Coordination Meetings Initial Period Current Period
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CAR LL Report Annex 4: Overview of surveys v Two user surveys were done for CAR: 1) Survey 1: Targeting logisticians that were present in 2013 when the Logistics Cluster was activated: • Sent to 49 people from 40 organisations (47 organisations in CAR in December 2013); • 13 answers collected (some partial); • Response rate was 27 percent (of all recipients). 2) Survey 2: Targeting logisticians currently present in the country: • Shared through the CAR mailing list – sent to 69 people from 61 organisations (currently there are 110 organisation in CAR); • 19 answers collected (some partial); • Response rate was 28 percent (of all recipients). Survey results Respondents I v Characteristics of respondents: • They are mainly from INGOs or UN organisations; • Most of the respondents are logistics coordinators/officers; • The most represented sectors are Food Security and Health. Initial Period Current Period Organisation INGO (54%), UN (31%), Local NGO (15%). INGO (68%), UN (21%), Local NGO (5%). type Position Logistics coordinator/officer (62%), logistics Logistics coordinator/officer (47%), logistics (11%) (23%) and head of mission (8%). and head of mission (11%). Sector (top 3) Food Security, followed by Health, and Food Security, Protection, Health/Logistics. Nutrition. Location 20 locations - Bangui, Bambari, Batangafo, 24 locations - Alindao, Bandoro, Bangui, Bambari, Benzivi, Berberati, Bocaranga, Boda, Bamingi Bagoran, Bakouma, Berbérati, Birao, Boali, Bossangoa, Bouar, Bria, Carno, Kaga, Bossangoa, Bossombele, Bouar, Kabo, Kaga, Mbaiki, Kouango, Mbaiki, Mboki, Ndele, Obo, Paoua, Ndélé, Obo, Paoua, Rafai, Sibut, Tiringoulou, Yaloke, Sibut, Zemio. Zemio. Survey results Respondents II v Characteristics of respondents (cont): • More than 50% participate regularly or frequently in meetings; Initial Period Current Period Participation in 54% participated regularly or 61% participated regularly or frequently in meetings frequently in cluster meetings. cluster meetings. Utilisation of - 31% frequently or regularly used - 56 % frequently or regularly used air services level air services; services; - 54% frequently or regularly used - 44% frequently or regularly used IM/GIS IM/GIS products. products. Survey Findings Strategy v Appropriateness of the Logistics Cluster Strategy: The Logistics Cluster strategy (as per Concept of Operation – ConOPS), which was initially found appropriate by only 44%, is now considered appropriate by 79% of the respondents. Main comments/Initial period: • The Cluster did not facilitate Was the Strategy outlined in the ConOps anything except for information appropriate? • It did not address corridor issues Main comments/current period: Non, 21% • The Cluster shares information Non, 56% on operational challenges and is open Oui, 79% to suggestions Oui, 44% • The Cluster has facilitated road and bridge rehabilitation INITIAL PERIOD CURRENT PERIOD Survey Findings Strategy v The respondents mentioned the following challenges to be the main logistical challenges faced when delivering cargo to final destination: Initial Period Current Period Secure access (transport). Difficulties in Customs and customs clearance finding trucks and drivers willing to transport with the difficult security situation. Difficult to have escorts organised. Tried sending cargo per flight but this was Access. Especially in the South East (Road dropped because we were not able to conditions, Insecurity, unpredictable flights) receive answers to our questions. Information on security (for arranging Mandatory military escorts transport) Transport availability The state of the roads, bridges and ferries N/A Threat of theft of cargo on the route from Bangui to Bossembélé Survey Findings Strategy v The Logistics Cluster was perceived significantly better at addressing the challenges in the current period (60% versus 17%) • Initial Period • Current Period Were you able to meet the challenges with Were you able to meet the challenges with the help from the Logistics Cluster? the help from the Logistics Cluster? 17% Yes Yes 40% No No 60% 83% Survey Findings Strategy v Gaps in services: In the initial period 72% of respondents found that the Logistics Cluster did not address all gaps and should provide additional services. In the current period, this was down to 17%. Initial period Current period No Yes 29% 17% Yes Yes No 71% No 83% The additional services requested were: Both periods: road transport coordination, coordination for improving access, improved Initial period: effective coordination Survey Findings Strategy v One key reason for the change in perception of the performance of the Logistics Cluster from the Initial Period to the Current Period was that the Cluster was seen to better live up to its commitments: • Initial Period • Current Period Do you think the Logistics Cluster has met its Do you think the Logistics Cluster has met its commitments? commitments? 8% Yes No 40% Yes No 60% 92% Survey Findings Coordination v Logistics Cluster rating: Listen and responding to needs Encourage Collaboration 8% 0% 8%0% 8% 13% 0% 8% 23% 13% 0% 13% 23% 50% Has 31% 23% 38% Good 0% improved 38% 25% 31% 25% Significant INITIAL PERIOD CURRENT PERIOD INITIAL PERIOD CURRENT PERIOD Excellent Très bon Bon Mauvais Très mauvais N/A difference Excellent Très bon Bon Mauvais Très mauvais N/A between intial Liaison with key actors (customs, period and Quality of coordination authorities etc.) current 11% 7% 0% 7%0% 0% 15% 11% 8% 14% 25% 0% 31% Can be 44% 43% 38% Has 23% 0% improved 11% 25% 23% 22% improved 29% INITIAL PERIOD CURRENT PERIOD INITIAL PERIOD CURRENT PERIOD Excellent Très bon Bon Mauvais Très mauvais N/A Excellent Très bon Bon Mauvais Très mauvais N/A Coordination Survey Findings meetings v Suggestions for improvement were: Initial period Current period At the time there was too much turnover of LC, which Improve leadership of the cluster resulted in repetition in meetings The capacity of the Cluster was limited compared to Better meeting palace for the communication its autonomy. meetings Certain issues that have little value recur in all NGOs should be better at accepting that the UN meetings agencies use their common warehouse Lack of added value from the meetings Better observation of changes in e-mail notifications More focus on practical and operational elements There is not enough focus on coordination between NGOs and the Cluster Agendas should differ from time to time. They tend to Allowing the Logistics Cluster Manager to go on field have the same topics visits to the locations to better evaluate and monitor projects N/A Safety has a strong impact on logistics. Therefore it would be good to include security as a small point on the agenda Survey Results Overall Performance v Key strengths and weaknesses: • Initial Period • Current Period Key Strengths Key Weaknesses Key Strengths Key Weaknesses Sharing information and The administrative The communication Lack of effective data burden and policy does network coordination not allow for a rapid and strong implementation Rapid response to No field visit by the Meetings organised with The involvement of requests from partners Logistics Cluster major suppliers government actors: Coordinator Ministry of Transport, Customs, Trade Clear focal point to Segregation between Association. coordinate action NGOs and UN agencies The means (finances and N/A hardware) Very good network of Updating of distribution Good cooperation N/A contacts and suppliers lists Good information-flow Periods of absence Survey Results Recommendations v Key Recommendations: • Initial Period • Current Period Coordination IM Common Coordination IM Common services: services: More focus on Inform ConOps More Strengthening Strengthening Extending the operational and partners of coordination communication communication level of the sub humanitarian various reports on offices response (via and tools which humanitarian Regular Update logistics Having NGOs) are available on projects presentations at databases on competitive costs the website the ICC website More presence in N/A Convoy the field facilitation More involvement N/A N/A from partners.