Strengthening UNICEF's Humanitarian Action - THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Strengthening UNICEF’s Humanitarian Action THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Strengthening UNICEF’s Humanitarian Action THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS September 2020
Contents
Abbreviations 4
Preface 5
Glossary of Terms 7
Executive Summary 11
Background 11
Methodology 11
Key findings 11
Recommendations 14
PART 1. Introduction and Background 17
1.1 Review Process 18
1.2 Data Analysis and Limitations 20
1.3 Report Structure 20
1.4 Beyond the Review 21
PART 2. The Current and Future Context of Humanitarian Action 22
2.1 Current and Projected Funding Trends 22
2.2 A Changing Operational Context: Emergency Types 25
2.3 A Changing Operational Context: Country Classification 27
2.4 Cross-Cutting Concerns 28
PART 3. Predictability, Quality, Timeliness and Equity of UNICEF’s Humanitarian Action 33
3.1 Revising the Core Commitments for Children in Humanitarian Action 34
3.2 New Emergency Procedures 34
3.3 Revised Emergency Preparedness Procedure 34
3.4 Prioritization and Accountability in Humanitarian Action 35
3.5 Recommendations to Improve UNICEF’s Humanitarian Action 36
PART 4. Humanitarian Leadership and Capacity-Building 37
4.1 Supporting and Building Staff Capacity 37
4.2 Investing in Leadership 38
4.3 Emergencies as Prestigious Working Environments 40
4.4 Improving Career Management 40
4.5 Building Humanitarian Capacity 42
4.6 Methods for Rapid Scale-Up and Scale-Down 44
4.7 Improving Surge Mechanisms 45
4.8 Duty of Care 47
4.9 Stay and Deliver, and Remote Programming 47
2 STRENGTHENING UNICEF’S HUMANITARIAN ACTIONPART 5. Corporate Commitment to Humanitarian Action 49
5.1 Many Conditionalities and Few Flexible Funds 49
5.2 Coherent Advocacy 53
5.3 Linking Humanitarian and Development Programming 55
PART 6. Accountability 61
6.1 Risk Management 61
6.2 Humanitarian Access 64
6.3 Localization 67
6.4 Accountability to Affected Populations 69
6.5 Cooperation with International Actors 71
6.6 Data Collection and Analysis 74
Afterword 79
Annexes
Annex I. Terms of Reference of the Humanitarian Review – Strengthening
UNICEF’s Humanitarian Action 80
Annex II. Desk Review Documents List 85
Annex III. List of Members of the External Advisory Group 88
Annex IV. List of Interviewees 89
Annex V. Participant List of Senior Management Validation Workshops 91
Annex VI. Interview Methodology and Guidance 92
Boxes
Considering CO capacity in emergency planning: learning from COVID-19 28
Cash as a programme modality 30
Innovations and public health emergencies 31
Workforce diversification 41
Cluster coordination as a core function 43
The challenge of calculating humanitarian expenditure 50
Innovative finance 52
The Global COVID-19 Advocacy Framework 54
Leveraging National Committees for humanitarian action in high-income countries 56
Making developmental gains from humanitarian action: Collaborating with the Onalab 58
Using emergency cash transfer programming to improve social protection systems 59
Ensuring access to life-saving information: U Report 71
Figures
Figure 1: Humanitarian review road map 19
Figure 2: UNICEF humanitarian funding trend, 2007–2019 22
Figure 3: Global humanitarian funding trend, 2007–2019 23
Figure 4: Children in need by emergency type, 2018–2020 23
Figure 5: Top 20 HAC countries: Humanitarian spending by crisis type, 2018 24
Figure 6: Top 20 HAC countries: Humanitarian spending by crisis type, 2020 24
Figure 7: Global emergency typology in 2019 24
THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3Abbreviations
AAP Accountability to Affected Populations KII Key Informant Interview
CCCs
Core Commitments for Children in LHD linking humanitarian and development
Humanitarian Action M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
CERP Climate, Environment, Resilience and MIS management information system(s)
Peacebuilding Unit
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
CHTE Complex, High-Threat Environment
NSAG Non-State Armed Groups
CO Country Office
OCHA Office for the Coordination of
COVID-19 Coronavirus Disease 2019 Humanitarian Affairs
CPD Country Programme Document OED Office of the Executive Director
DAPM Division of Analysis, Planning and ORR Other Resources Regular (budget)
Monitoring
PBR Programme Budget Review
DFAM Division of Financial and
Administrative Management PCA Project Cooperation Agreement
DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo PD Programme Document
EAG External Advisory Group PFP Private Fundraising and Partnerships
EMOPS UNICEF Office of Emergency PHEIC Public Health Emergency of
Programmes International Concern
EPP Emergency Preparedness Platform PM&E Programme Monitoring and Evaluation
ERT Emergency Response Team PPD Public Partnerships Division
FAI First Action Initiative PPE personal protective equipment
FO Field Office PSEA Protection from Sexual Exploitation
and Abuse
HAC Humanitarian Action for Children
RO Regional Office
HAF Humanitarian Access Framework
R&R Rest and Recuperation
HIC High-Income Country
RR Regular Resources (budget)
HQ Headquarters
RRT Rapid Response Team
HR Human Resources
SBP Stand-By Partner
HRP Humanitarian Response Plan
SMQ Strategic Monitoring Question
IB Institutional Budget
SOP Standard Operating Procedures
IRT Immediate Response Team
UNDSS United Nations Department for Safety
ICRC International Committee of the and Security
Red Cross
UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner
ICVA International Council of for Refugees
Voluntary Agencies
US$ United States Dollar
IDPs Internally Displaced Persons
WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
IHL International Humanitarian Law
WFP World Food Programme
INGO International Non-Governmental
Organization WHO World Health Organization
IOM International Organization for Migration
4 STRENGTHENING UNICEF’S HUMANITARIAN ACTIONPreface
In 2020, the number of people targeted for humanitarian
assistance was 108 million – the highest of all time
OVER THE PAST 10 YEARS, we have seen a rapidly changing and evolving
humanitarian landscape.
The number, scale, duration, and complexity of humanitarian crises have increased
dramatically, notably in violent conflicts and refugee and migration settings and public
health emergencies.
These increases mean that more people than ever before are counting on UN
humanitarian assistance. In 2020, the number of people targeted for this assistance
was 108 million – the highest of all time.
At UNICEF, more than half of our annual global expenditure was spent on
humanitarian action for several years, including our response to COVID-19.
Given these increases, and the growing stakes for affected populations, a review of
how we can improve the equity, the quality, the predictability, and the timeliness of
our humanitarian work could not be more timely.
This review surveys past evaluations and complements the findings of
comprehensive internal and external consultations, as well as experiences emerging
from our COVID-19 response. The outcome provides excellent opportunities to
improve our overall humanitarian responses in terms of targeting, timeliness, and
quality.
Since the beginning of the review process, consultations have yielded positive
feedback on UNICEF’s humanitarian action to deliver results for children. This was
particularly evident from interviews with the External Advisory Group (EAG), which
appreciated UNICEF as a valued partner – and often, a leader – in its sectoral areas of
focus.
The review also uncovered some lingering weaknesses that need to be addressed by
the organization and offers some bold and timely recommendations to address them.
We welcome these recommendations. While some can be quickly implemented,
others will require a long-term approach, including investment. We look forward
to working with our partners across the humanitarian system to weave these
recommendations throughout our humanitarian response architecture.
I want to express my sincere gratitude to all who contributed to the review. The
EAG – which includes donors, sister agencies, NGO partners and key thinkers
on humanitarian action – provided invaluable insights and views. We are deeply
grateful for their time and availability in sharing their competent and knowledgeable
experience and suggestions for UNICEF to improve its humanitarian action.
THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5I also want to thank all UNICEF colleagues who contributed to the review, through
interviews, workshops or various feedback or inputs. I have once more seen first-
hand the passion and dedication of colleagues to UNICEF’s mandate. I believe that
all UNICEF staff and partners will find the findings, insights, and recommendations
herein useful and timely.
I wish also to extend my gratitude to the team that led the humanitarian review:
Bernt Aasen, Steven Lauwerier, Hannah Curwen and Frederic Cave who coordinated
the process and produced this report.
As we face the growing needs of these emergencies, I am confident that this review
will help us make our humanitarian responses stronger, more effective, and more
targeted in the coming years.
Omar Abdi
UNICEF Deputy Executive Director
for Programmes
6 STRENGTHENING UNICEF’S HUMANITARIAN ACTIONGlossary of Terms
Accountability to affected populations (AAP): option can be arranged. It ‘bridges’ the gap
The ability of all vulnerable, at-risk and crisis- between the point at which a company’s money
affected girls, women and men supported through is set to run out and when it can expect to receive
UNICEF humanitarian actions to hold UNICEF to an infusion of funds. This type of financing is
account for promoting and protecting their rights normally used to fulfil an organization’s short-term
and generating effective results for them, taking working capital needs.4
into consideration their needs, concerns and
preferences, and working in ways that enhance Catastrophe bonds: These allow entities
their dignity, capacities and resilience.1 exposed to natural disaster risk to transfer a
portion of that risk to bond investors. They work
Blended finance: A range of instruments that in a similar way to insurance, paying out when a
use grant funding to attract further private sector disaster event meets certain pre-defined criteria
investment in emerging markets.2 (such as a specified earthquake magnitude).5
Blockchain technology: A blockchain is a Co-funding initiative: An emergency
decentralized ledger of all transactions across preparedness initiative that seeks to support
a peer-to-peer network. Using this technology, investments by Country Offices and Regional
participants can confirm transactions without the Offices to enhance the preparedness of UNICEF,
need for a central clearing authority. Potential partners and government actors in the short-,
applications include fund transfers, settling medium- or long term. This may be in relation to
trades, voting, and many other issues.3 single or multiple risks, preferably in medium- or
high-risk countries.
Blueprint for action: A plan of action that sets
out a vision to address a certain issue. As of Complex humanitarian emergency: A human-
June 2020, UNICEF is working on joint blueprints itarian crisis in a country, region or society
for action with the UN High Commissioner for where there is total or considerable breakdown
Refugees (UNHCR; Education, Water, Sanitation of authority resulting from internal or external
and Hygiene (WASH) and Child Protection conflict, which requires an international response
needs of refugee children) and the World Food that goes beyond the mandate or capacity of any
Programme (WFP; nutritional needs of children). single and/or ongoing UN country programme.6
Bridge financing: Often in the form of a bridge Core Commitments to Children (CCCs): A
loan, this is an interim financing option that global framework for humanitarian action for
companies and other entities use to solidify their children undertaken by UNICEF and its partners.
short-term position until a long-term financing It is guided by international human rights law,
1 UNICEF, Putting People at the Centre of Humanitarian Action: Integrating accountability to affected people, UNICEF,
New York, March 2017.
2 Willitts-King, Barnaby, Roshni Assomull, John Bryant, Clare McCartney, Tej Dhami and Dominic Llewellyn
with Sarah Adamczyk, New Financing Partnerships for Humanitarian Impact, Humanitarian Policy Group, London,
January 2019, , accessed 4 September 2020.
3 PwC, ‘Making sense of bitcoin, cryptocurrency and blockchain’, USA, 2017–2020, , accessed 4 September 2020.
4 Mitchell, Cory, ‘Bridge Financing’. Investopedia, 27 July 2020, ,
accessed 4 September 2020.
5 World Bank, Disaster Risk Insurance Platform: Insurance Solutions for World Bank Clients, World Bank, Washington
D.C., January 2020, , accessed 4 September 2020.
6 IASC, ‘Definition of Complex Emergencies’, Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Working Group XVIth Meeting,
30 November 1994.
THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7the Convention on the Rights of the Child and, Equity-based approach in humanitarian
in the case of complex emergencies, also by action: Equity means that all children have an
international humanitarian law. On an operational opportunity to survive, develop and reach their
level, the CCCs are based on global standards and full potential, without discrimination, bias or
norms for humanitarian action.7 favouritism. It also means identifying risks and
underlying vulnerabilities, targeting humanitarian
Corporate emergency activation procedure: action to, and prioritizing the needs of, those who
An executive directive issued by UNICEF to are most vulnerable and disadvantaged.12 UNICEF
strengthen its capacity to respond immediately is committed to an equity-based approach in
and effectively to a Level 3 (large-scale) humanitarian action.
emergency. It outlines the required chain of
command and operating procedures. E-tools: A platform to strengthen efficiency
and results in UNICEF’s core work processes
Coverage: UNICEF defines this as “the extent (work planning, partnership management,
to which major population groups facing life- implementation monitoring) in development
threatening suffering are being (or were) reached and humanitarian contexts. These include the
by humanitarian action”.8 Guidance provided Partnership Management Portal and the Field
by the World Food Programme expands this Monitoring Module.
to include providing “impartial assistance and
protection proportionate to need”,9 which First Action Initiative (FAI): An emergency
addresses concerns raised in the Scoping preparedness initiative designed to help Country
Report10 about the breadth of assistance and the Offices rapidly increase UNICEF’s standing
requirement for its timing to reflect need. capacity to deliver an initial life-saving response
to a likely humanitarian emergency due to an
Cryptocurrency: A medium of financial exchange imminent/high risk. Countries eligible for the
created and stored electronically in the blockchain FAI are identified through UNICEF’s Office of
using encryption techniques to control the Emergency Programmes’ horizon-scanning
creation of monetary units and to verify the process. Actions to be considered for potential
transfer of funds. Bitcoin is the best-known recipients of FAI funding are focused on
example. It has no intrinsic value and no physical preparedness for an initial life-saving response
form, existing only in the network. Its supply (first two weeks). A FAI investment should result
is not determined by a central bank, and the in significant time and/or financial savings.
network is completely decentralized.11
Hard-to-reach or access-constrained areas:
Emergency Preparedness Platform (EPP): An For the purpose of this report, these are locations
online tool for implementing UNICEF’s Procedure that are remote or insecure, making them difficult
on Preparedness for Emergency Response. for members of the humanitarian community
Emergency preparedness procedure: to reach.
Mandatory procedure that ensures that Humanitarian access: The ability of humanitarian
preparedness is mainstreamed across UNICEF actors to reach populations affected by crisis,
through mandatory Minimum Preparedness and an affected population’s ability to access
Actions (MPAs) and Minimum Preparedness humanitarian assistance and services.13
Standards (MPSs) for Country Offices (COs),
Regional Offices (ROs) and Headquarters (HQ). Humanitarian action: Assistance, protection
and advocacy in response to humanitarian
needs resulting from natural hazards, armed
7 UNICEF, Core Commitments for Children in Humanitarian Action, UNICEF, New York, 2020.
8 This definition was used in the Scoping Report and is taken from Buchanan-Smith, Margie, John Cosgrave and
Alexandra Warner, Evaluation of Humanitarian Action Guide, ALNAP/ODI, London, 2016, p. 114.
9 WFP, Technical Note: Evaluation criteria and questions, World Food Programme (WFP), Rome, Italy, 2016, p. 3.
10 Schenkenberg, Ed & Velina Stoianova, Light Landscape Analysis to Support UNICEF’s Humanitarian Action Review,
November 2019 (February 2020 version).
11 PwC, ‘Making sense of bitcoin, cryptocurrency and blockchain’, USA, 2017–2020, , accessed 4 September 2020.
12 UNICEF, UNICEF Reference Document for Emergency Preparedness and Response, UNICEF, New York, 2017.
13 UN OCHA, OCHA on Message: Humanitarian access, Version 1, United Nations Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs (UN OCHA), New York, 2010.
8 STRENGTHENING UNICEF’S HUMANITARIAN ACTIONconflict or other causes, or emergency response Non-state entities: These include armed
preparedness.14 or unarmed groups. Depending on the context,
these could include: militias, armed opposition
Humanitarian principles: The principles of groups, guerrillas, pandillas (gangs) and
humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence paramilitary groups; or state-like groups
underline all humanitarian action. The Core (self-declared states that are not recognized,
Commitments for Children in Humanitarian Action or only partially recognized, by the international
are grounded in these principles and UNICEF is community); or ‘de facto authorities’, which
committed to applying them in its humanitarian have effective control of territory and self-
action. The UN has taken up the principles, governing administration but do not seek
derived from international humanitarian law, in independence or secession.17
General Assembly resolutions 46/182 and 58/114.
The Code of Conduct underscores their global Programme criticality: An approach that involves
recognition and relevance for the International determining which programmes are most critical
Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, Non- in each part of a country (in terms of saving lives
Governmental Organizations in Disaster Relief and or requiring immediate delivery) and therefore
the Core Humanitarian Standard on Quality and warrant accepting a greater level of risk or a
Accountability.15 greater allocation of resources.18
Innovative financing: A range of mechanisms Public health emergencies of international
intended to raise more money from capital concern (PHEICs): The 2005 international health
markets for development and humanitarian aid, regulations define these as, “an extraordinary
leveraging and supplementing the grants from event which is determined… to constitute a
governments, foundations and private donations public health risk to other states through the
that currently provide the bulk of resources for international spread of disease; and to potentially
aid responses.16 require a coordinated international response”.19
Recent examples include the global COVID-19
Integrated programming: The intentional pandemic, and the West African Ebola outbreaks
combining of one or more sector interventions of 2014 and 2018.
by UNICEF to achieve improved humanitarian
outcomes. Quality: The extent to which UNICEF adheres
to its Core Commitments for Children in
Levels of emergency response (L1, L2, L3): Humanitarian Action benchmarks, plus its
The scale of an emergency is such that: at supplementary commitments to: 1) the Core
Level 1, a UNICEF Country Office can respond Humanitarian Standard (including related
using its own staff, funding, supplies and Commitments to Accountability to Affected
other resources, and the usual Regional Office/ Populations); 2) technical standards for
Headquarters (HQ) support. At Level 2, a UNICEF humanitarian programming (primarily Sphere,
Country Office needs additional support from Inter-Agency Network for Education in
other parts of the organization (HQ, Regional Emergencies, and the Child Protection Minimum
Office and Country Offices) to respond and the Standards); 3) high-level common themes of the
Regional Office must provide leadership and World Humanitarian Summit and related Grand
support. At Level 3, the emergency requires Bargain commitments, as reflected in UNICEF’s
UNICEF-wide mobilization. Strategic Plan 2018–2021.
14 IASC, Introduction to Humanitarian Action: A brief guide for resident coordinators, Inter-Agency Standing Committee
(IASC), New York, 2015.
15 UNICEF, Core Commitments for Children in Humanitarian Action, UNICEF, New York, 2010.
16 Willitts-King, Barnaby, Roshni Assomull, John Bryant, Clare McCartney, Tej Dhami and Dominic Llewellyn with Sarah
Adamczyk, New Financing Partnerships for Humanitarian Impact, Humanitarian Policy Group, London, January 2019,
, accessed 4 September 2020.
17 UNICEF, Engaging with Non-State Entities (NSEs): Programme guidance, UNICEF, New York, (forthcoming).
18 Egeland, Jan, Adele Harmer and Abby Stoddard, To Stay and Deliver: Good practice for humanitarians in complex
security environments, UN OCHA, New York, February 2011, , accessed 4 September 2020.
19 WHO, ‘IHR Procedures Concerning Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEIC)’, World Health
Organization (WHO), Geneva, Switzerland, 2005, , accessed 4 September 2020.
THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9Remote programming: Programming without UN security risk management: A UN Security
the presence of staff due to unacceptable security Management System tool to identify, analyse
risks or the denial of access by authorities.20 and manage safety and security risks to UN
personnel, assets and operations. The tool is
Risk-informed programming: An approach risk-based, not threat-based. While threats are
to programming that aims to reduce the risk assessed as part of the process, decisions are
of hazards, shocks and stresses on children’s taken based on the assessment of risk.22
well-being, their communities and systems,
contributing to resilient development.21
20 UNICEF, Remote Programming in Humanitarian Action: Programme guidance, UNICEF, New York, 2012.
21 UNICEF, UNICEF Reference Document for Emergency Preparedness and Response, UNICEF, New York, 2019.
22 UNDSS, ‘What We Do’, United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS), United Nations, New York,
undated, , accessed 9 September 2020.
10 STRENGTHENING UNICEF’S HUMANITARIAN ACTIONExecutive Summary
As an agency, we need to put the ‘E’ back in UNICEF.
— UNICEF staff member
BACKGROUND supported by a field taskforce. Research and
analysis took place from June 2019 to July 2020.
This review examines UNICEF’s humanitarian
operations in the context of the global challenges In addition to a literature review and desk
of the 21st century: rapid rises in the number, research, we conducted over 173 individual, semi-
scale, duration and complexity of humanitarian structured interviews with a range of people with
crises; climate breakdown and the impact of experience of the humanitarian sector: middle
extreme weather events; large-scale migration and senior UNICEF managers; experts from a
and displacement of populations; significant public range of UN agencies, academia and international
health emergencies, including the global pandemic and national non-governmental organizations
of COVID-19; and constraints and greater demands (who formed the External Advisory Group);
on funding from a widening community of UNICEF partners; and staff on the ground. These
humanitarian actors. The number of children in interviews form the backbone of this review, and
need grew to nearly 120 million in 2020, primarily represent the ‘voice’ of UNICEF.
in complex or refugee/migration settings.
The report is not an evaluation of UNICEF’s work – KEY FINDINGS
these already exist in some quantity – but instead Although this review necessarily focuses on
focuses on the changes that are needed to meet what needs to change at UNICEF, there are many
identified challenges. The changes required are strengths in its systems and operations. Without
proportionate to the scale of the challenges faced, exception, external advisers held UNICEF’s
yet there are also reasons for optimism in the humanitarian action in high esteem. UNICEF’s
many positive advances and promising work- global presence and reach mean that it is well
streams of recent years, notably the revised Core placed to adapt to a rapidly changing world and
Commitments for Children in Humanitarian Action the challenges of the 21st century. The main
(CCCs) and new Emergency Procedures. This areas for improvement are described below.
review acknowledges these, while recognizing
gaps and weaknesses that remain to be addressed. Reputation
The recommendations presented here outline Despite its significant influence globally, with
both ‘quick wins’ for improved humanitarian a strong and sustained pre-emergency pres-
action in the short term and the required strategic ence, UNICEF is not always seen by ‘outsiders’
shifts in UNICEF’s response to humanitarian as predictable in humanitarian emergencies.
situations in the medium term. The findings Contributory factors suggested by interviewees
and recommendations of this review will also were: a need for clarity on UNICEF’s role in emer-
inform the preparation of UNICEF’s Strategic gencies; variations in the quality of programming;
Plan 2022–2025 and contribute to ongoing a need for greater focus in performance targets
organizational improvement initiatives. Ultimately, and quality assurance mechanisms on emer-
these recommendations will help to ensure that gency responses; and bureaucratic processes
UNICEF’s humanitarian action is of high quality, that distract staff from their humanitarian work.
reliable, equitable, timely – and fit for the future. In addition, while UNICEF’s decentralized nature
can be an advantage, it can have the unintended
effect of making humanitarian action over-reliant
METHODOLOGY on in-country leaders’ personalities, skills and
Two senior UNICEF staff members and a priorities, leading to unpredictable approaches
programme coordinator conducted this review, and variable quality in programmes. The recently
THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11updated Core Commitments for Children, and the multi-year funding, as a funder, UNICEF itself
development of the new Emergency Procedures often places additional restrictions on funding in
and Revised Emergency Preparedness Procedures order to ensure accurate reporting, and this can
are timely initiatives with the potential to address affect the flexibilities afforded to partners.
these perceptions and boost UNICEF’s humanitar-
ian reputation. Advocacy
Leadership and capacity We need to position UNICEF within the
‘one UN’ system so we can influence on
It’s important for UNICEF to invest in behalf of children and use the system for
leadership, as [that] is a change maker in their benefit and advocate for them.
the organization at the country level. —UNICEF staff
—External Advisory Group
Despite the acknowledged strengths of UNICEF’s
Although UNICEF has already gone some way advocacy, a more cohesive humanitarian
towards improving its staff induction, welfare advocacy strategy, with shared vision, messaging
and support systems, a more coherent human and accountabilities between countries, regions
resources (HR) strategy is required to ensure that and headquarters will be required. Although some
the necessary capacities can be developed within initiatives link UNICEF’s advocacy to in-country
the organization. More leaders with the right skills, action in a proactive manner, this is not standard
qualities and expertise in humanitarian work are practice. Advocacy is often reactive and linked
needed. When a leadership team’s experience to specific needs, or combined with fundraising
or skills do not fulfil the requirements of a spe- efforts, rather than being anticipatory and
cific emergency type and context, this can lead strategic. More thorough evaluation of UNICEF’s
to challenges in the humanitarian response. At advocacy will help to clarify and measure its
country level, some staff perform multiple roles overall effectiveness.
as vacancies remain unfilled. UNICEF could do
more to address these factors, including seeking Linking humanitarian and development work
out new talent. Representative positions should
have clear succession plans and the organization Despite the launch of several LHD initiatives,
could invest more in handovers or induction prior interviewees cited a need for the integration of
to deployment. humanitarian and development work to go further
in order to address a current lack of clarity about
Interviewees told us that emergency work ‘lacks LHD procedures and inconsistencies in practice
prestige’, and there is consequently often a across Country Offices. UNICEF currently plans
shortfall in the number of staff with the requisite humanitarian and development programming sepa-
skills and experience for humanitarian contexts. rately, using different processes and timescales. It
A shortage of back-office support hampers quick does not invest enough in its pre-disaster develop-
and effective scale-up and scale-down. UNICEF ment presence to enhance emergency responses,
stand-by partners deployed for surge expertise or make developmental gains from humanitarian
are often used for normal emergency staffing. action. Too often, implementation rests with
UNICEF needs to invest in building on the existing individuals rather than through a corporate commit-
skills of its own staff to ensure the technical skills ment. At all levels, LHD planning, monitoring and
needed are available internally. reporting could be integrated further. Additional
findings and recommendations are expected as
Funding further reviews and evaluations are undertaken in
parallel with the humanitarian review.
Like all humanitarian actors, UNICEF faces
rapid changes in funding, not least following the
impending economic downturn among what are Risk-informed programming
normally traditional high-income donor countries UNICEF’s formalized risk appetite remains
due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Short-term underdeveloped, leading to unpredictable
funding and increases in funding conditions limit humanitarian responses. Operational procedures
planning, implementation and continuity. The do not currently facilitate the measured risk-
situation is not helped by the fact that UNICEF taking needed. UNICEF’s humanitarian action is
has not yet standardized guidance on tagging over-dependent on in-country leadership, placing
different parts of its expenditure as humanitarian considerable pressure on individuals. Overall,
or development, leading to challenges in reporting. this means UNICEF’s humanitarian action is risk-
Though only a few humanitarian donors provide averse and misses multiple opportunities.
12 STRENGTHENING UNICEF’S HUMANITARIAN ACTIONUNICEF risk-assessment mechanisms relating to in UNICEF’s humanitarian work, with AAP and
preparedness and planning encourage reactive, Communication for Development departments
rather than proactive and agile, emergency working individually rather than collaborating.
responses. The Emergency Preparedness UNICEF often only engages with affected
Platform is contributing to mitigating this, but populations once programmes are running. While
requires further development to be better suited complaints and feedback mechanisms do exist
for dynamic risk analysis in volatile contexts. to cover programmes, these also need to ensure
that feedback is acted on, and that UNICEF’s
Access responses are communicated to affected
populations.
Limited access, due to insecurity or restrictions, is
a major barrier to reaching crisis-affected people,
especially in complex, high-threat environments Partnerships
(CHTEs). Interviewees reported that leaders If there was a clear distribution
do not press enough for access: perceptions
of access difficulties rather than the realities
of tasks among humanitarian actors, it
on the ground are limiting the organization’s would make resourcing for donors much
reach. UNICEF’s ability to contribute to or lead easier and more efficient.
collaboration on access with other actors would —External Advisory Group
be enhanced by a greater focus on access, and
recognition of the contribution that local partners The current work on deepening collaboration
can make to overcoming access barriers. The across UN agencies (including UNICEF)
roll-out of the new access strategy will help to is enabling more efficient and effective
increase access to affected populations. humanitarian action. Now UNICEF requires a
similar collaborative blueprint for action with
Localization the International Organization for Migration to
reflect the changing coordination systems used in
Local actors should not just be implement- large-scale refugee/migration responses. UNICEF
ers, they should be partners, but we are a could also capitalize more fully on its position
long way from this. as a cluster leader to support more integrated
—External Advisory Group programming between clusters and between
humanitarian and development systems.
In places that UNICEF staff cannot access, or
where agencies have withdrawn staff, many local Data collection, analysis and monitoring
partners ‘stay and deliver’. However, UNICEF
tends to underestimate the need to build the Appropriate humanitarian action requires
capacity of these local partners. Country Offices context-specific approaches, but UNICEF’s
are often hesitant to engage with local partners, responses tend to be standardized. Consequently,
perceiving them as unreliable. Engaging without representatives in complex settings are often
adequate assurance measures in place has risks, obliged to make key operational decisions
but we also need to recognize the risks that these with limited evidence. A more robust analysis
organizations face in implementing programmes. combining specialist political, contextual
and humanitarian perspectives, linked to
Accountability to affected populations disaggregated data collection and performance
monitoring, would facilitate more accurate
If affected populations are not involved predictions and improved response to
from the onset of an emergency, your humanitarian emergencies.
response will not be effective, and you Likewise, the current quantitative approach to
might be providing aid the beneficiaries performance monitoring using large amounts
do not hope for. of data should be supplemented by greater
—External Advisory Group
depth of qualitative data, including measures of
programme quality and adequacy, and beneficiary
Accountability to affected populations (AAP) feedback. Despite having lots of data at its
is critical to effective UNICEF humanitarian disposal, UNICEF’s approach to humanitarian data
responses, to ensure that crisis-affected collection has been less holistic, resulting in a
populations receive accurate information, provide series of snapshots rather than a full panorama.
actionable feedback and participate in programme There is a need to develop staff skills and
design. Despite recent improvements, AAP is competencies to ensure that data analysis leads
still not central enough or sufficiently coherent to improvements in programming.
THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13RECOMMENDATIONS Improving humanitarian action
The review’s recommendations are directly based • Invest in the roll-out of the new CCCs, building
on the interviews conducted with members of on global COVID-19 momentum across the
the External Advisory Group and staff from across whole of UNICEF, to strengthen understanding
the organization, reflecting both UNICEF’s current and awareness of UNICEF’s humanitarian
challenges and its desired end states. mandate, and identify individuals as focal
points for the CCCs to ensure their effective
The recommendations in the Humanitarian implementation.
Review Report have been summarized below
• Incorporate lessons from the COVID-19
to provide an overview of the direction of the
response into the new Emergency Procedures
recommended areas for action. The report itself and begin to apply procedures beyond L2 and
goes into further detail to provide guidance on the L3 emergencies where required.
way forward. The change management process
that is intended to follow this review will map out • Embed humanitarian action in its next strategic
clearly the actions, resources and accountabilities plan and introduce more measurable and track-
for these recommendations to ensure that all are able goals for each area in order to emphasize
actioned and implemented. UNICEF’s humanitarian commitments.
Collectively, these actions will help the Leadership
organization to become more agile, more able • Establish a leadership strategy for the ‘top 20’
to fulfil its dual mandate and, most importantly, humanitarian Country Offices to ensure they
better able to meet the needs of all crisis-affected have appropriate leadership.
children. • Establish adequate, standardized handover
and induction mechanisms for senior
Preparing for future emergency contexts managers in UNICEF’s top 20 humanitarian
• Define UNICEF’s role in public health crises and other countries at most risk.
emergencies, with a clear strategy, increased • Make mandatory service of at least one full
technical capacity at all levels, and adapted duty cycle in a senior management position in
strategies, including a no-regrets approach. an emergency duty station for staff who reach
• Reinforce UNICEF’s current capacities at HQ director level.
level, and in relevant regional offices (ROs) and • Develop an internal talent initiative to nurture
country offices (COs), to support responses to new talent and diversify UNICEF’s workforce
large refugee and migration crises. in crisis-affected countries.
• Ensure that UNICEF can mainstream and
Career management
increase the volume of humanitarian aid
delivered through cash across sectors through • Develop a career management system
organizational investment (both financial and in for staff willing to serve in crisis-affected
people) and in the development, maintenance countries, with flexible career paths across
and integration of beneficiary data systems. both development and humanitarian work
and regular rotation between hardship
• Leverage technology and innovation to and non-hardship duty stations, as well as
improve the speed and quality of UNICEF’s mechanisms for identifying suitable talent
response, notably in humanitarian contexts. from diverse backgrounds.
• Strengthen the integration of supply needs • Develop a dynamic staff diversification
in programme planning and response, strategy to ensure a diverse workforce in
especially on supply-driven programming in humanitarian settings.
public health emergencies, working more
• Establish a young humanitarian leadership
closely with the private sector in order to build
development programme (in collaboration
supply networks and ensure continuity within
with other agencies and a training institute,
constrained markets.
preferably in the global South) to invest in the
• Explore new configurations of HQ field next generation of humanitarian leaders and
support in order to better target and prioritize attract talent from diverse backgrounds.
technical assistance, advocacy and political
engagement and streamline approaches Capacity
across similar settings in different regions to • Develop a learning platform, with links
better apply lessons learned. to policies and tools that are critical to
14 STRENGTHENING UNICEF’S HUMANITARIAN ACTIONstrengthening humanitarian responses, Flexible funding
including compulsory courses in the CCCs. • Establish funding mechanisms for countries
• Invest in staff capacity by considering the facing humanitarian crises that have limited
establishment of an internal Humanitarian RR and IB funding allocations to guarantee the
Action Capacity-Building Fund. financing of key back-office functions.
• Ensure that a dedicated cluster team is • Explore innovative financing mechanisms to
permanently in place where appropriate and secure a much higher preparedness level and
develop a career path for cluster coordinators a more timely and appropriate response for
to attract talent, also adding cluster future public health emergencies.
performance to country office leadership • Review the allocation processes of the
assessments. 7 per cent set-aside to ensure adequate
Scale-up and scale-down of emergency funding of programmes in CHTEs, emergency
operations preparedness and LHD programming.
• Develop an HR toolkit and a Programme • Invest in real-time reporting mechanisms
Budget Review process for scaling up to improve reporting and improve access to
and scaling down emergency operations, flexible funding.
including short-term contracting • Standardize tagging of programming to ensure
arrangements for rapid engagement of that all humanitarian expenditure (including
additional workforce. preparedness) is more accurately reflected and
• Establish and standardize regional rosters visible to external funders and donors.
and talent pools to increase UNICEF’s Advocacy
humanitarian capacity.
• Ensure that the ‘top 20’ humanitarian crisis
Surge mechanisms countries have detailed, integrated advocacy
• Create a single Management Information strategies.
System (MIS) for all UNICEF surge • Establish an internal review of current
mechanisms and set up an ERT team to advocacy governance structures, with the aim
increase effectiveness. of developing a new, integrated structure with
• Establish a core team of seasoned clear accountabilities at all levels.
representatives for temporary deployment in • Increase advocacy capacity at HQ, all ROs
humanitarian leadership. and specific COs, reinforcing the capacity for
• Finance Emergency Response Team (ERT) specialist advocacy on sensitive issues.
and global cluster leadership using core Linking humanitarian and development work
UNICEF funding, and staff cluster coordinator
positions with UNICEF personnel. • Develop a joint results framework for
Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP)/
• Develop a capacity-building mechanism for Humanitarian Action for Children (HAC) and
surge missions, similar to the surge roster and Country Programme Document (CPD) results
systems used for Supply staff. in all HRP/HAC countries.
• Identify ways to increase the inclusion of • Increase organization-wide capacity for
stand-by partners from the global South into ‘triple-nexus’ programming, for example by
rosters and deployment, in order to further establishing LHD ERT(s).
diversify UNICEF’s short-term emergency
workforce. Risk management
Further duty of care • Develop a common and comprehensive risk-
appetite statement for the whole organization,
• Develop duty of care guidelines for UNICEF across the different crisis types.
partners working in difficult settings, which
cover exposure to security and health risks. • Develop an organization-wide risk compact
linked to risk types, which clearly defines shared
Stay and deliver, and remote programming risk accountabilities with donors and partners.
• Develop a toolkit for remote programming • Define the minimum risk-management
situations that includes proper risk structures for each crisis type.
management measures. • Increase the systematic use of global and
regional risk analysis capacities, including
THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and • Make AAP (including PSEA) mandatory
Abuse (PSEA). in all M&E frameworks in countries with
• Develop training in risk management for humanitarian programming.
operations staff to accompany the roll-out of Partnerships
the Emergency Procedures to increase staff
capacity in this area. • Build on the Partnerships Platform and
inter-agency blueprints for action towards a
Access common partnership format, collectively with
• Define clear ‘red flags’ at organizational other agencies
and CO level that indicate when principled • Explore or expand the blueprint for action
humanitarian action could become to other key humanitarian agencies (IOM) to
compromised and to trigger a structured strengthen working relationships on large-
response process. scale migration settings.
• Prioritize the roll-out of the Humanitarian • Establish strong, community-led, organized
Access Framework, including access and managed platforms capable of being
negotiation training and with a focus on engaged as soon as an emergency hits, with
increasing and monitoring humanitarian access wider use of standby Programme Cooperation
as a core commitment in the revised CCCs. Agreements (PCAs) that have a fully integrated
• Consider creating an ERT position on access PSEA strategy.
to support COs in developing or updating their • Prioritize investment in cluster coordinators
access strategies. and national co-leads, through a pool of
• Increase internal access capacities at the coordinators or by ensuring that programme
appropriate levels and increase support to and emergency staff are trained to cover
partner organizations by deploying UNICEF cluster functions.
staff to support partners on access issues. • Advocate for straightforward and simple
• Develop a strategy for senior leaders to reach coordination mechanisms in inter-agency
out beyond the traditional capitals to foster work, avoiding the creation of parallel
diplomatic relations for key crises. coordination structures where these are
unhelpful.
Localization • Establish a partnership focal point to focus
• Develop a localization strategy that considers on global partners to help provide a common
the different crisis types and the roles of the interface and oversight on issues that go
different levels in order to address consistent beyond a single country.
engagement with local actors. • Develop models of direct implementation for
• Develop in-country lists of local organizations humanitarian settings.
and their capacity, making it mandatory to
develop contingency Programme Documents Data collection and analysis
(PD) with local partners in CHTEs. • Establish links with universities, research
• Include technical and institutional capacity- institutions, analysts and/or consulting firms
strengthening for local partners in emergency to complement contextual analyses of crises
preparedness action, and reach out to the with political, economic and social analysis.
local private sector to widen procurement and • Develop an appropriate way to measure the
ensure continuity of supplies. quality of UNICEF’s work beyond targets,
• Play a lead role in defining a localization with monitoring frameworks that include
agenda that puts anti-racism and anti- indicators relating to programme quality and
discrimination at its centre. disaggregated data collection, use and analysis.
• Develop a menu of monitoring options
Accountability to affected populations for partners to use across various data
• Make an AAP strategy, that includes PSEA, collection and management platforms, to
mandatory for all humanitarian contexts. enable smoother and more sustainable
This should be done in consultation with operationalization with partners.
communities and governments to promote
an inter-agency coordinated framework in
each country.
16 STRENGTHENING UNICEF’S HUMANITARIAN ACTIONPART 1
Introduction and
Background
It is very positive to see that UNICEF is willing to be more
ambitious, agile, predictable and courageous as UNICEF’s
leadership is much needed in international humanitarian crises.
— Jan Egeland, Secretary General of the Norwegian Refugee Council
The objective of this humanitarian review is the ways in which UNICEF’s personnel live and
to examine UNICEF’s humanitarian operations work, if only for a brief period, and also the way
broadly and in depth. Its results will inform an the organization responds to emergencies. This
organizational rethink of UNICEF’s configuration review outlines the lessons to be learned from
and capacity for principled humanitarian action, both UNICEF’s global COVID-19 response and the
in order to improve its response. This includes opportunities and challenges it has brought to the
how UNICEF’s humanitarian action links with organization’s ongoing humanitarian action.
its development work and how it can adapt
its regular programming to better prevent and Despite the global implications that a pandemic
mitigate the effects of crises, and prepare has for UNICEF’s work, it is not typical of the
effective emergency responses. organization’s normal operating environment.
While this review looks at what can be learned
This organizational rethink is designed to answer from COVID-19 to improve UNICEF’s humanitarian
the question: does UNICEF’s current business action overall, it also outlines trends that UNICEF
model prepare it for an effective response to must consider to better prepare for the future.
a rapidly evolving landscape of crisis, whether These include an overall increase in humanitarian
that be a global pandemic, the climate crisis, or needs and a shift towards responses in more
increasing global insecurity and migration? How complex environments, where needs are greater,
can UNICEF adapt its model to ensure it can and expectations of UNICEF higher.
respond to future humanitarian contexts and
needs quickly and effectively? Although this review necessarily focuses on
what needs to change at UNICEF, there are
The review process was initiated partly in many strengths in its systems and operations.
response to the Evaluation Office report, Without exception, external advisers interviewed
The Coverage and Quality of the UNICEF for this review held UNICEF’s humanitarian
Humanitarian Response.23 This made recommen- action in high esteem. UNICEF is perceived as
dations to increase UNICEF’s capacity (in terms a unique organization because it “has a large
of its policy, structure, accountability, systems global presence and has a mandate that gives it
and resources) to deliver on its humanitarian universality. Its presence before, during and after
commitments. a crisis gives UNICEF important continuum.” (9)
Nevertheless, all agreed that UNICEF needs to
The global pandemic caused by coronavirus keep pace with a rapidly changing world. This
disease (COVID-19) arose during the humanitarian review aims to help UNICEF to do just that, in
review process. The pandemic has changed order to meet children’s needs effectively.
23 Featherstone, Andy, Tasneem Mowjee, David Fleming, Katie Tong, Clemens Gros, Leonora Evans-Gutierrez, assisted
by Abhijit Bhattacharjee, Kate Hale and Richard Burge, The Coverage and Quality of the UNICEF Humanitarian
Response in Complex Humanitarian Emergencies, UNICEF, New York, 2018, .
THE HUMANITARIAN REVIEW: FINDINGS AND AND RECOMMENDATIONS 171.1 REVIEW PROCESS These factors informed the team’s initial thinking
and shaped the next stage of the review by
This humanitarian review is not an evaluation
providing key areas for discussion at the key
and it does not investigate the effectiveness of
informant interviews (KIIs).
UNICEF’s humanitarian action. Instead, it seeks
to understand and present what needs to change
1.1.2 External Advisory Group
within UNICEF to improve its overall humanitarian
action. It does so using the results of previous To support this review, UNICEF enlisted an
evaluations, the landscaping exercise undertaken External Advisory Group (EAG) to provide objec-
by the Evaluation Office,24 and a review of internal tive, experienced knowledge of the humanitarian
and external literature. system, forecasts of the humanitarian environ-
ment over the next 5–10 years, and perspectives
In addition, the findings are informed by over on UNICEF as a humanitarian actor and the
153 semi-structured interviews with UNICEF challenges it needs to overcome. The EAG also
staff in both headquarters (HQ) and the field, provided guidance on good humanitarian practice
and 20 interviews with key thinkers in the wider that UNICEF could learn from, and eventually
humanitarian sector. These ensure that the adopt, to increase the efficiency, effectiveness
findings reflect challenges currently affecting and scale of its humanitarian action.
the implementation of UNICEF’s humanitarian
programmes. The EAG comprised 20 individuals from UN
agencies, international non-governmental
1.1.1 Literature review and landscaping organizations (INGOs), national organizations,
exercise donors, academic institutions and thinktanks in
the humanitarian sector (see Annex III). Members
This review took place from June 2019 to July
were nominated by UNICEF senior management
2020 (see Figure 1). It began with a literature
based on their agencies’ close work with UNICEF
review of evaluations, after-action reports and
or the individual’s standing and experience in the
annual reports on humanitarian action, including
humanitarian sector.
the reports of external agencies (see Annex I). To
contextualize its findings and recommendations, Each EAG member participated in an individual,
this review also used the Evaluation Office’s hour-long KII (see Annex IV). After reviewing the
landscape analysis, which identifies and examines preliminary list of ten factors outlined above, each
trends in the humanitarian sector.25 member was invited to discuss in more depth
the two that they felt were the most important to
This desk research identified 10 factors
address, as well as describing any other significant
influencing effective, good-quality humanitarian
thematic areas that were not in the initial list.
action by UNICEF:
They were also asked to comment on UNICEF’s
1. Impeded access performance as a humanitarian actor and to
identify good practice and other humanitarian
2. Cooperation with international actors
actors from which UNICEF can learn.
3. Human Resources
4. Linking humanitarian and development 1.1.3 Internal interviews
programming The review team then conducted semi-structured
5. Localization and engagement with affected interviews with UNICEF employees to gain inputs
populations from the field. The preliminary lists of factors and
emergency types were used to facilitate these
6. Conditionalities and flexible funding
discussions.
7. Context analysis and assessment of needs
Interviewees comprised UNICEF staff from HQ
8. Planning, monitoring and reporting of in different locations and from Regional Offices
advocacy (ROs) and Country Offices (COs) in each of
9. Technology and innovation UNICEF’s seven operational regions. RO and
CO staff were nominated by regional directors
10. Consistent and predictable quality of
and regional emergency advisers, based on their
humanitarian action.
experience at UNICEF. Staff selected were from
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid.
18 STRENGTHENING UNICEF’S HUMANITARIAN ACTIONYou can also read
