Transcript Coordinate Assessment Approach Phase III

HUMANITARIAN DASHBOARD
COORDINATED ASSESSMENT APPROACH
PHASE III
What Are We Aiming For
• Increase the evidence base for humanitarian
strategies and appeals
• Improve monitoring to the point it can inform
coordination, decision making and
humanitarian funding
Key Actions
• Review systematically secondary information and
identify information gaps
• Identify and measure an agreed set of indicators
(tip: start with 2 or 3 indicators only)
• Ensure geographical and temporal
synchronisation of assessments
• Establish a process for collating data from
multiple assessments
• Establish a process for conducting a shared
analysis of data
Methods and Tools
• Common Operational Data Set
• Survey of surveys
• Humanitarian Dashboard
What Is the Humanitarian Dashboard
• A platform to systematically consolidate data from
cluster leads and other sources (primary and
secondary data)
• A process to facilitate cross-sectoral analysis and a
shared understanding of the humanitarian situation.
• A tool to highlight information gaps and monitor
CAP/programme cycles (against indicators and
humanitarian caseloads)
• This leads to an output called (for now) Humanitarian
Dashboard
• Important: All this is owned by the IASC. OCHA’s role
is to facilitate this process
Platform Components
Inter-sectoral Analysis
• (overview/cover pages)
• Comprehensive overview
(outlook, most affected groups
and regions, main drivers).
• Key figures
• Priority needs (as defined by HCT)
• Chart: Needs, target and coverage
• Response overview (against
commitment/ targets)
• Analysis: Gaps and trends
• Reference indicators (baseline)
• Operational Constraints
Sectoral analyses
• (dashboard matrix)
• Data collection form (Excel)
• Sectoral analysis completed by
each cluster lead:
– Quantitative information:
caseloads, planning figures,
coverage (vs. reached), indicators
– Qualitative information: Priority
needs, analysis (affected groups,
priority areas, trend, , risks, gaps,
challenges), information gaps,
assessment planning
• Visualisation components: crosssectral needs/coverage chart,
trend chart, baseline analysis,
historic trend chart.
• Somalia: Component of the Single
Reporting Format
Sectoral Page – 3 Components
1. Analysis
PRIORITY NEEDS
Highlight any changes in needs since the CAP 2012 document
(E.g. higher rates of malnutrition among people in famine affected regions)
SECTOR ANALYSIS
Elaborate on the points listed on the left and highlight changes since the CAP
- most affected groups,
2012 document
- most affected areas,
- trend (of needs),
- main challenges (of
- risks,
- gaps (related to caseloads
and indicators).
2. Caseload Tracking
BEST ESTIMATE OF PEOPLE IN NEED
DATE 1:
1,000,000
1) Explain this figure (how was this estimate
calculated):
2) List also people in need outside of the CAP
framework (this is important to obtain a
complete picture of the overall situation)
Reliability of
estimate:
1,200,000
Explanation:
Reliability of
estimate:
(figure established in CAP 2012
document)
DATE 2:
(next update or mid-year reiview
figure)
Reliability of
estimate:
Date 3:
(continue enpanding matrix with
new figures)
NUMBER OF PEOPLE TARGETED
DATE 1:
400,000
(figure established in CAP 2012
document)
DATE 2:
Detail how this figure was calcluated:
If possible, list also people targeted outside the
CAP framework:
Reliability of
estimate:
700,000
(next update or mid-year reiview
figure)
Explanation:
Date 3:
Reliability of
information:
(continue enpanding matrix with
new figures)
Reliability of
information:
BEST ESTIMATE OF NUMBER OF PEOPLE COVERED
DATE 1:
200,000
1) Explain the standards (e.g. sphere) applied to Reliability of
estimate the number people covered and detail information:
the calculation:
2) List also people covered outside CAP
framework (this is important to obtain a
complete picture of the overall response
DATE 2:
500,000
Explanation:
Reliability of
estimate:
Explanation:
Reliability of
information:
Date 3:
(continue enpanding matrix with
new figures)
3. Monitoring
SECTORAL
OBJECTIVES
INDICATORS
(of the CAP response plan)
336 newly constructed or
rehabilitated institutional (schools
1.Provide access to safe drinking or health centres) and community
water points (boreholes, protected
water, in accordance with
wells, reticulated water distribution
SPHERE standards (under
systems)
strategic objective 1)
3.Improve the hygiene
knowledge and daily practices
of target populations (under
strategic objective 1)
137,250 people who have
attended a hygiene promotion
training session
Mid-year target End-year
target
Achievement
as of date
(dd/mm/yyyy)
Achievement
as of date
(dd/mm/yyyy)
Overview Page
Process
ANALYTICAL
FRAMEWORK
FTS
OPS
INTER-SECTORAL LEVEL:
CONSOLIDATION
DATA GATHERING
(from clusters/sectors)
ANALYSIS
by ICCM
OUTPUT
COMMON REQUEST
FORM
CODs / FODs
SECTORAL ANALYSIS
by cluster leads
(humanitarian
profile)
Other
sources
SECTORAL LEVEL:
3W
SECTORAL CONSOLIDATION
AND DATA VETTING
Needs assments
(Assessment registry)
SECTORAL DATA COLLECTION
• PRIMARY DATA (sectoral assessments)
• REVIEW OF SECONDARY DATA
• MONITORING Systems
Inter-sectoral analysis
and clearance of draft by
HCT/ICCM
(in other words: a
discussion based on the
information consolidated
through sectoral sheets
and the inter-sectoral
template )
Product creation
(Sequencing and
alignment with
other OCHA
outputs and
product
STAKEHOLDERS
DATA
COLLECTION
• CLUSTERS
CONSOLIDATION
ANALYSIS
OCHA (IMO)
HCT
HC
OCHA (HoO, HAO,
IMO)
• OCHA (HAO, IMO)
• UNDAC (in certain cases)
• Other (Governments, online
communities, crowd sourcing)
OUTPUT
HC
OCHA (HAO,
IMO, IPO)
IMPLEMENTATION CAP CYCLE 2012
CAP 2012
Documents
Dashboard
Updates
MYR
Cross-sectoral overview pages
developed for:
Afg
CDI
Niger
CAR
DRC
Djibouti
CHAD
Haiti
Liberia
oPT
Somalia
Yemen
Philipinnes Zimbabwe Kenya
S-Sudan
Sudan
Ideally 3 updates to
inform midyear
review
Dashboard updates
should inform
midyear review
(3 data points allow
for better trend
analysis and
illustration)
(continuious
monitoring of
situation, indicators,
progress towards
objectives)
Dashboard
Updates
To monitor progress
since MYR
CAP 2013
Documents
Dashboard
updates should
inform
development of
CAP 2013
Documents
What Does That Mean for Our
Colleagues in the Field?
Cluster Leads are requested to update their sectoral analysis of the needs,
response and operational priorities. Cluster leads should:
• Conduct a review of secondary information and identify information
gaps
• Promote consistency among Cluster Members in the collection, sharing
and reporting of data, as well as on terminology usage (affected, reached,
covered – see below)
• Log the cluster objectives and indicators from the CAP in to the
Dashboard Matrix and highlight any changes that have occurred since the
beginning of the CAP cycle
• Log caseloads and number of people covered (per main activity, e.g.
provision of sustainable water), highlighting any changes that have
occurred since the beginning of the CAP cycle
• Facilitate an analysis of needs and the response, based on this data.
Cluster Leads are encouraged to reserve 15 minutes at Cluster meetings to
review/update their sectoral analysis with their members
• Submit agreed sectoral analysis to OCHA by the agreed cut-off date
Maintenance of the Inter-Sectoral Overview
• Maintenance of the Inter-Sectoral Overview
(OCHA and ICCT)
• The Inter-Cluster coordinator will work regularly
with Cluster coordinators to review the sectoral
needs, response and gaps/operational priorities:
– OCHA will coordinate the process for maintaining the
Dashboard
– OCHA will support the ICCT in undertaking the routine
analysis of the data in the Dashboard
– OCHA will submit the completed and vetted
Dashboard to the HCT
– OCHA will publish the Dashboard, on behalf of the HC
Consistent Terminology
• Affected people include all people impacted by the crisis in one way or
the other. Not all affected people are in need of humanitarian assistance.
• People in need (caseload) is a sub-group of the affected people. They
require humanitarian assistance in one form or the other.
• People targeted (beneficiaries) includes all people that the cluster system
is trying to assist. This will most likely be a sub-group of the people in
need taking into consideration that many are being assisted by actors notparticipating in the cluster system.
• People reached include those that have received some form of assistance
from a cluster member. This figure says nothing about how long and how
well the assistance is helping the beneficiary.
• People covered is a more meaningful figure as it takes into consideration
a standard (e.g. Sphere). There is a significant difference between
following two statements: 1000 people received water (people reached),
or, 1000 people received enough water to cover their needs (15 litres per
day) for the next two weeks.
X. Analytical Spin-offs (Tool)
Baseline Analysis
BASELINE CHART
Nr of people
in need as of
Dec 2010
(CAP 2011
Increase of
Total nr of
people in need % change
people in need (change absolut, (against CAP 2011 Comments
(as of 16 Sept)
against CAP 2011 baseline)
baseline)
Document)
2,000,000
4,045,000
2,045,000
102%
460,000
1,800,000
1,340,000
291%
1,200,000
4,000,000
2,800,000
233%
Health - NA
no data
3,700,000
na
Nutrition (children)
376,000
450,000
74,000
Protection - NA
no data
2,406,600
na
Shelter & Non-food items
1,200,000
42,000
-1,158,000
WASH
2,000,000
3,300,000
1,300,000
Agricultur & Livelihoods
Education
Food Assistance
no baseline
na established in CAP
2011 Doc
20%
no baseline
na established in CAP
2011 Doc
-97%
Figure includes
65% both water and
sanitation
Increase of people in need per sector in 2011
Thousands
0
1000
Agricultur & Livelihoods
2000
Education 460
Food Assistance
2000
3000
1200
1340
1200
2800
4000
5000
Nr of
people in
need as of
Dec
2010(CAP
2011
Document)
Health - NA 0
Nutrition (children) 377 73
Protection - NA 0
Shelter & Non-food items
WASH
1200
2000
0
1300
Increase of
people in
need(chang
e absolut,
against
CAP 2011
baseline)
Coverage / Access Map
Funding / Progress Chart
XI. Conclusions
• Facilitates dialogue: Situational analysis based on
systematically collected data
• Promotes a common understanding and analysis of the
humanitarian situation
• Monitors progress: Supports the HCT and Clusters in
monitoring appeal
• Assists Clusters in presenting consolidated information
relative to their sector
• Strategic decision-making: Informs Humanitarian Country
Team discussions
• Identifies conflicting data and information gaps
• Supports advocacy by illustrating key figures and issues
• Minimal common denominator: Basis to compare across
emergencies by focusing on caseloads and their coverage
In the Case of Somalia…
• Dashboard process helps to develop a shared
understanding of the humanitarian situation and get the
figures right
• Informs data-derived products (maps, briefs, TPs)
• Helps streamline information requests (single reporting
format) and creating a certain predictability in the
information OCHA is requesting
• Has become a helpful tool and basis for analysis
(baseline analysis, trend analysis, coverage, funding
against coverage)
Next Steps…
• Roll-out of dashboard process in all CAP countries
• Alignment with MIRA (multi-cluster rapid assessment) to
form a suite of NATF tools and solutions
• Streamlining OCHA’s information requests (and
management)
• Integration with relevant information streams (OPS, FTS)
• Develop online platform
• Making the dashboard an analytical tool (develop a
framework to assist analysis similar to the MIRA)