STRATEGIC EVALUATION FAO/WFP Joint Evaluation of Food Security Cluster Coordination in Humanitarian Action
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
measuring results, sharing lessons results, measuring sharing STRATEGIC EVALUATION FAO/WFP Joint Evaluation of Food Security Cluster Coordination in Humanitarian Action A Strategic Evaluation Evaluation Report August 2014 Prepared by Julia Steets, Team Leader; James Darcy, Senior Evaluator; Lioba Weingärtner, Senior Evaluator; Pierre Leguéné, Senior Evaluator Commissioned by the FAO and WFP Offices of Evaluation Report number: OEV/2013/012 Acknowledgements The evaluation team would like to thank all of those who provided support and input for this evaluation. We are particularly grateful for the clear guidance and constructive cooperation of the evaluation managers, the extensive support of the Food Security Cluster’s Global Support Team, the input and feedback of the Reference Group, the excellent facilitation of all of our country missions by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the World Food Programme (WFP) and the many individuals working for the United Nations, and the international and national NGOs and governments that provided their time and insights by participating in the survey and in interviews. Our special thanks go to Rahel Dette and Maximilian Norz, who provided valuable research support. Disclaimer The opinions expressed are those of the Evaluation Team, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) or the World Food Programme (WFP). Responsibility for the opinions expressed in this report rests solely with the authors. Publication of this document does not imply endorsement by FAO or WFP of the opinions expressed. The designations employed and the presentation of material in the maps do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of FAO or WFP concerning the legal or constitutional status of any country, territory or sea area, or concerning the delimitation of frontiers. Evaluation Management Evaluation Managers: Lori Bell, Evaluation Officer, FAO Tullia Aliazzi, Senior Evaluation Officer, FAO Ross Smith, Evaluation Officer, WFP Pernille Hougesen, Evaluation Officer, WFP Directors, Offices of Helen Wedgwood, WFP Evaluation: Masahiro Igarashi, FAO Table of Contents Executive Summary...................................................................................... i 1. Introduction .......................................................................................... 1 1.1. Context and background .......................................................................................... 1 1.2. Evaluation features ...................................................................................................2 2. Evaluation findings: Effects of food security coordination on humanitarian organisations and their activities ....................................... 8 2.1. Stronger relationships and trust among organisations .......................................9 2.2. Crucial, but inconsistent contributions to needs assessment and analysis .... 11 2.3. Strong engagement in strategy formulation with limited results .................... 15 2.4. Duplications avoided, little active role in addressing gaps ............................... 18 2.5. Effects on technical standards variable, little attention to other quality issues at country level ................................................................................................................. 20 2.6. Much stronger reporting, little learning ............................................................. 22 2.7. Little engagement in preparedness, with promising pilots ............................. 24 2.8. Effects on beneficiaries and cost-benefit .............................................................25 3. Factors influencing the effectiveness of food security coordination mechanisms............................................................................................... 31 3.1. Focus and priorities of the coordination mechanism ........................................ 31 3.2. Inclusiveness and participation ........................................................................... 33 3.3. Support by the Global Support Team and the lead agencies ........................... 40 3.4. Clarity of roles, responsibilities and boundaries ............................................... 43 4. Conclusions and recommendations ................................................... 46 4.1. Overall assessment ................................................................................................ 46 4.2. Recommendations ................................................................................................. 49 Annexes ..................................................................................................... 53 Annex 1. Suggestions for operational improvement ....................................................53 Annex 2. Terms of reference of the evaluation ............................................................ 60 Annex 3. Key documents consulted for the evaluation ...............................................74 Annex 4. Methods ............................................................................................................ 78 Annex 5. List of interviewees / persons consulted...................................................... 90 Acronyms................................................................................................. 106 List of Tables Table 1: Factors correlated to trust building.............................................................................11 Table 2: Overview of food security coordination capacities and funding................................29 Table 3: Evaluation matrix ......................................................................................................83 List of Figures Figure 1: Theory of change of food security coordination ......................................................... 4 Figure 2: Country studies conducted for this evaluation........................................................... 6 Figure 3: Relevance of services and activities offered by the coordination mechanism ...........8 Figure 4: Agreement with statement “coordination has increased trust between different actors” ...................................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 5: Correlation between clarity of responsibilities and trust-building .......................... 10 Figure 6: Gaps in activities relating to needs assessments and analyses ................................ 14 Figure 7: Correlation between the development of common response plans and the balance between food aid and agriculture ............................................................................................ 17 Figure 8: Gaps in activities to exchange good practices and encourage lesson learning ........ 23 Figure 9: Overall effectiveness of food security coordination .................................................26 Figure 10: Perceptions on whether or not the food security coordination mechanism is a worthwhile investment ............................................................................................................28 Figure 11: Pooled funds as part of total humanitarian funding in the case study countries ... 36 Figure 12: Effectiveness rating of the FSC by stakeholder groups .......................................... 41 Figure 13: Interviewees by country .......................................................................................... 79 Figure 14: Interviewees by organisational background ........................................................... 79 Figure 15: Survey responses by country (only countries with at least 10 responses) ............. 80 Figure 16: Organisational background of survey respondents ................................................ 81 Figure 17: Role of the respondents’ organisation in the coordination mechanism ................. 81 List of Boxes Box 1: Good practice in disseminating needs assessment findings ......................................... 13 Box 2: Good practice on actively addressing gaps ................................................................... 19 Box 3: Good practice in providing guidance for cash & voucher interventions ...................... 21 Box 4: Good practice in contingency planning ........................................................................ 25 Box 5: Good practice in having a clear purpose for meetings and other coordination activities .................................................................................................................................................. 32 Box 6: Good practice in supporting national coordination mechanisms ................................38 Box 7: Good practice in providing strong leadership .............................................................. 43 Executive Summary Introduction Context and Background 1. The Emergency Relief Coordinator and the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) introduced the cluster system in 2005 as part of a wider reform of the humanitarian system. In 2010, the global food security cluster (FSC), co-led by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and WFP, was created to coordinate food security interventions in emergencies. 2. The global FSC has 47 members and a Global Support Team (GST), based in Rome with an average of 12 staff members and a cumulative budget of USD 7 million for January 2011 to January