OVERVIEW
Post-Conflict Needs Assessment (PCNA) and Transitional Results Framework
PCNA Defined
The Post-Conflict Needs Assessment (PCNA) is the agreed inter-agency tool for post-conflict
assessment and planning under the UN, European Commission (EC), World Bank Partnership
Framework Agreement for Crisis and Post-Crisis Situations (2008). A PCNA identifies key needs in a
country emerging from conflict. The PCNA is formally government-led, and usually jointly coordinated by
national stakeholders and multilateral agencies. Sectoral teams, comprising national and international
technical experts, conduct field and desk assessments, seeking to be comprehensive, but recognizing
that the reality of the post-conflict context is that data will be incomplete or rudimentary and access to
stakeholders and communities may be challenged by logistics and security concerns.
Transitional Results Framework
The PCNA leads to a Transitional Results Framework (TRF), which lays out a prioritized group of
outcomes and programmes/ interventions and their financial implications, and allows national and
international stakeholders to align joint efforts to support successful recovery . Transitional Results
Frameworks are an integral part of the OECD-DAC Principles of Good International Engagement in
Fragile States and the Paris Declaration on Harmonization.
TRFs should be simple, selective, nationally owned, integrated across political, security, economic and
social aspects of recovery, and have sufficient donor buy-in. They include outcome indicators and
monitorable targets, and therefore function as a strategic planning and management tool as well as
umbrella framework for donor coordination. TRF indicators focus on results achievable in the short-term,
although they may be linked conceptually to expected medium- and long-term efforts to achieve
nationalized Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). To the extent possible, the monitoring systems
and indicators should build on existing systems and data collection efforts.
PCNA Process
Launch
Consideration of a PCNA is initiated when a national government sends a request to UN, World Bank or
EC representatives. Though in principle a PCNA is to be triggered by the signing of a peace agreement
or other indication that a conflict has subsided, because of the political nature of the PCNA, they
increasingly are requested and conducted prior to the cessation of hostilities and in the midst of a
humanitarian response.
A PCNA formally does not take place unless all partners—including the government--agree to launch a
planning mission. Assessments by individual partners do not amount to a PCNA because PCNA requires
engagement by all four principle PCNA partners: the government, UN, EC and World Bank. A PCNA
ideally builds on and coordinates with humanitarian action and ensure that the Transition Recovery
Framework clearly links to longer term development plans.
Key Stages in Post-Conflict Recovery Planning
Pre-assessment





Conflict and
risk analysis
Mapping of
institutional
capacities and
processes
Assessment of
security and
access issues
Vision
Preliminary
identification of
strategic
peace-building
priorities




Assessment and
Recovery Planning
Needs assessments
Prioritization of
needs
Transitional results
framework
Budget




Validating and
Financing
Findings and
priorities
validated and
results published
Coordination
mechanisms and
financing
modalities
proposed
Donor meeting
Start-up
implementation
capacity and
activities
launched
Implementation



Periodic
monitoring
and reporting
against
measurable
performance
indicators
Communicati
on strategy in
support of
monitoring
Adjustment to
plan and
resource
allocation as
needed
1
UN PCNA Co-ordination and UNICEF Role
DOCO co-ordinates UN engagement in the PCNA exercise at the global level, and liaises with World
Bank and EC counterparts in Washington and Brussels, respectively. At the country level, the RC leads
PCNA discussions within the UNCT.
At UNICEF HQ, the Recovery and Risk Reduction Section in EMOPS represents UNICEF at all global
discussions. Close cooperation between the PCNA country and global focal points, including Regional
Emergency and Planning Advisers, should be established to maximize strategic positioning of UNICEF’s
mandate in the process and information sharing, which is key to addressing whether the CO requires
additional resources to support the PCNA process. The key steps at this stage include:



the RC engages in regular dialogue with the government, World Bank and EC delegation
regarding the need for a PCNA. Any of these four institutions may initiate the dialogue; there is
no need to wait for government to formally request a PCNA to begin the conversation. A parallel
discussion will be undertaken between DOCO on behalf of UNDG, the World Bank and EC at the
HQ.
if the Government requests a PCNA to any partner, this should be treated as a request to all
partners.
organize a PCNA planning mission
UNICEF should influence decision-making on the initiation of a PCNA planning mission. UNICEF can
take action in several ways:








Identify country and global focal points that feed in and analyze baseline information
Take stock of initial quick assessments and provide information on humanitarian action
Assess and provide information on capacities of national counterparts and partners--both human
and technical data (software, hardware)
Share information on the upcoming PCNA exercise with all actors as appropriate and analyse its
implications
Provide information on security, logistics and operational workload that this exercise might
require of the CO
Conduct/provide analysis of past (early) recovery interventions from all clusters/sectors and
programmes in the affected areas (ideally to be shared with global, regional and national actors)
Agree on coordination channels between national, regional and global actors if applicable
Identify additional capacities to support the PCNA process if required (advisory or/ and technical)
Pre-Assessment
Rather than immediately moving into assessing recovery and reconstruction needs without a clear sense
of strategic priorities, a pre-assessment process can help to identify the key outcomes to keep the
transition towards peace and stability on track. If time and capacity are available, a pre-assessment may
be an in-depth process in which an overall data platform is assembled to inform a later full assessment,
including indicators on social and economic welfare and access to services and infrastructure; with
sufficient time, specifically commissioned analysis may be launched in preparation for a full assessment.
If events are moving more quickly, the pre-assessment may be as simple as convening a meeting or
series of meetings between key international and national actors to identify the key strategic objectives
and outcomes which will be important for peacebuilding. These early discussions are important to help
set strategic direction while nurturing an early sense of national ownership.
Regardless of the amount of time available for the pre-assessment, identifying causes and
characteristics of the conflict will be particularly important. In addition, discussions during the preassessment should take into account considerations of the current or near-future milestones, which may
cover next steps in the political, humanitarian, security, socioeconomic recovery planning.
The pre-assessment must be grounded in analysis of conflict and risks, to identify key priority outcomes
to keep the peace process on track. Time permitting, the pre-assessment can also build a basic shared
analysis of the degree of capacity and legitimacy of state and non-state institutions (which can be a
complex endeavour given the nature of the conflict) and actors (where non-state includes community
structures as well as civil society), in several dimensions: technical and administrative capacity; credibility
and will of key actors and institutions; issues with perceived bias within state and other counterpart
2
structures; and prospects for short and long-term revenue generation. This is important to help identify
the needed partners for a more comprehensive recovery planning process, as well as to inform thinking
on implementation arrangements for recovery and reconstruction. In this regard, the pre-assessment
offers an opportunity to consider pre-war government traditions that have implications for post-war
governance, as well as to identify specific non-state ‘resources for peace’ that may be available through
women’s groups, religious groups, tribal groups, youth networks, or community networks.
The pre-assessment should aim to produce an agreed concept note that will provide a road map for the
PCNA process, including:




a peacebuilding storyline that articulates peace-building objectives to guide recovery planning –
for example, to ensure early social and economic results are delivered in regions vulnerable to
renewal of conflict;
parameters for selection of national and international counterparts for a full recovery planning
process, and for involvement of national and local institutions in implementation (for example,
basic parameters for strengthening of national versus regional or local administrative structures);
identification and scope of priority sectors and cross-cutting issues to be considered, based on
the analysis and consultations coming out of the pre-assessment;
co-ordination arrangements for the PCNA: roles and responsibilities for the PCNA team leaders,
technical sectorial coordinators and other focal points; structure of the Secretariat ; and
estimated costs of the PCNA exercise (see below).
Depending on the crisis context and capacities on the ground, the UNICEF PCNA focal point should
assess the technical and financial implications for the Country Office, as well as UNICEF led
clusters/sectors, and relevant government counterparts.
Depending on the context, UNICEF does not need to participate formally in a PCNA pre-assessment
mission. However, in most post-conflict situations, children, women and youth represent more than 70%
of affected populations. One avenue that UNICEF can pursue is through active participation in UN-led
processes both through the RC at the country and UNDG DOCO-led processes at the global level. Both
processes include co-ordination with the World Bank and EC. The UNICEF Country Office PCNA focal
point should liaise with clusters/sectors under UNICEF’s leadership and co-leadership, and ensure
quality inputs to the process. UNICEF also should provide technical inputs to the agreed concept note
that will provide a road map for the PCNA process.
Some specific activities that can be undertaken by UNICEF during the pre-assessment stage can
include:








Work with the relevant CO colleagues on the PCNA
Share planning mission TORs with CO, RO and HQ
Coordinate with the HC, RC, and Early Recovery Cluster/Network
Coordinate with the global PCNA focal point as well as internally with UNICEF’s structures
(global, regional and national) as appropriate
Participate and/ or contribute in the PCNA Planning Mission where possible
Provide ongoing communication and coordination with OCHA and UNICEF led clusters/sectors,
government counterparts and partners
Identify and plan jointly with UNICEF programmes and cluster colleagues on dedicated staff
capacities for the PCNA (CO and RO), and on required financial resources (some co-financing
possible under the RC and Cluster Working Group on Early Recovery)
Liaise with PD and global clusters for technical advice on needs assessment tools,
methodologies, information management as needed for the next stage.
Assessment and Recovery Planning
A full assessment and recovery planning process will typically involve assessing across different regions
of the country or affected territory: (i) the current situation in terms of population location and welfare
(disaggregated by both gender and age if possible), service delivery, and physical infrastructure; (ii)
institutional capacity (of both state institutions and potential non-state partners and implementing
agencies) and needs for capacity-building or reform; (iii) priorities expressed by national and local
stakeholders. Priority outcomes emerging from this assessment will then be drawn together into a
transitional results framework (TRF) which lays out a number of programmes/ interventions, estimated
timeframe, responsible partners and related costs.
3
Structure of the Assessment
Assessment teams will generally be made up of national/ local and international counterparts (see
section IV). Teams are normally organized by priority functional area (usually referred to as sectors); for
example, social services (health and education); or governance and rule of law. Teams will normally
spend some time together in one location deciding on the approach to the assessment and reviewing
background data, before conducting field visits and consultations, and then regrouping to develop basic
design, parameters and costs for priority needs emerging from the assessment. A coordinating team –
again, national/ local and international – will provide direction and standard formats for results planning
and costing to teams, ensure that linkages are made between sectoral teams, and take responsibility for
communications on the assessment and planning process. On the national side, this small team may be
nominated from the parties to peace talks, the transitional leadership (President or Prime Minister’s
office, Ministries of Planning or Finance), or others, bearing in mind the phase of peace talks, powersharing arrangements, and the role played by civil society – all issues which should have emerged from
the pre-assessment.
Cross-Cutting Issues
Decisions on how to handle issues that have historically been treated as “cross-cutting” are considered
within the country-specific context; there is no automatic position for a specific cross-cutting topic, but in
a country where exploitation of natural resources has been a core factor in the conflict, consideration of
common environmental resources would logically be a priority topic. The structure of the teams should
incorporate lessons from past PCNAs on the elements needed to effectively “mainstream” a cross-cutting
issues, and those identified as being of particular importance for the peace process may be best
supported by being made a sector or sub-sector of their own, with specific additional mechanisms and
resources for “cross-fertilization” with other sectors .
A cross-cutting issue of particular importance for the sustainability of peace, economic recovery, and
social stability, is women’s engagement in post-conflict recovery. It is increasingly recognized that
women’s participation is constructive for effective governance systems, for conflict-resolution, particularly
at the community level, and for economic recovery particularly in the agricultural sector in rural
economies. However, gender issues have, in the past, ‘fallen between the cracks’ in post-conflict
planning. Gender issues are likely to be relevant to almost all sectors in post-conflict needs assessment
teams, and so the ‘rule of thumb’ for incorporating gender issues is to determine whether and how
women and men experienced conflict differently, and in consequence have differing needs, and then
translate this into differentiated actions for inclusion in the post-conflict recovery process. A gendersensitive PCNA will be evident in a TRF with gender-differentiated results where relevant, and financing
for recovery will likewise show clearly the costs associated with those TRF results. Gender budgeting
methods can be used to track spending to ensure there are adequate resources for agreed priority
actions to respond to the needs of women and girls.
Other key cross-cutting themes that are critical importance to UNICEF must also be integrated. These
include protection, youth, and social cohesion. Typically, post-conflict situations prominently feature
protection issues. The role of youth—not merely as representing a group at risk of taking up arms, but a
crucial resource for post-conflict recovery—is increasingly gaining attention. Social cohesion—from
equitable access to services, social protection, to community-based programmes that build in dialogue
and reconciliation—also represents a value adding component of UNICEF’s post-conflict work that cuts
across sectors. These areas all offer crucial contributions to post-conflict recovery and must be
adequately addressed in the assessment and TRF.
Key activities of UNICEF in the assessment and recovery planning stage can be:
 Ensure that UNICEF sector colleagues and counterparts are members of the sectors teams and
participate in the sector assessments
 Provide input in the sector team TOR and work plan
 Ensure the integration of cross-cutting issues, such as protection, gender, youth
 Assist with the recruitment of additional capacities if required
 Work with the sector teams in the analyzing the data as appropriate
 Ensure mid to longer term recovery interventions include risk reduction and do no harm
approaches
 Work with the sector colleagues in developing the Transition Recovery Framework
 Support with the development of the long term vision
4




Contribute to the revision of Flash Appeal/ development of CAP and linkages between different
humanitarian, political, security and development frameworks for the UN and national plans
Coordinate with the global PCNA focal point as well as internally with UNICEF’s structures
(global, regional and national) as appropriate
Continue communication and coordination with OCHA and UNICEF led sectors/ clusters,
government counterparts and partners
Liaise with PD Emergency Programmes and UNICEF led Cluster Coordinators for technical
advice on needs assessment tools, methodologies, information management as needed for the
next stage.
Developing the TRF
The co-ordinating team also takes responsibility for developing the final transitional results framework
(TRF). The TRF should be put together by taking a strategic filter to the sectoral or regional
assessments completed by each team. The primary criterion for identifying the priority actions is that a
TRF should address the crucial areas where lack of progress could risk reversal in the transitional and
peace-building process, including re-establishing a legitimate and accountable role for the state. The
minimum necessary to do this generally includes progress on national reconciliation, re-establishment of
security and public safety, achievement of a minimal level of functioning public finance systems and
provision of basic service delivery and economic recovery. Thus, the basic framework for an effective
TRF would normally provide coverage of country-appropriate aspects of four functions: political, security,
public finances, and social/economic recovery. Outputs (programmes/ interventions) that “fill” the matrix
should be crafted to reflect strategic dimensions of peace building and conflict mitigation (would add the
environment sustainability) by referring to gender-, ethnic-, age-, or region-specific actions.
Combining Results and Institution-Building
The TRF should provide for some actions that are visible to the general public and can generate modest
but tangible “quick wins” that deepen or broaden national ownership and support for the peace or
transition process. These should be accompanied by less visible actions – in the area of institutional
capacity-building and reform, transparency, and governance of natural resources, for example – that
must be initiated early on even though their benefits will not be felt for some time. These are critical to
underpinning future governance, state capacity and accountability, without which ownership of the
process risks becoming nominal, rather than national, and can lead to a reversion of gains at a later date.
TRF as a Compact for Recovery
In many post-conflict situations, effective recovery is dependent on actions not only of the national
government and public administration, but also of donors and other key international actors
(humanitarian agencies; peace-keeping and political missions) who bring capacity and resources. In
highly aid-dependent post-conflict situations with weak government capacity, government will not directly
control many of the resources available for early recovery, and international institutions have a far more
direct responsibility for results achieved than in a more stable development context. For example,
physical reconstruction may be carried out by government, or by international agencies such as the UN
funds and programs, or through bilateral donor execution arrangements; institutional reform actions are
generally the responsibility of government, but may be dependent for their success on the timely release
of donor funds and/or technical assistance. Hence the TRF is normally framed not as a traditional
government-implemented recovery plan, but as a joint compact which describes the actions needed from
government, other stakeholders, and the country’s international partners to support recovery. The TRF is
therefore an articulation of shared responsibility, and acts not to set conditions on government, but to
point the way for government and its national and international partners to work together towards shared
recovery goals and to monitor the recovery process.
Costing the Recovery Plan.
A realistic plan needs to ensure that enough money will be available, at the right time, to achieve the
priorities identified. The objective of the costing exercise is to estimate the necessary financial resources
to implement priority activities and to thus inform state budget processes, requests for external financing
and program commitments made by donors. There is a two-way link between the costing exercise and
the government’s budget.
The coordinating team will need to consider resource availability issues – short-term access to
resources, absorption capacity, and long-term fiscal sustainability – in reaching a prioritized plan. Where
normal government processes are functioning, the final decisions on priorities identified during the
recovery planning process may be referred to cabinet or a budget sub-committee. Where the normal
5
budget process is not yet functioning, proposals on prioritization may be developed by the coordinating
committee and put to national leadership for validation.
Validating and Financing
Ideally, a recovery planning exercise is carried out with direct participation of all national technical
counterparts and key international partners, and with frequent consultation with national leadership at a
political level and with civil society – and validation is thus embedded in the entire process. In some
cases, however, it will have proved impossible to include one or more of the key players to the extent
needed to ensure full ownership, and in other cases the fluid political situation may have resulted in
emerging voices that need to be “brought in” to the discussion. Once the key results have been triaged
and reflected in the TRF, final validation will then be needed of the overall storyline and external
assistance requirements with all major actors, including those not fully involved in the assessment. This
is necessary as much for reasons of cross-checking and validation as it is for safeguarding ownership
and commitment of the PCNA process and results. It is important at this point to also re-visit the early
conversations with national counterparts and key international partners during the pre-assessment about
objectives and trade-offs, using the agreed PCNA objective as the touchstone for prioritizing, addressing
difficult trade-offs and agreeing on the rationale for choices made during prioritization and sequencing.
Resource Mobilization
The PCNA typically contributes to a donor conference. The PCNA and TRF, as well as other planning
frameworks such as a Poverty Reduction Strategy, provide a basis for mobilizing resources for the
recovery and longer-term reconstruction and recovery of affected areas. The inclusion of major donors as
PCNA partners, namely the World Bank and EC, is key to facilitating this process.
Technical Support at UNICEF HQ
The Recovery and Risk Reduction Section specializes in post-crisis needs assessment methodology,
and serves as the UNHQ global focal point for PCNAs, working closely with other divisions. The team
can support Regional and Country Offices electronically and is also available for direct surge support.
Often, external consultants are required, and there is a roster available for additional external support.
For further information, contact:
James Rogan
Chief
Recovery and Risk Reduction Section
EMOPS NY
jrogan@unicef.org
Blerta Aliko
Recovery Specialist
Recovery and Risk Reduction Section
EMOPS Geneva
baliko@unicef.org
Isabel Candela
Sr. Recovery Advisor
Recovery and Risk Reduction Section
EMOPS NY
icandela@unicef.org
Erin Tettensor
Recovery Specialist
Recovery and Risk Reduction Section
EMOPS NY
etettensor@unicef.org
6