two
months
2. Steering Committee minutes
available earlier
3. Findings from RHA tour by John
Mitchell and Tony Beck
Findings from RHA: 2005 tour
 CIDA, Multilateral Programs Branch, Ottawa (TB)
 DfID Regional Office, New Delhi (TB)
 International Development Evaluations Association (IDEAS) 1st
Biennial Conference on ‘Evaluation for Development – Beyond
Aid’ (TB)
 ITDG South Asia, Sri Lanka (TB)
 OCHA/UNICEF, New York (TB)
 UNDP Country Team (UNCT) plus heads of the World Bank, IMF,
ADB etc., Sri Lanka
Focus on the Implications of the Recent Findings on Relief and
Recovery for the Tsunami Response (TB)
Findings from RHA: 2005 tour, cont’d..
 Instituto de Estidius sobre Conflict y Accion Humanitaria (IECAH)
“Humanitarian Action, at the Crossroads. Promoting Proposals to
Strengthen Action in the 21st Century” (JM)
 UN Evaluation Group Annual Conference, hosted by FAO (JM)
 Global Economic Governance Programme, Oxford University (JM)
 Benfield Hazard Research Centre, IPAR Seminar, University College
London,
Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Management (JM)
 Africa Evaluation Society 3rd Annual Conference (Sarah Swords)
Please ask if your organisation(s) would like a presentation.
ALNAP Guide to Applying DAC Criteria
When Evaluating Humanitarian Action
(title to be confirmed) by Tony Beck
1. Advisory Group:
Anne Bay Paludan, John Borton, Margie Buchanan Smith,
Alistair Hallam, Astri Suhrke, Samuel Tadesse,
John Telford and Peter Wiles.
2. Pilot version:
piloted by ECHO team in Sri Lanka, October 2004
3. Publication scheduled for end of this year
ALNAP Guide to Protection
in Humanitarian Action
by Hugo Slim and Andrew Bonwick
1. Pilot version

1500 copies printed

piloted by IRC and DRC
(also used for training)

Distributed in many field offices

Most popular download on ALNAP website
2. Consultative process
a) Advisory Group:
Alain Aeschlimann, ICRC
Nadya Kebir Raoloson, ICRC
Mihir Bhatt, DMI
James Darcy, HPG
Peter Giesen, MSF
Peter Klanso, DRC
Kate Alley, UNICEF
Asmita Naik, Independent
Geeta Narayan, UNICEF
Sarah Wikenczy, IRC
Kamela Usmani, SCF
Shahrzad Tadjbakhsh, UNHCHR
Mark Vincent IDD, OCHA
Kathrin Starup, DRC
b) Written comments received from:
Bjorn Petterson IDD, OCHA
Nicoletta Pergolizzi, ECHO
Ermino Sacco, FAO
Christophe Beau, Global IDP Project
Romain Sirois, WFP
Nicholas Crawford, WFP
Karin Landgren, UNICEF
Diane Paul, Independent
Paul Bonard, ICRC
Brian Phillips
Ed Shenkenberg, ICVA
Danielle Coquoq
Wayne MacDondald, Independent
Simon Lawry White, UNICEF
Anita Menghetti, USAID
…many more verbal comments
c) Stocktaking Meeting on Protection
(ICVA/InterAction and Washington (50 participants)
 First Edition
Due for publication Autumn 2005
Study on Consultation and Participation
in Humanitarian Action
Outputs to date:
 6 Country monographs (Sri Lanka, Angola, Columbia,
Afghanistan, Democratic republic of Congo and
Guinea)
 Pilot edition of Practitioners Handbook
Current status of project:
 Management back in ALNAP Secretariat
 Recruitment process to begin for editor/specialist to
assist with first edition of Practitioners Handbook
 Practitioners Handbook and Companion Book due
for publication end of 2005
Review of Humanitarian Action in 2004
Chapter 1
John Mitchell
Chapter 2
Capacity Building - Ian Christoplos (main author)
(AG – Vendela Fortune, Sigurd Endresen, Jock Baker and
Jonathan Potter)
Chapter 3
Evaluation Synthesis, focus on Darfur - Larry Minear
(AG Ian Christoplos, Bronagh Carr, Paul Harvey)
Chapter 4
Meta-evaluation - Peter Wiles, Christian Bugnion, John
Lakeman.
(AG Simon Lawry-White, Peter Giesen, John Telford)
Experiences from past years of RHA
 Meta evaluation – methodological challenges;
but helping to improve quality of evaluation
 Evaluation Synthesis – methodological
challenges; but valued as proxy or humanitarian
performance
 Chapter 2 – has utility but may not be the most
effective format
Working Group Model
a) Study on Consultation and Participation of Affected
Communities in Humanitarian Action
Key Learning point:
Major projects of this nature require dedicated time and
adequate resources.
b) The Use of Research Methods in Humanitarian
Contexts
Key Learning Point:
Team leaders are vital to sustainability.
c) Field Level Support Initiatives (FLSI)
Key Learning Point:
Not realistic to expect people/organisations with competing
priorities to deliver. Need clear sense of shared expectations
and ownership.