Global WASH Cluster Strategy 2011-2015
Mid-Term Review
October 19, 2012
Acronyms and abbreviations .................................................................................................................. 2
Executive summary ................................................................................................................................. 3
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Scope and Rationale................................................................................................................................ 5
Analytical Review .................................................................................................................................... 6
Progress on the implementation of the 2011-2015 GWC Strategic Plan ........................................... 6
Impacts of Contextual Changes on the 2011.2015 GWC Strategic Plan ........................................... 13
Prospects........................................................................................................................................... 13
New Initiatives ...................................................................................................................................... 14
Revised Logical and Monitoring Framework (output levels) ................................................................ 17
Strategic Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 17
Logical Framework ............................................................................................................................ 17
Outcome 1
Effective Coordination and Capacity of the Global WASH Cluster ............................................... 17
Outcome 2
Timely Operational Support to National WASH Clusters as Needed ............................................ 18
Outcome 3
Improved emergency preparedness and technical capacity of WASH stakeholders ................... 18
Outcome 4
Accountability and Learning Facilitates Effective WASH Cluster Action....................................... 19
Outcome 5
Operational Advocacy for WASH as an Essential Part of Humanitarian
Response and Communication in Both Emergency and Development Fora ................................ 19
Monitoring Framework ..................................................................................................................... 20
Indicative Budget Needs for 2013-2015 (USD) ..................................................................................... 24
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 25
1
Acronyms and abbreviations
CAST
:
Cluster Advocacy and Support Team
CLA
:
Cluster Lead Agency
EMOPS
:
Office of Emergency Programmes
GenCap
:
Gender Stand-by Capacity Project
GWC
:
Global WASH Cluster
GWCSP
:
Global WASH Cluster Strategic Plan
HC
:
Humanitarian Coordinator
HCT
:
Humanitarian Country Team
IARRM
:
Inter-Agency Rapid Response mechanism
IASC
:
Inter-Agency Steering Committee
IMO
:
Information Management Officer
MIRA
:
Multi-Cluster Initial Rapid Assessment
MTR
:
Mid-Term Review
NGO
:
Non-Governmental Organization
OCHA
:
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
RAT
:
Rapid Assessment Team
RECAS
:
Regional Emergency Cluster Adviser
RRT
:
Rapid Response Team
SAG
:
Strategic Advisory Group
TA
:
Transformative Agenda
UNDAC
:
United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination
Unicef
:
United Nations Children’s Fund
WASH
:
Water Sanitation and Hygiene
WCC
:
WASH Cluster Coordinator
2
Executive summary
The Mid-Term Review of the 2011-2015 Global WASH Cluster Strategic Plan is designed to assist
GWC partners to refine and reorient where necessary their strategy for the next three years in light of
the results achieved so far and contextual changes associated with the Transformative Agenda of the
Humanitarian Reform.
Achievement highlights of the past two years are:




The capacity of the GWC to support national level coordination in emergencies has been
markedly increased through the deployment of an expanded and diversified Rapid Response
Team;
Partner commitment to and implementation of the GWC strategy have reached a very high
level.
Partner-led initiatives including the piloting of a Rapid Assessment Team and the installation
of six Regional Emergency Cluster Advisors have strengthened support to national
coordination platforms and provided valuable understanding of persistent operational gaps and
capacity building needs;
Efforts have been made to increase transparency and regular circulation of the results of
monitoring the implementation of the strategy has improved the degree to which performance
information is shared.
Significant effort is still required to achieve the vision embodied in the strategy particularly in the
following areas:

While it is considered that the level of CAST communication with partners has improved, it
still lacks a consistent and systematic basis.
 The communication among the Global WASH Cluster partners would benefit from being
more structured to improve alertness and responsiveness of partners’ headquarters to support
field office participation to in-country coordination and response;
 Intercluster cooperation needs to improve to stimulate operational cooperation with core
clusters and improve the effectiveness of the emergency responses in the field;
 In many high-risk countries the emergency WASH coordination mechanisms is weak due to
a persistent lack of commitment, political attention or adequate awareness of procedures and
tools available to support emergency WASH response. There is an on-going need to continue
to strengthen the human resource based upon which the humanitarian response system
depends
 A more strategic support framework to national WASH cluster platforms should be pursued
through a better integration of the Rapid Response Team, the Rapid Assessment Team and
Regional Emergency Cluster Advisers
With respect to the contextual changes, many of the recommendations contained in the Transformative
Agenda (TA) have already been reflected in the global WASH cluster strategy. The specific emphasis
that the TA brings to improved strategic leadership at HCT level is particularly welcome to cluster
partners. We need however to adjust to the changes the TA brings without losing the WASH cluster
momentum in four main areas: support to the inter-agency rapid response mechanism, coordinated and
multi-cluster assessment approach, performance monitoring of national WASH coordination platforms,
and inter-cluster coordination.
3
The five expected outcomes contained in the strategy remain unchanged. They are still relevant to
achieve the strategic objectives pursed by the partners, namely:
1. Ensure a global multi-stakeholder partnership for enhanced coordination of humanitarian
assistance in the WASH sector and with other sectors
2. Strengthen surge capacity of WASH stakeholders at global, regional and national levels to
support coordination and emergency response in the WASH sector
3. Provide regional support to national coordination and response platforms and improve
emergency preparedness (including capacity of WASH stakeholders on a conceptual basis
4. Monitor performance of national cluster coordinator platforms, identify and incorporate
lessons learnt to improve the WASH cluster coordinator and emergency response
5. Engage partners into an advocacy strategy to recognize WASH as an essential human right to
be part of humanitarian responses
No radical changes are proposed and the momentum of the strategy is kept: the priority for the GWC
partners remains the improvement of the national WASH coordination platforms to respond to
humanitarian emergencies. To support this priority, it is proposed to launch 14 new initiatives until
2015. They are articulated around three main axes:
1. Operational refinements are proposed to enhance the support given to countries and improve
operational modalities
2. More explicit actions related to support multi-cluster operations and enhance gender equity
approach are suggested
3. New outputs could be developed for the advocacy strategy for the GWC (outcome 5) to focus
more on country needs;
The new logical framework for 2013 -2015 is characterized by additional output on gender marker and
a reformulation of the outputs on advocacy.
4
Introduction
The Mid-Term Review (MTR) of the 2011-2015 Global WASH Cluster Strategic Plan (GWCSP) is
sustained by the following principles: 1) a systematic review of the progress made in the implementation
of GWCSP, 2) the necessity to take into account the new contextual changes and anticipate future
developments and needs, 3) to capitalize on a number of key lessons learnt during the next
implementation phase of the GWCSP, 4) the need to adjust the strategy whenever necessary, but to also
keep the current WASH Cluster momentum.
The GWCSP and has been driven by the capacity of the Global WASH Cluster (GWC) to support
national WASH coordination platforms in operations and emergency preparedness activities. Amongst
the initiatives undertaken during the first two years of the GWCSP implementation, the extension of
the Rapid Response Team (RRT), the set up of a Rapid Assessment Team (RAT) and the development
of a specific WASH cluster capacity in the regions through the Regional Emergency Cluster Advisers
(RECAs) have been considered as key priorities by the partners.
Whilst these initiatives have been implemented, significant contextual changes have occurred in the
broader humanitarian landscape with the implementation of the Transformative Agenda (TA) by the
Inter-Agency Steering Committee (IASC) based on lessons learnt from 2010 and 2011 crises. The TA
looks for more operational integration between clusters and more mutual accountability among partners.
Even if, many of the GWCSP initiatives are in line with the ones proposed in the TA, it impacts on
WASH cluster business, both at national and global levels. Changes need to be reflected in the GWCSP
to meet the challenges – but also the opportunities – led by the TA associated with enhanced strategic
leadership, global deployment capacity, multi-cluster assessment approach or performance monitoring
frameworks.
There is no doubt that the partners in countries and at global level are still facing challenges to improve
coordination, build capacity, streamline coordination mechanisms and enhance communication, but
globally, the GWCSP has providing a good orientation to the GWC partners to overcome them.
Priorities and new initiatives for 2013-2015 are proposed based on an analytical review of the progress
made in each of the outcomes of the GWCSP.
Scope and Rationale
The MTR of the 2011-2015 GWCSP proposes a limited number of changes in the GWCSP that can be
implemented up to 2015 but still aim at strengthening the GWC capacity of the national WASH
coordination platforms to fulfil the six core functions1 agreed by the IASC principals and take into
account the new context brought by the Transformative Agenda (TA)2. It has been compiled by the
Cluster Advocacy and Support Team (CAST), guided by the Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) of the
1
2
At the country level, the aim of the cluster approach, as agreed in 2006, is to strengthen response through predictability,
accountability, and partnership through better prioritization, defining roles and responsibilities or humanitarian
organizations. The six core functions are : 1) supporting service delivery, 2) providing a platform to ensure that service
delivery is driven by the agreed strategic priorities, 3) Developing mechanisms to eliminate duplication of service delivery,
3) Informing strategic decision-making of the HC/HCT for the humanitarian response, 4) establishing Needs assessment
and gap analysis (across other sectors and within the sector), 5) Identifying and addressing (emerging) gaps, obstacles,
duplication, and crosscutting issues, 6) Prioritizing grounded in response analysis.
More detailed information on the TA is provided further in this document.
5
GWC and is proposed for endorsement by the GWC partners during the 16th Global WASH Cluster
meeting held in Nairobi on October 17-19, 2012.
The priority for the GWC partners remains the improvement of the national WASH coordination
platforms to respond to humanitarian emergencies by reinforcing the sector preparedness and technical
capacity in high risk countries plus developing a surge capacity in support of WASH national
coordination platforms. Regional capacity remains a key link to support WASH cluster partners in
countries from the global level.
Improving WASH coordination in countries requires the GWC partners to have a strategy that goes
beyond cluster coordination and looks at sector coordination and achieved through a more substantial
operational integration between RRT, RAT, RECA and Cluster Lead Agency (CLA) regional capacity
to guarantee a coherent approach and efficient support in countries.
The full development of the GWC strategy also implies a strong commitment of each partner
organisation, both in upgrading their internal capacity toward the Humanitarian Reform in general and
the cluster approach in particular (global and national levels), and in committing consistently to their
engagements towards the GWC strategic frame.
Analytical Review
Progress on the implementation of the 2011-2015 GWC Strategic Plan
The current GWCSP aims at achieving five core expected outcomes, dividing into 17 expected outputs.
A rapid analysis on the progress achieved until early September 2012, shows that the implementation
of the GWCSP is globally on track and the initiatives taken have allowed the GWC partners to provide
a more consistent support to the national WASH coordination platforms, even if some adjustments
remain to be done. This analysis is supported by the review of monitoring framework of the GWCSP
set-up by the partners during the 15th GWC meeting held in Toledo, Spain on April 4-5th 2011 (see
tables associated for each outcome).

Effective coordination and capacity of the Global WASH Cluster (outcome 1). The governance
of the GWC has reached a satisfactory level of effectiveness and transparency as illustrated by
the nomination process of the new SAG early 2012 and the development of sound working
arrangement among partners. The strategic document and monitoring framework (even if the
indicators need to be slightly modified to reflect better the current initiatives) have allowed the
partners to set up the baselines to monitor progress in achieving priority outputs and outcomes.
Three major challenges remain:
i.
The communication among the GWC partners needs to be more structured to share
relevant information and improve alertness and responsiveness of partners’
headquarters to support field office participation to in-country coordination and
response. A sound architecture of communication should be proposed to the partners;
6
The partners would have an interest in completing the current working arrangements
with a statement of principles to encourage a better buy-in of the GWCSP as well as
enhance mutual accountability;
iii.
Inter cluster cooperation must improve to stimulate operational cooperation with core
clusters and improve the effectiveness of the WASH cluster responses in countries.
Reinforcing inter cluster cooperation in priority with the Health and Unicef led Clusters
is seen as a key priority for the second period of the GWCSP implementation. A more
formal mechanism for inter cluster (particularly within UNICEF) coordination could
be proposed / supported by the GWC.
Target
Outputs
Baseline
Outcome 1: Effective coordination and capacity of the Global WASH Cluster
Two workplans (2012-2013 and 2014-2015), after a mid-term review of the strategy) are developed, costed
111 funded and rolled out for all relevant outputs by responsible agencies and consolidated by CAST for
advocacy.
0
2
112 The strategy outputs are monitored and reported to stakeholders on a quartely basis.
0
16
113 A consultative mid-term review is organized in mid-2013 to adjust the strategy if required
0
1
121 Working arrangements are issued by the CLA and endorsed by the partners
1
1
Output Indicators
1.1 Global WASH Cluster is achievable
and effective
1.2 Global WASH Cluster “working
Working arrangement reviewed in 2012, together with the mid-term review of the strategy and endorsed at
arrangement” model is achievable and 122
the first cluster meeting in 2013
affective
123
1.3 Resources accessed by
participating agencies are sufficient to
support the agreed GWC Strategy
131 % of output budget funded

N/A 1
0
8
No
80%
Bas.
Priorities on intercluster cooperation are jointly identified between CAST and equivalent structures in at
least 5 clusters shared and agreed among the GWC partners in 2012
0
5
142 Joint intercluster activities are defined with at least 5 clusters based on the priorities set-up by the GWC
0
5
143 Biannually progress reports are shared by CAST with WASH cluster partners and other stakeholders
0
8
141
1.4 The Global Wash Cluster promotes
coherence with others clusters and
internal transparency between WASH
Cluster Stakeholders
WASH cluster meetings are organized twice a year with participation of at least 1 national WASH
coordination platform
Progress
ii.
Timely operational support to national WASH coordination platforms response as needed
(outcome 2). The support to national WASH coordination platforms response is currently
enhanced through two mechanisms: the deployment of a RRT fulfilling coordination and
7
information management functions and the deployment of a RAT fulfilling an assessment
function. The RRT concept is not new to the cluster since it was tested during the
implementation of the previous strategy. During this period, it has been extended (from 3 to 9
officers) and clarified with two separate coordination and information management functions,
based on lessons learned by the GWC partners. The establishment of a RAT is a new 18-month
initiative piloted by a consortium of partners and currently under a testing phase that was
initially established to ‘find victims wherever they are’ during a rapid onset emergency. Based
on the current implementation phase, the following elements can be underlined:
i.
After difficulties and delays to compose a new robust RRT, the RRT concept has
confirmed to be a powerful tool of the GWC to support in-country WASH cluster
operations, above all when information managers can be deployed together with
WASH cluster coordinators. Some limitations appeared in the implementation of the
RRT concept, mainly due to its success, but also due to the temporary duration of their
deployment. The requests reached a quite significant level, and resulted in deployment
beyond expected time deployment ratio of 50% of their working time. CAST and RRT
partners had to find alternative solutions to meet the numerous requests. This situation
should be mitigated with the recruitment of additional RRTs on one hand, but with the
application of more rigorous criteria for deployment on the other hand; continuity
between different RRTs deployment in the same country and sustainability of their
actions also need to be mainstreamed and ensured. RRTs need to systematically assess
the continuity of their functions when deployed and provide initial recommendations
(after one week) to CO and CAST for rapid action.
ii.
Although the RAT pilot project showed difficulties in setting up an independent
operational framework for deployment from the cluster coordination and coordination
with the other operational components of the GWC strategy (RRT, RECA) could be
even stronger, it confirmed the necessity for the WASH cluster to have a specific
operational assessment tool for the sector that can be flexible enough to meet in-country
needs or be coordinated with a wider approach in the context of the TA (MIRA). A
better integration of the RAT with the RRT would promote a more coherent approach
of the GCW surge mechanism. Finally, the RAT operational guidelines need to be
clarified for slow onset emergencies where RAT members could broaden their support
and help the sector to organize better assessment and information management
processes, provided there would be a consensus among partners and the final evaluation
of the RRT would recommend the continuation of this project. With this regards, in
some contexts, the broader support to the assessment process as opposed to direct
assessment is of more value to partners. To improve operational integration among
RAT and RRT functions, it has been discussed that CAST could request the RAT to
deploy, with the RAT still maintaining the ability to deploy independently
8
Outputs
Progress
Target
Output Indicators
211
2.1 Timely global WASH cluster
support to coordination at country
level (national and subnational) in
emergency is appropriate and
effective (coordination support to
emergencies)
% of emergencies for which a WASH Cluster Coordinator and an Information Manager haved been deployed
N/A 80%
72 hours after request (barring visa constraints)
% of rapid onset emergencies (with official and dedicated appeal) with functional WASH Cluster facilitation
N/A 80%
212 (Coordination and IM capacity) within 72 hours of receiving an official request for deployment by the
country office (barring visa constraints)
213
% of WASH cluster staff and financial resources provided by non-CLA on a pro bono basis in major
emergencies
2.2 Global and National WASH clusters
% of emergencies for which a Rapid Assessment Team Member have been deployed after 72 hours of
have sufficient capacity for effective 221 request (barring visa constraints)
and timely support at the national and
sub-national levels, in the early days
of any cluster based emergencies
(surge mechanisms)
222 % of RAT deployment delivering data to the WASH coordination platform after one week

Baseline
Outcome 2: Timely Operational Support to National Wash Cluster responses as
needed
N/A tbd
N/A tbd
N/A
tbc
Improved emergency preparedness of WASH Stakeholders (outcome 3). The GWC should
contribute to the improvement of emergency preparedness in identified high-risk countries by
1) providing relevant tools, 2) supporting the WASH sector to map and adapt to risks, 3)
building WASH sector capacities based on an in-depth and participatory analysis of the
vulnerabilities and strengths, 4) offering a regular support through the regional capacity of the
WASH cluster partners. With the implementation of a new pilot project and the creation of
RECA functions in six regions, the GWC partners created a specific cluster resource to achieve
this outcome. Early September 2012, the progresses made in the implementation of the GWCSP
show the following:
i.
Even though the GWC has not set-up a systematic mechanism to inventory the tools in
use by national WASH coordination platforms, it has developed the elements (website,
WASH cluster mailing list, regional backstopping points) that will enable a more
systematic approach to communication, sharing of tools and support to national WASH
coordination platforms. Efforts should be pursued to develop a coherent and
standardized approach on information management and to systematize the capacity and
vulnerability mapping for national WASH coordination platforms. Setting the baseline
for an effective information management approach remains a high priority for the
GWC;
ii.
The instrumental role of the CLA in regions to support WASH cluster activities,
national coordination platforms and capacity building has been confirmed all along the
implementation of the GWCSP. The GWC must produce an effort to continue
supporting the CLA capacity building strategy in the regions for WASH;
9
As for the RAT, more needs to be done to increase awareness of the RECA entity.
Outcome3: Improved emergency preparedness of WASH Stakeholders
Outputs
3.1 The Global WASH cluster provides
solid replicable support tools
output Indicator
New tools are refined or developed based on WASH priority gaps identified through a stocktaking exercise
311 carried out with WASH cluster coordinators, REWAs, and RECAs to support in-country coordination and
N/A tbd
response
312 An open and effective feedback mechanism on WASH cluster tools is set up
N/A tbd
321
% of countries by region where WASH cluster tools* or equivalent are made available to the WASH sector
partners before any rapid onset emergency
N/A 60%
322
% of WASH cluster countries by region having used or adapted at least 3 tools* developped by the GWC or
used national equivalent tools in their response at national and subnational levels
N/A 80%
3.2 Countries benefit effectively from
GWC support at national and
subnational levels
3.3 Regional capacity facilitates an
# of regions with a functional coordination platform** to build up WASH response capacity in high risk
331
interface between global strategy and
countries
national action, focusing on a mapping
of risks, vulnerabilities, needs and
332 % of countries by region having endorsed a WASH contingency plan for their primary risks
capacities
5
7
N/A 60%
3.4 Partners of the GWC play an active
% of GWC agencies submitting an annual report to the CAST with an estimate of the expenditures they
role in making the cluster effective in 341
dedicated in support of the cluster approach in the WASH sector
both their HQs and missions
0 80%
Note:
*Tools are : 1) information management, 2) capacity mapping, 3)hygiene promotion, 4) accountability, 5) Gender Marker...
**Minimum functional coordination platform: regular information sharing
10
Progress
iv.
Target
In many high-risk countries, it is assumed that emergency WASH coordination
mechanisms are weak due to a persistent lack of commitment, political attention or
adequate awareness of procedures and tools available to support emergency WASH
response. The RECA project started to address these issues and brings good
perspectives, also promoting partner engagement and reinforcing regional capacity.
Four elements remain instrumental: 1) a more coordinated approach is required to
improve the integration between RECAs, RRTs, RAT, National Cluster / Sector
Coordinators, 2) although different, an effort could be done to have a more consistent
approach across the regions and enhance RECAs’ methodology in capacity and
vulnerability mapping when feasible/applicable, 3) the GWC needs to set up a quality
assurance mechanism to progressively reinforce and homogenize RECAs’
competencies, 4) finally, taking into consideration the specific needs in big regions (e.
g. West and Central Africa) in term of WASH capacity, the number of RECAs could
be increased.
Baseline
iii.
Output
output Indicator
4.1 WASH cluster collective
% of countries in which the WASH cluster has a strategy for improving its accountability - with particular
411
accountability to beneficiaries and
focus on transparency, feedback and staff attitudes and behaviour
other stakeholders through the set up
% of WASH clusters that can demonstrate that WASH programmes have changed - either what they do or
and roll out of standardized
412
how they do it - as a result of feedback or complaints from beneficiaries
monitoring mechanisms
4.2 Lessons learned are captured,
disseminated and used for future
emergencies
421
A global mechanism enables to monitor in-country performance and capture lessons learnt for the WASH
cluster
413
% of major WASH cluster-based emergency response having gone through a formal external evaluation by
the GWC partners*
tbd 80%
tbd 80%
0
1
N/A 100% N/A
422 % number of accountability and learning documentation available on the GWC and ALNAP webpages
N/A 100%
423 % of lessons learnt applied in subsequent emmergencies
N/A 80%
431
A process accepted by the GWC partners is set up to validate and systematize the lessons learnt at global,
national and sub-national levels
4.3 WASH cluster knowledge
management strategy and web-portal 432 A webportal is functional and updated on a monthly basis and gives satisfaction to at least 80% of the users
finalized and implemented
WASH Cluster partners have access to timely and reliable technical support services that enables also to
433
identify where further lessons need to be investigated
Progress
Outcome 4: "Accountability and learning" facilitates effective WASH Cluster Action
Target
‘Accountability and learning’ facilitates effective WASH cluster actions (outcome 4). There is
an on-going need to continue to strengthen the human resource based upon which the
humanitarian response system depends. The GWC needs to pursue its effort on building a
knowledge management strategy and disseminating key lessons learnt and tools. Substantial
efforts have been made by the partners to develop a knowledge management strategy, renew
the GWC website, consolidate accountability to beneficiaries and donors, and disseminate new
lessons. The GWC will pursue the current efforts with a special attention to mainstream gender
into WASH, which has been seen to be inconsistent, with some countries taking exceptional
steps to ensure cluster partners commit and operationalize programs using the ‘gender lens’,
whilst others have yet to promote and establish a set of structured tools. Although
implementation of the gender marker is most common (and recommended for all partners to
include) at appeal stage, creating gender‐responsive projects should be an on-going and year‐
round process. To facilitate this through all clusters and respective partners, the initial step is
to integrate gender within the WASH Cluster global strategic framework, its outputs, indicators,
and throughout monitoring and analysis of the clusters performance. Also, support from the
GenCap roster could enhance the gender consideration within the WASH Cluster strategies.
Baseline

0
1
0
1
1
1
Note
* Formal evaluations will be undertaken on all cluster based responses serving >500,000 affected. Emergency responses delivering to less than 500,000 people will be
11
output
5.1 All key WASH cluster partners
mainstream commitment to the
cluster approach within their own
organization, including advocacy,
communication and resource
mobilization
output Indicator
511
% of GWC agencies submitting and annual report to the CAST with a narrative on activities dedicated to
0 80%
advocacy, communication and ressource mobilization in support of the cluster approach in the WASH sector
512
An evidence-based advocacy strategy is set-up and endorsed by all WASH cluster at the first GWC meeting in
0
2012
1
5.2 All key WASH cluster partners
mainstream commitment to advocate
Nb of WASH sector events, fora, workshops where the WASH cluster approach has been advocated by
521
for humanitarian WASH within the
partners
broader WASH sector
N/A
5
5.3 All key WASH cluster partners
mainstream commitment to advocate
Nb of humanitarian fora, events, workshops where the WASH cluster approach has been advocated by
531
for humanitarian WASH within the
partners
broader humanitarian community
N/A
5
5.4 All key WASH cluster partners
mainstream commitment to advocate
541 Nb of general events, workshops where the WASH cluster approach has been advocated by partners
for humanitarian WASH within the
general public
N/A
5
12
Progress
Outcome 5: Operational advocacy for WASH as an essential part of Humanitarian
response and Communication in both emergency and development fora
Target
Operational advocacy for WASH as an essential part of humanitarian response and
communication in both emergency and development fora (outcome 5). With the notable
exception of the participation of CAST and key GWC partners to the World Water Forum,
operational advocacy has not received enough priority compared to the other expected
outcomes. Impact of WASH interventions within Food Security, Nutrition and Health
indicators needs to be documented and promoted to enhance cross-sectoral, multi-cluster and
inter cluster added-value. Amongst priorities, experience has showed that supporting and
monitoring operational advocacy done by national WASH cluster coordinators to promote and
facilitate national level WASH activities and enhance WASH visibility. Finally, Outcome five
requests a stronger leadership, a strategic agenda based on key events and initiatives connected
to the sector & emergency context, and possibly a stronger commitment and support from the
CAST. It became clear from the commencement of implementation of the strategic plan that
the outcome as framed was not well suited to the current needs and objectives of the GWC. At
the 15th general meeting of the GWC in March 2012, a proposal was advanced by SAVE the
Children, lead agency for implementing the outcome, to restructure the outcome into more
appropriate outputs. These were largely supported and it is proposed to restructure the outcome
along the lines proposed.
Baseline

Impacts of Contextual Changes on the 2011.2015 GWC Strategic Plan
In light of the growing recognition of the weaknesses in the multilateral humanitarian response, the
IASC decided to review the current approach to humanitarian response and make adjustments, building
on the lessons learned in 2010 and 2011 in order to enhance leadership, coordination, and accountability
as well as set up new commitments for system-wide response in large emergencies. The Emergency
Relief Coordinator has been personally leading the process called Transformative Agenda (TA).
Under the TA, operational integration between clusters, operational accountability of Global Cluster
Coordinators, and mutual accountability among partners are reinforced in L3 emergencies with:

The set-up of an Inter-Agency Rapid Response mechanism (IARRM) to be deployed on a noregrets basis to support quick establishment of the coordination required. This will be composed
of core OCHA functions and, cluster coordinators;

The triggering of a Multi-Cluster Initial Rapid Assessment (MIRA) to identify priorities;

The development of a strategic plan for the response in the first days of the emergency, as well
as a preparedness plan prior to the emergency, led by the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT).
The plan should lay out priorities and a common strategic approach and drive the cluster's
operational response planning and guide new actors arriving in country.
Many of the recommendations contained in the TA have already been reflected in the global WASH
cluster strategy and monitoring framework, and therefore reinforce some of the finer strategic objectives
as well as the importance of the role of national Governments in cluster mechanisms. Nevertheless, the
GWC needs to clearly reflect in the GWCSP the backing to the TA without losing the WASH cluster
momentum in four main areas: 1) support to the IARRM, through the consolidation of the RRT, 2)
coordination on assessments between the initiatives taken by the GWC (RAT) and the multi-cluster
approach promoted by the IASC (MIRA), 3) consolidation of the performance monitoring of national
WASH coordination platforms and 4) reinforcement of the inter-cluster coordination.
Some of the initiatives, taken in the framework of the TA, filter down to level 1 and 2 emergencies. It
is a matter of fact that most of the emergency responses organised within the WASH cluster / sector are
small-scale emergencies. As such, the cluster priority remains to focus on national and sub-national
coordination and preparedness mechanisms. The TA complements the current approach developed by
the GWC to reinforce the coordination functions in the countries before, during and after an emergency.
In this respect, the GWC partners need to pay a systematic attention to the transitions phases and
mechanisms (activation and deactivation) which are taken place in countries.
Prospects
The first strategically framework under which the GWC project were developed between 2006 and
2010 allowed the GWC to disseminate the humanitarian reform throughout the WASH sector as well
as develop tools to support national WASH coordination platforms. The current GWCSP was prepared
to draw the lessons from the past and reinforce the capacity of the GWC to support national WASH
cluster operations, by amplifying valuable initiatives, launching new ones and dropping others. The
GWC is progressively developing an effective backstopping capacity for national WASH coordination
platforms, which can be deployed from headquarters and regions. The Mid-Term review confirms the
importance to build up global and regional capacities to support WASH cluster / sector coordination
and capacity building in-countries as an interim solution to the shortfall of capacity within those
countries. The new initiatives proposed by the GWC aims firstly at reinforcing national WASH cluster
response capacities.
13
New Initiatives
A series of new initiatives are proposed for 2013-2015 to reinforce the operational capacity of the
GWC to support country operations. They are articulated around three main axes:

Operational refinements are proposed to enhance the support given to countries and improve
operational modalities (better integration of the RRT, RAT and RECA projects, GWC
capacity to support the IARMM in the framework of the TA, development of a performance
monitoring framework…);

More explicit actions related to support multi-cluster operations and enhance gender equity
approach are suggested (intercluster cooperation with Health and other Unicef led clusters,
promotion of gender markers);

New outputs could be developed for the advocacy strategy for the GWC (outcome 5) to focus
more on country needs;
These initiatives and their rationale are detailed hereafter:


Outcome 1: effective coordination and capacity of the Global WASH Cluster
#
Initiative
GWCSPOutput
Rationale
1a
Complete the GWC
working
arrangement with a
statement of
principles
1.2
Render the working arrangement more applicable and
enhance mutual accountability among partners
1b
Intercluster
cooperation in
priority with Health
and other Unicef
led clusters
1.4
Base better national WASH cluster decisions on evidences,
rationalize decision and measure impacts of WASH cluster
actions. Increase coherence among clusters in the
framework of the TA and realize economies of scale with
the systematic establishment of joint activities (training,
performance monitoring, joint cluster missions,
information management, joint assessments), but also
clarify and harmonize the roles and responsibilities,
collaboration between the Health CLA and other Unicefled clusters.
Outcome 2: timely operational support to national WASH cluster response as needed
#
Initiative
GWCSPOutput
Rationale
2a
Extend the RRT project and
support the IARRM through
the establishment of a core
group of senior WCC, IMO
and RAT
2.1
The RRT project will be hopefully assessed as
successful but the current rates of deployment
of the RRT members are high. The project will
be extended till end 2014 with additional RRT
members (IMO) meanwhile lasting solutions
will be explored through the stand-by
mechanism led by. In addition, the deployment
14
ability of the GWC should be increased to
soundly support the IARRM for major
emergencies.
2b

Use RAT to support
coordination platforms with the
assessment process and
integrate their deployment
mechanisms with RRT and
rationalize initial assessments
in coordination with other
clusters when relevant
2.2
RAT deployments need to be coordinated with
RRT deployments and a continuity of the
assessment and information management
functions must be ensured to strengthen the
impact of the GWC support to national WASH
coordination platforms. Furthermore, the Rapid
Assessment Team needs to be able to operate
in a broader context (UNDAC, MIRA).
Outcome 3: improved emergency preparedness of WASH Stakeholders
#
Initiative
GWCSPOutput
Rationale
3a
Set-up the GWC agenda on
stockpiling and in-kind aid. Develop
a GWC meta-database where
agencies could provide simple real
time updates of their global stock
3.1
Based on the end result of the stockpiling
project, GWC partners will be able to
align and consolidate their positions on
stockpiling and aid in-kind and
disseminate it to outside partners,
3b
Develop a consolidated approach on
information management, in
particular ensure a systematic
disaggregated of data by sex and age
3.1
Rationalize all initiatives taken at country
and regional level to provide a step-bystep on information management
coherent with other initiatives (MIRA)
and with national systems and approaches
whenever they exist.
3c
Improve sanitation under difficult
circumstances
3.1
After Haiti and Pakistan, the WASH
cluster partners agreed that there is a need
to improve the approach on sanitation in
difficult contexts such as urban areas or
floods
3d
Assess current gaps in WASH
response and develop a strategy to
meet the new challenges
3.1
The WASH partners need to identify
their areas for improvement to provide a
more appropriate response to the
beneficiaries whenever possible
3e
Continue and integrate the RECA
initiative with other GWC initiatives
(RRT, knowledge management,
reinforcement of CLA capacity for
humanitarian WASH in Regional
Offices)
3.2
Operational integration of the RECA
initiative should increase the impact of
RECA’s support in selected countries.
3f
Set-up a two way feedback
mechanism between the GWC and
the national coordination platforms
3.2
The coordination between the global and
national levels needs to be reinforced and
systematized in order to better identify
problems in national coordination
platforms when they emerge (pre-alert)
and support their solving
15
3g


Strengthen capacity building
strategies for coordination platforms
whenever necessary
3.3
Based on the capacity building exercises
that have been carried out in high-risk
countries, the GWC should have the
ability to support the capacity building
strategies developed by national WASH
coordination platforms
Outcome 4: ‘accountability and learning’ facilitates effective WASH cluster actions
#
Initiative
GWCSPOutput
Rationale
4a
Develop and disseminate a
consolidated performance
monitoring framework for
clusters that systematically
captures feedbacks from
beneficiaries
4.1
The performance monitoring frameworks
currently used by the WASH clusters incountries remain subjective. IASC is
developing a performance monitoring
framework in the context of the TA, which
could provide the basis to monitor all WASH
cluster /sector coordination mechanism in
future.
4b
Promote the inclusion of
gender markers in WASH
cluster activities, supported by
a systematic information
management approach with
disaggregated data by sex and
age
4.4 (new
output
proposed)
The integration of gender within the WASH
Cluster global strategic framework, should
facilitate mainstreaming gender into WASH.
Outcome 5: operational advocacy for WASH as an essential part of humanitarian response
and communication in both emergency and development fora
#
Initiative
GWCSPOutput
Rationale
5a
Support and monitor
operational advocacy done
by national WASH cluster
coordinators
New
output 5.2
In some specific contexts, the WASH cluster
coordinators need to develop a strong advocacy
strategy and use all evidences to promote WASH
interventions and need a systematic support from
the GWC.
16
Revised Logical and Monitoring Framework (output levels)
Strategic Objectives
A. Ensure a global multi-stakeholder partnership for enhanced coordination of humanitarian assistance in the WASH sector and with other sectors
B. Strengthen surge capacity of WASH stakeholders at global, regional and national levels to support coordination and emergency response in the
WASH sector
C. Provide regional support to national coordination and response platforms and improve emergency preparedness (including capacity of WASH
stakeholders on a conceptual basis
D. Monitor performance of national cluster coordinator platforms, identify and incorporate lessons learnt to improve the WASH cluster coordinator
and emergency response
E. Engage partners into an advocacy strategy to recognize WASH as an essential human right to be part of humanitarian responses
Logical Framework
Outcome 1: Effective Coordination and Capacity of the Global WASH Cluster
Core initiative:
Core initiative:
Core initiative:
Core initiative:
A: Strategy Development
B: Working Arrangement Model
C: Dedicated Resources
D: Inter-cluster Coherence
Output 1.1:
Output 1.2:
Output 1.3:
Output 1.4:
Global
WASH
Cluster Global WASH Cluster Working Resources accessed by participating agencies The Global WASH Cluster promotes coherence with
Strategy is achievable and Arrangement Model is achievable and are sufficient to support the agreed Global other clusters and internal transparency between
effective.
effective.
WASH Cluster strategy.
WASH cluster stakeholders
New initiative
New initiative
Complete the GWC working
arrangement with a statement of
principles
Intercluster cooperation in priority with Health and
other Unicef led clusters
17
Outcome 2: Timely Operational Support to National WASH Clusters as Needed
Core initiative:
Core initiative:
A: Coordination Support to Emergencies
B: Surge Mechanisms (RRTs and RATs)
Output 2.1:
Output 2.2:
Timely global WASH Cluster support to coordination at country level (national and Global and National WASH coordination platforms have sufficient capacity for
sub-national) in emergency is appropriate & effective.
effective and timely support, at the national and sub-national levels, in the early days of
any emergency.
New initiative
New initiative
Extend the RRT project and support the IARRM through the establishment of a core Use RAT to support coordination platforms with the assessment process and integrate
group of senior WCC, IMO and RAT
their deployment mechanisms with RRT and rationalize initial assessments in
coordination with other clusters when relevant
Outcome 3: Improved emergency preparedness and technical capacity of WASH stakeholders
Core initiative:
Core initiative:
A: Refinement of Tools
B: Roll Out to Tools to National C: Regional Risk Mapping and Capacity D: Partner Commitments and mainstreaming
Level
Development
Core initiative:
Output 3.1:
Output 3.2:
Output 3.3:
Core initiative:
Output 3.4:
The Global WASH Cluster Countries benefit effectively from Regional capacity facilitates an interface Partners of the Global WASH Cluster play an active
provides
solid
replicable Global WASH Cluster tools, at between global strategy and national action, role in making the cluster effective in both their HQ
support tools and projects.
national and sub-national levels.
focusing on a mapping of risks, and missions.
vulnerabilities, needs and capacities.
New initiatives
New initiatives
Set-up the GWC agenda on
stockpiling and in-kind aid.
Develop a GWC meta-database
where agencies could provide
simple real time updates of their
global stock
Continue and integrate the RECA Strengthen capacity building strategies for
initiative with other GWC initiatives coordination platforms whenever necessary
(RRT,
knowledge
management,
reinforcement of CLA capacity for
humanitarian WASH in Regional
Offices)
New initiative
18
Develop
a
consolidated Set-up a two way feedback mechanism
approach
on
information between the GWC and the national
management, in particular coordination platforms
ensure
a
systematic
disaggregated of data by sex and
age
Improve
sanitation
difficult circumstances
under
Assess current gaps in WASH
response and develop a strategy
to meet the new challenges
Outcome 4 Accountability and Learning Facilitates Effective WASH Cluster Action
Core initiative:
Core initiative:
Core initiative:
A: Collective Accountability
B: Lessons Capture and Use C: Knowledge Management
D: Gender Marker
Output 4.1:
Output 4.2:
Output 4.4
Output 4.3:
Core initiative
WASH cluster collective accountability to Lessons learned are captured, WASH
cluster
knowledge Gender markers are included in national WASH
beneficiaries and other stakeholders through the disseminated and used for management strategy and web Cluster operations at 2a or 2b levels
portal finalized and implemented.
set-up and roll out of standardized monitoring future emergencies.
mechanisms
New initiative
New initiative
Develop and disseminate a consolidated
performance monitoring framework for clusters
that systematically captures feedbacks from
beneficiaries
Promote the inclusion of gender markers in WASH
cluster activities, supported by a systematic
information management approach with disaggregated
data by sex and age
Outcome 5: Operational Advocacy for WASH as an Essential Part of Humanitarian Response and Communication in Both Emergency and
Development Fora
Core initiative:
A: Operational Advocacy
19
Output 5.1:
Output 5.2
Output 5.3
WASH cluster agencies agree on key advocacy Advocacy on WASH is systematically promoted and All key WASH cluster partners mainstream commitment to
messages related to WASH in emergencies.
facilitated at national level by WASH cluster coordinators advocate for humanitarian WASH within the humanitarian
and partners
community and the general public
New initiative
Support and monitor operational advocacy done by
national WASH cluster coordinators
Outputs
Output Indicators
111
1.1 Global WASH Cluster is achievable and effective
112
1.2 Global WASH Cluster “working arrangement” model is
achievable and affective
Two workplans (2012-2013 and 2014-2015), after a mid-term review of the
strategy) are developed, costed funded and rolled out for all relevant outputs by
responsible agencies and consolidated by CAST for advocacy.
The strategy outputs are monitored and reported to stakeholders on a quartely
basis.
Target
Outcome 1: Effective coordination and capacity of the Global WASH Cluster
Baseline
Monitoring Framework
0
2
0
16
113
A consultative mid-term review is organized in mid-2013 to adjust the strategy if
required
0
1
121
Working arrangements are issued by the CLA and endorsed by the partners
1
1
122
Working arrangement reviewed in 2012, together with the mid-term review of the
strategy and endorsed at the first cluster meeting in 2013
0
1
123
WASH cluster meetings are organized twice a year with participation of at least 1
national WASH coordination platform
0
8
20
141
1.4 The Global Wash Cluster promotes coherence with
others clusters and internal transparency between WASH
Cluster Stakeholders
142
143
% of outcome budget funded
Priorities on inter-cluster cooperation are jointly identified between CAST and
equivalent structures structures in at least 5 clusters shared and agreed among the
GWC partners in 2012
Joint intercluster activities are defined with at least 5 clusters based on the
priorities set-up by the GWC
Biannually progress reports are shared by CAST with WASH cluster partners and
other stakeholders
Outcome 2: Timely Operational Support to National Wash Cluster responses as needed
Outputs
Output Indicators
211
2.1 Timely global WASH cluster support to coordination at country
level (national and subnational) in emergency is appropriate and
effective (coordination support to emergencies)
2.2 Global and National WASH coordination platforms have
sufficient capacity for effective and timely support at the national
and sub-national levels, in the early days of any cluster based
emergencies (surge mechanisms)
212
% of emergencies for which a WASH Cluster Coordinator and an
Information Manager have been deployed 72 hours after request (barring
visa constraints)
% of rapid onset emergencies (with official and dedicated appeal) with
functional WASH Cluster facilitation (Coordination and IM capacity) within
72 hours of receiving an official request for deployment by the country
office (barring visa constraints)
No
Bas.
80%
0
5
0
5
0
8
Target
131
Baseline
1.3 Resources accessed by participating agencies are
sufficient to support the agreed GWC Strategy
N/A
80%
N/A
80%
213
% of WASH cluster staff and financial resources provided by non-CLA on a
pro bono basis in major emergencies
N/A
tbd
221
% of emergencies for which a Rapid Assessment Team Member has been
deployed within 72 hours of request being approved (barring visa
constraints).
80%
tbd
222
% of RAT deployment delivering new or additional data to the WASH
coordination platform after one week
80%
tbc
21
output Indicator
3.1 The Global WASH cluster provides solid replicable
support tools
New tools are refined or developed based on WASH priority gaps
identified through a stocktaking exercise carried out with WASH cluster
311
coordinators, REWAs, and RECAs to support in-country coordination and
response
An open and effective feedback mechanism on WASH cluster tools is set
312
up
321
3.2 Countries benefit effectively from GWC support at
national and subnational levels
322
3
0
1
N/A
60%
N/A
80%
331
# of regions with a functional coordination platform to build up WASH response
capacity in high risk countries
5
7
332
% of countries by region where WASH coordination platforms have developed a
WASH contingency plan for their primary risks
N/A
60%
341
% of GWC agencies submitting an annual report to the CAST with an estimate of
the expenditures they dedicated in support of the cluster approach in the WASH
sector
0
100%
Outcome 4: "Accountability and learning" facilitates effective WASH Cluster Action
Output
output Indicator
4.1 WASH cluster collective accountability to beneficiaries and other
stakeholders through the set up and roll out of standardized
monitoring mechanisms
411
% of countries in which the WASH cluster has a strategy for improving
its accountability - with particular focus on transparency, feedback and
staff attitudes and behaviour
Target
3.4 Partners of the GWC play an active role in making the
cluster effective in both their HQs and missions
0
Baseline
3.3 Regional capacity facilitates an interface between global
strategy and national action, focusing on a mapping of risks,
vulnerabilities, needs and capacities
% of targeted countries by region where Global WASH cluster tools or national
equivalents are made available to the WASH sector partners before any rapid
onset emergency
% of targeted countries by region having incorporated GWC tools or national
equivalent tools in their response at national and subnational levels
Target
Outputs
Baseline
Outcome3: Improved emergency preparedness of WASH Stakeholders
tbd
80%
22
100%
413
% of WASH clusters that can demonstrate that WASH programmes
have changed - either what they do or how they do it - as a result of
feedback or complaints from beneficiaries
tbd
80%
421
A global mechanism enables to monitor in-country performance and
capture lessons learnt for the WASH cluster
0
1
N/A
100%
N/A
100%
N/A
80%
0
1
0
1
0
1
UNK
80%
<10%
100%
422
423
424
431
4.3 WASH cluster knowledge management strategy and web-portal
finalized and implemented
432
433
4.4 Gender markers are included in national WASH Cluster operations
at 2a or 2b levels
441
442
% of major WASH cluster-based emergency response having gone
through a formal external evaluation by the GWC partners*
% of accountability and learning documentation available on GWC and
ALNAP web-pages
% of lessons learnt applied in subsequent emergencies
A process accepted by the GWC partners is set up to validate and
systematize the lessons learnt at global, national and sub-national
levels
A webportal is functional and updated on a monthly basis and gives
satisfaction to at least 80% of the users
WASH Cluster partners have access to timely and reliable technical
support services that enables also to identify where further lessons
need to be investigated
WASH assessments and information mechanisms organized by regional
platforms contain desegregated data by sex and age
% of WASH Cluster Projected marked as 2a or 2b in CAP
Outcome 5: Operational advocacy for WASH as an essential part of Humanitarian response and Communication in both emergency and development
fora
23
Target
UNK
Baseline
4.2 Lessons learned are captured, disseminated and used for future
emergencies
412
% of WASH coordination platforms that have set-up a feedback
mechanisms as a way of making specific progress in accountability to
beneficiaries
output
output Indicator
5.1 WASH cluster agencies agree on key advocacy messages related to WASH
in emergencies.
511
A joint list of advocacy messages is set-up by WASH Cluster
Partners and disseminated to national WASH coordination
platforms
5.2 Advocacy on WASH is systematically promoted and facilitated at national
level by WASH cluster coordinators and partners
521
% of national WASH clusters implementing an advocacy strategy
for WASH
5.3 All key WASH cluster partners mainstream commitment to advocate for
humanitarian WASH within the humanitarian community and the general
public
531
Nb of humanitarian fora, events, workshops where the WASH
cluster approach has been advocated by partners
0
80%
N/A
80&
1
5
Indicative Budget Needs for 2013-2015 (USD)
2013
Outcome
Total
1
Effective Coordination and Capacity of the GWC
2
Timely Operational Support to National Clusters
3
Improved Emergency Preparedness
4
Accountability and Learning
5
Operational Advocacy
2014
2015
685,000
685,000
685,000
1,868,000
2,600,000
1,868,000
2,850,000
1,868,000
2,850,000
327,000
180,000
180,000
30,000
30,000
30,000
5,510,000
5,613,000
5,613,000
24
Conclusion
The Mid-Term review exercise confirms the importance to build up global and regional capacities to
support WASH cluster / sector coordination and capacity building in-countries as an interim solution to
the shortfall of capacity within those countries. Progressively The GWC partners are renewing their
capacity to effectively backstop national WASH coordination platforms.
Partners reaffirm that they are individually and collectively accountable of the WASH response to the
beneficiaries.
Endorsed by the GWC partners
16 Global WASH Cluster meeting
Nairobi October 17 to October 19, 2012
th
25