Afghanistan Inter Cluster Coordination Team Meeting
DRAFT Minutes of Meeting – April 22, 2015
Participants
ES/NFI:
Walter Bruzzoni (CC), Zainullah Sultani (IOM)
FSAC:
Reggie Xavier (CC), Brian Gray (WFP), Sudip Joshi (PIN)
HEALTH:
Dr Alaa Abouzaid (CC)
NUTRITION:
Leo Matunga (CC), Zakhro Djabbarova (ACF)
PROTECTION:
Khurshed Yunusov (CC), Stuart Brooks (NRC), Bekim Kajtazi (IMO), Matthijs Zeilstra (UNHCR)
WASH:
Rolf Luyendijk (UNICEF), DACAAR Representative
REFUGEE RESPONSE:
OCHA:
Charlotte Ashley (ICC/Chair), Jolly Shah (CCU), Kristin Pristupa (CCU), Ramon Shinkfield (IMU)
OTHERS:
Meeting Opening
1.
OCHA opening remarks


ICC welcomed members and opened the floor outlining status of action points from previous meeting.
Government requested UN & donor portfolio review: The Government has initiated a number of portfolio reviews, specifically looking at the alignment and
scale of UN and donor activities. The UN has prepared and submitted a Portfolio Review providing an overview of programmes under the UNCT. These reflect
substantive efforts in development support across all national development priority areas as well as support in the traditional normative roles of the UN. The
Government is looking for clear justification and value of agencies and has shown particular interest in international staffing numbers as a key issue. At the HCT
meeting the HC made clear that any exit strategies would be linked to operational drawdowns but no complete withdrawal of the UN in its normative functions.
While humanitarian response activities generally fall outside the scope of the Portfolio Review, the Government has shown increasing interest in the scale of
humanitarian assistance along with the measures in place for monitoring impact. OCHA / HC have shared the HRP Response Monitoring Framework, the
development of which has been extremely timely.
The above will also add significance to the planned Humanitarian Architecture Review and particularly the mapping of Government capacity and cooperation.
2.
Review of last meeting action points

ICC reviewed the action points arising from March 31st meeting (refer to table below).
Supporting Service Delivery
3.
Cluster Contingency Planning updates

No expression of interest from clusters demonstrated at this time.
Afghanistan Inter Cluster Coordination Team Meeting, April 22, 2015
1
4.
Spring Flood Preparedness (stocks review and gap analysis), Agreement on Future Process


All clusters have supported review of stock lists in the last month.
In addition to gathering info on all items available across country (detailed stock lists), OCHA has worked with the clusters to identify the most critical items
required for floods. The availability of these items has been translated into the number of people which can be supported in case of emergency in order to provide
an overall analysis and simplified messaging.
Based on the overview prepared, clusters provided analysis on gaps per region; most agreed there is sufficient stock within country that can be relocated as
needed. Only Shelter noted that there would be insufficient stock in the case of a flood scenario with national impact. Nutrition has contingency stock for all
response types (same inputs required), prepositioned in regional warehouses and with all partners but not specific for flood preparedness; 1 month + 10%
contingency stock transferred to every partner. Nutrition cluster also working on sectoral contingency plan.
Clusters (through OCHA) have been asked to provide revised stock situation to government every 2 months; OCHA has been collecting this information to date to
avoid overburdening clusters, however a recent agreement was made to transfer responsibility back to clusters. Clusters are recommended to keep the current
spreadsheet updated, share with partners, record depletion/replenishment of stocks, while OCHA will work with partners to complete the summary overview to
share with regional teams (rather than region upward to national level, as previously done). OCT/HRTs to support, but not to collect themselves anymore. ICCT to
come up with appropriate timeframe for reporting for every cluster (report stocks at same time); some clusters may do more regularly than bimonthly, but
bimonthly at minimum – OCHA to re-communicate deadline in advance. ICCT group agreed on setting joint date now, at two weeks before the 2-month due
date to government (June 22nd deadline for next update from clusters).
o WASH CC noted stock lists are actually for any emergency, not just floods (i.e. separate stocks are not kept for every emergency scenario), so need to
caution/preface this in the future.
o WFP noted their division of stocks by natural hazard and conflict (separate caseload and stock)
o Seasonal element may need to be considered in some cases depending on sector (e.g. pneumonia kits for health)
o Identifying key stocks for upcoming likely/seasonal event is most useful for stakeholders to see high level situation
IOM noted feedback from regions on narrative; stocks listed may cover anticipated caseload, but not all families will be in need of X (e.g. not all families affected
by floods will actually have requirements for shelter) As such the overview may show gaps when there may not be in reality. OCHA IMU will work with the shelter
cluster to determine an estimated % of the affected caseload that is likely to require shelter and Can reduce target caseloads for stocks depending on likelihood
(e.g. people affected vs. people in need of assistance).
Consensus that the process/representation is not exact, it may look like more stock is available; future stock updates can be prefaced.




Planning and Strategy Development
5.
Humanitarian Architecture Review

Rough work plans were provided previously. Now key deliverables/areas of work must be considered, including the need of various stakeholders to engage at
different stages of the process, to be completed by end of July. Clusters requested to think of ways of approaching, gathering/analyzing data and making
recommendations.
Process is IASC mandated and meant to be done within 6 months of a sudden onset emergency, or annually in a protracted situation; despite being an annual
requirement there is very limited documentation of the process taking place elsewhere and limited guidance in terms of tools and approach.
Refer to PowerPoint presentation:
1. Review Coordination Requirements:
i) Changes in humanitarian needs: last review in 2012/13 which resulted in some streamlining (removed communications/logistics, early recovery, EiE
clusters) although wasn’t thoroughly documented. There was some discussion on merging health/nutrition, phasing out ESNFI, transitioning WASH to MRRD,
(file with OCHA on this review if needed). Important to go through process to establish and document recommendations. Process will include:

Looking at trends/changes in level of needs, if any change in sectors where we’re seeing priority needs (requiring cluster structure) – OCHA desk
review of CHAPs/HRPs


ii) Changes in humanitarian context (since review and since clusters were activated): looking at how field coordination has worked/changed. Considering
duration/lifespan of cluster system in Afghanistan, keeping emergency coordination function rather than becoming coordination function for all actors/activities
in a given sector (even development work). What primary functions can/do clusters perform (identifying the need), which government may not yet be able to
take over yet (what is national coordination capacity, why not at point that clusters have to be sustained).
Afghanistan Inter Cluster Coordination Team Meeting, April 22, 2015
2

Looking at clusters in addition to broader systems, TFs, WGs, etc.; how coordination is working at field level.
iii) Changes in national coordination capacity: consideration of clusters’ continued justification. Exit strategies/roadmaps should start to be developed by
end of year. Mapping out various/ongoing capacity building initiatives, handover/alternative approach needs to be envisioned. Process to involve
consultations with government, donors, development partners, etc., to engage everyone in visioning exercise. Importance of acquiring/building commitment
from government to ensure continuity, presence of same staff in key positions, etc.

WFP noted this should include overall push/vision for handover (in coming years), work towards ANDMA/PDMC taking over responses, setting up
lasting structures rather than training individuals. ICCT had overall agreement on this approach as what we’re working towards.

WASH CC noted a likely interim need for the cluster system in terms of collating and reporting into the HCT/HC, as this structure will likely endure for
next few years. Important to jointly envisage how the government system can/should work, and work towards that with joint strategy for phasing out.

PIN noted the need to consider and include development actors as interim/midpoint for handover, medium-longer term capacity building
o Consensus of strong need to focus in more on what cluster system’s very specific humanitarian remit is (further narrowing of HRP), also
considering development partners which are already doing medium-term response work. A paradigm shift is needed, with OCHA/HCT to consider how to
engage government on higher level national coordination structure.

Cluster system has morphed into sector catch-all; need to re-focus only on emergency response/humanitarian coordination remit, tighten its
role/function, putting other/liaising with development structures in place, and allow other DRR/DRM work to continue as it is, along with development
partners (it’s a continuum) – can link cluster to development partners, encouraging development actors to engage in those structures instead.

WFP noted the Organizational Resilience Management System (ORMS) system embraced fully by UN system could be a potential framework for
consideration, noting the division of strategy and operational work, which includes essential element of emergency management.

Need to understand broader government architecture to undertake humanitarian response/coordination, to better see how/what parts of cluster
system/functions can be absorbed and transferred. Individual clusters will have to start working with government counterparts to assess awareness,
appetite, and capacity (conveying that cluster is temporary function). Will have to assess what functions can be handed over to line ministries, and
what to ANDMA

ICCT consensus that reasonable way forward is to discuss with Government how best to handover humanitarian function eventually, including
assessment of best way to integrate/modify existing structures, and determine what needs to be in place to get there – this is a higher level
process/discussion with HCT.
2. Cluster Review Recommendations:

Based on analysis, recommendations on cluster structure can include: status quo, strengthening/expanding, streamlining/merging, transitioning
(feasibility of), or deactivation (if national structures can takeover).
3. Cluster functionality and performance: are clusters operationally effective against core functions?

CCPM results to feed into process; assesses clusters’ fulfillment of core functions/quality work

Stakeholder consultation: survey to be developed by OCHA – WASH CC, Health CC and FSAC Co-lead/WFP offered to support OCHA with
development of survey.
4. TIMELINES: entire Architecture Review process to be completed by end of July at latest, ensuring engagement of HCT throughout process.
Timeframe for review of key milestones include:

April 30th: OCHA desk review of change in humanitarian needs

May 21st: regarding national coordination capacity: cluster and relevant counterparts to consider feasibility of handover, involvement of line ministries,
analysis of the potential and requirements to handover functions. OCHA will send survey, including to government counterparts as recommended by
CCs, and conduct piece of work with ANDMA (general structure of emergency management within government, what’s working/not).

May 31st: OCHA desk review/survey/KIIs and cluster position papers on continued requirements in protracted crisis.

June 4th: Cluster review recommendations: summary report from clusters for expanded HCT presentation (CC’s review of cluster future based on 5
possible outcomes)

June 18th: Cluster functionality and performance: draft CCPM reports by June 18th latest to incorporate findings

CCs requested contact Global Cluster Coordinators to support on this process, who have signed up to Architecture Review, and detailed the cluster
deactivation / transition process in the cluster coordination reference manual, and can provide guidance on methodology.
Afghanistan Inter Cluster Coordination Team Meeting, April 22, 2015
3
Monitoring and Reporting
6.
Q1 reporting process, ICCT indicators and any feedback



Q1 reports are by Thursday April 23rd
Some clusters noted poor partner response in financial reporting, which is further complicated if they’re engaging in both humanitarian and development work.
CCs requested to indicate which partners have reported in order to support visibility of partners in published report, also further indicating which partners have
reported finances (OCHA will document under each Strategic Objective, with special note of partners reporting financing)
ICCT indicators which will be reported on include:
o Use of RAF within 48 hours; in Q1, 40% of RAFs were completed within 2 days (low due to extreme weather events and access as constraints), while
71% were completed within a week;
o Protection mainstreaming will not be included as a strong element as it is just launching (more details to follow in Mid Year Review)

Informing Strategic Decision-Making of the HC/HCT
7.
Gaps, obstacles, priority issues arising from Cluster Meetings (Round Table)



As the ICCT is meant to be the operations arm of HCT, it can improve on this function, including highlighting key issues for HCT to focus on
ICCT to improve operational function
WFP noted a need to consider how to facilitate more dynamic population surveillance (such as with recent towns around Jalalabad emptying), and how to survey
population movements owing to forthcoming Spring offensive.
AOB

Next meeting: Tuesday May 12th, 2pm at UNOCHA
Action points arising April 22nd 2015:
Action
Follow-up on use of RAF compliance by all agencies
Circulate RAF information again including data ‘dump’
Circulate draft note on endorsement and feedback processes to be
followed by clusters
4. WASH and Protection clusters to initiate CCPM survey in April
5. Clusters to keep stockpile list and overall gap analysis updated with
partners, at least bi-monthly, and provide update 2 weeks before
bimonthly due date to government for compilation.
6. Q1 reports to also list which partners have reported (including additional
notation of partners reporting financial information) to support visibility of
partners in published report
Architecture Review related:
7. Distribute Architecture Review TOR to clusters
8. Share Organizational Resilience Management System tools for
consideration/reference as part of Architecture Review process
9. Request support and guidance of Global Cluster Coordinators on
Architecture Review process at cluster level
1.
2.
3.
Responsible
OCHA-IMU and IOM
OCHA-IMU
ESNFI CC
Comments
By April 26th
Status
Pending
Pending
Pending
WASH & Protection CC
All CCs
ASAP
By June 22nd
Pending
Pending
All CCs
On April 23rd
Pending
OCHA
WFP Co-lead
Pending
Pending
All CCs
Pending
Afghanistan Inter Cluster Coordination Team Meeting, April 22, 2015
4
10. Start dialogue with government counterparts to assess awareness,
appetite, and capacity to takeover core cluster functions
11. Discuss with HCT regarding opening discussion with Government on how
best to handover humanitarian function eventually, including assessment
of best way to integrate/modify existing structures, and roadmap.
12. Complete desk review on changes in humanitarian needs
13. Review potential and requirements to transfer cluster coordination
functions based on national coordination capacity
14. Complete desk review, survey and KIIs on changes in humanitarian
context/ required coordination structures
15. Cluster position papers on continued requirements in protracted crisis
16. Summary report from clusters on cluster review recommendations, with
initial presentation to expanded HCT
17. Draft CCPM reports from clusters
All CCs
Pending
OCHA
May 17th HCT
Pending
OCHA
CCs and counterparts
By April 30th
By May 21st
Pending
Pending
OCHA, with support of
WASH CC, Health CC
and WFP on survey
All CCs
OCHA and CCs
By May 31st
Pending
By May 31st
By June 4th
Pending
Pending
CCs
By June 18th
Pending
Comments
04/22: Standing item, not expecting
imminently
Status
Pending
Action points arising March 31st 2015:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Action
ICCT to follow up Government evaluation report of Extreme weather
response
ANDMA to share details of MRRD reconstruction plans
Agencies not using the RAF to be raised at HCT
Responsible
ANDMA, OCHA
Clusters to review RAF data and notify OCHA of intentions to conduct
further assessments. OCHA to share information among clusters and
facilitate coordinated approach.
All clusters/ OCHA
04/22: Reports of some agencies
not using RAF (e.g. ECHO report in
Kunduz); parallel follow-up to be
conducted by OCHA field offices,
and IOM.
By 2 April/ end of the week.
Protection cluster to inform OCHA of items to be added to stock list
OCHA to recirculate stock list and CP formats
Clusters to review stock list, calculations on beneficiary caseload and
shared overview and topline messages on contingency planning. Clusters
to identify existing gaps in stocks and provide monetary value of gap.
ESNFI CC to develop draft note on endorsement and feedback processes
to be followed by clusters
OCHA to share 4 day flood forecast with ICCT
Clusters to review zero draft of RAF and share feedback with OCHA IMU
Clusters to feedback to OCHA on protection mainstreaming proxy
indicators proposed (OCHA to circulate by email).
Clusters in position to brief on contingency planning at the next ICCT to
notify OCHA
Clusters to initiate CCPM exercise in April
Protection cluster
OCHA
All clusters
04/22: OCHA did not receive any
feedback. All 2014 data is on
website, IMU will circulate RAF
information again via email.
By COB 1 April
By COB 31 March
By COB 1 April
ANDMA, OCHA
OCHA
Pending
Pending
Pending
Completed
Completed
Completed
ESNFI CC, ICCT
Pending
OCHA
All clusters
All clusters
Completed
Completed
Completed
Relevant clusters
All clusters
04/22: no clusters expressed
interest
04/22: All clusters have initiated
surveys, except for WASH and
protection
Pending
Pending
Afghanistan Inter Cluster Coordination Team Meeting, April 22, 2015
5
Afghanistan Inter Cluster Coordination Team Meeting, April 22, 2015
6