In an emergency, the needs of an affected population are often greater than the capacity of any one humanitarian actor. Numerous government and UN agencies, international organisations, Red Cross/Red Crescent movement actors, and NGOs may respond to an emergency and have personnel working in the field. Humanitarian coordination is about how we interact with other organisations responding to the emergency to ensure the overall response is effective.
Humanitarian coordination efforts can have very different approaches and objectives, including:
- information sharing
- ensuring responses are complementary and maximise limited resources (who does what, and where)
- agreeing on contextualising technical and quality standards
- enabling coherence and a coordinated approach (common analysis and approach)
- using a common response framework.
Humanitarian coordination is important because:
- it enhances the effectiveness and impact of collective humanitarian efforts through ensuring common standards and approaches, prioritisation of needs, identification of gaps, and a stronger level of effort and peer accountability
- it helps avoid duplication, burden on the affected population, and potential harm or ineffectiveness that can result if there is no coordination
- demonstrated coordination is increasingly a criterion considered by donors for funding allocations, and is viewed as an indicator of a responsible and accountable organisation
- the effectiveness of CARE’s own response can be more effective by tapping into the resources and knowledge of the broader humanitarian community.
The primary coordination mechanisms that CARE participates in during an emergency response are:
- UN-led humanitarian coordination mechanisms (in particular clusters)
- coordination mechanisms established by the host government or local authority
- NGO-specific coordination forums (formal and informal).
Coordination may also be required with other non-humanitarian actors-for example, with peacekeeping or military forces. For guidelines on civil-military relations see Chapter 39.
The primary coordination mechanisms for the international community in a large-scale emergency are led by the UN in partnership with NGOs, donors and host government authorities, and in accordance with systems set out by the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC). The Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) is the key agency mandated to facilitate effective humanitarian coordination in an emergency.
1.4.1 Humanitarian reform
To achieve more effective humanitarian responses, a global humanitarian reform process was launched in 2005. The objectives of this process are to enhance humanitarian response capacity, predictability, accountability and partnership. This is so that the humanitarian community can collectively reach more beneficiaries, with more comprehensive, needs-based relief and protection, in a more effective and timely manner.
Humanitarian reform has four main objectives:
- sufficient humanitarian response capacity and enhanced leadership, accountability, and predictability in ‘gap’ sector/areas of response through the ‘cluster approach’
- adequate, timely and flexible humanitarian financing
- improved humanitarian coordination and leadership
- more effective partnerships between UN and non-UN humanitarian actors.
1.4.2 What the cluster system is
While humanitarian coordination in emergency responses has always involved coordination mechanisms such as sector meetings and working groups, humanitarian mechanisms are now more formally defined under the ‘cluster approach’.
While a ‘sector’ refers to a specific area of humanitarian activity, a ‘cluster’ is defined as a group of organisations and other stakeholders who work together to address the needs where response gaps appear. Clusters are also usually organised around particular sectors, but not exclusively (for example, shelter, logistics). The cluster approach operates at two levels:
- country level-A cluster approach in the field aims to strengthen the humanitarian response by clarifying the division of labour among organisations, better defining the roles and responsibilities of humanitarian organisations within the sectors, and providing the UN Humanitarian Coordinator with both a first point of call and a provider of last resort in all the key sectors or areas of activity
- global level-At the global level, the cluster approach aims to strengthen system-wide preparedness and technical capacity by ensuring that there is predictable leadership and accountability in all of the main sectors or areas of humanitarian response.
Clusters should ensure the following types of support are in place at the field level to strengthen the quality and timeliness of humanitarian response:
- technical surge capacity
- trained experts to lead cluster coordination at the field level
- increased stockpiles, some pre-positioned within regions (for example, emergency shelter materials)
- standardised technical tools, including for information management
- agreement on common methods and formats for needs assessments, monitoring and benchmarking
- best practices and lessons learned from field tests.
Clusters often provide a key means of accessing UN and donor funding, so participation is particularly important. The number of clusters and the level of activity can, however, also lead to meeting overload, so it is important to be strategic and well coordinated about cluster participation, and to allocated sufficient resources. For an analysis of key issues and challenges associated with clusters, see Chapter 9.3 Other key policy issues: humanitarian policy briefs .
1.4.3 Cluster leads
Under the cluster system, a ‘cluster lead’ is appointed for each sector. The cluster lead is accountable to the UN Emergency Relief Coordinator to ensure system-wide preparedness and technical capacity to respond to humanitarian emergencies. This is achieved by effective inter-agency responses, including ensuring that effective coordination and partnership arrangements are established.
18.104.22.168 Global cluster leads
|Sector or area of activity||Global cluster lead|
IDPs (from conflict)
|Education||UNICEF, Save the Children-UK|
IDPs (from conflict)
IDPs (from conflict)
Disasters/civilians affected by conflict (other than IDPs)
|Water, sanitation and hygiene||UNICEF|
1.4.4 Provider of last resort
The ‘provider of last resort’ concept is critical to the cluster approach. It represents the commitment of sector leads to do their utmost to ensure an adequate and appropriate response.
Where there are critical gaps in humanitarian responses, the sector leads should call on relevant humanitarian partners to address these gaps. If the partners are unsuccessful, the sector lead as ‘provider of last resort’ may be required to address the gap.
1.4.5 SAGS and TWIGS
The work of the clusters at the field level involves a Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) and Technical Working Groups (TWIGs).
A SAG is comprised of cluster members and determines the overall strategic direction for cluster response to an emergency.
A TWIG is an ad hoc sub-group established from the cluster participants to work on key technical issues, such as formulating relevant technical standards, and promoting and monitoring compliance with sector standards.
1.4.6 The role of NGOs in the cluster systems
The cluster approach aims to increase the active engagement of NGOs in coordination mechanisms, and to promote broader partnership between UN and NGO actors in broader partnership, beyond simply ‘implementing partner arrangements’. NGOs are able to take on cluster lead or coordination roles and to second staff to clusters. However, in practice, clusters are still perceived to be largely controlled by UN agencies.
The global humanitarian platform ‘principles of partnership’ have been established as part of the humanitarian reform process to try to enhance UN and NGO cooperation. These are:
- result-oriented approach
For a full description of the principles see http://www.globalhumanitarianplatform.org/.
22.214.171.124 Engagement in cluster coordination
It is important for CARE to engage as actively as possible in relevant cluster coordination mechanisms in the country to access (as well as offer) technical support, and have access to funding and other resources that may channel exclusively through the UN/cluster system.
1.4.7 Humanitarian financing and funding mechanisms
There are three key UN funding mechanisms that apply in emergencies, although experience shows they are currently not necessarily easy for NGOs to access, and can be very slow:
- CERF (Central Emergency Response Fund) is available to UN agencies to support humanitarian response. NGOs cannot access funding directly but can be engaged as implementing partners of the UN agencies receiving CERF funding.
- ERF (Emergency Relief Funds) are funds made available to NGOs through OCHA to address critical gaps in humanitarian assistance. Management of ERFs varies from country to country.
- Pooled/Common Humanitarian Funds (CHF) are funds given by donors that are not earmarked for any specific purpose, and can be used flexibly. Responsibility for allocating funds is given to the Humanitarian Coordinator. NGOs are eligible to receive CHF funds, although this is at the discretion of the Humanitarian Coordinator.
In addition to these funding mechanisms, the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) is a joint planning mechanism that can be an important way to seek donor funding. CAP is a mechanism to present a broad collection of funding proposals to the donor community. The CAP is managed by OCHA and while most proposals included are for UN agencies, NGOs are often also included. Actual funding decisions are managed directly between the donor and the implementing agency.
1.4.8 Common humanitarian services
Common humanitarian services are an important part of the overall humanitarian coordination system. These are UN agencies with mandates to provide support services to humanitarian organisations. The various responsibilities of these organisations are outlined in section 1.4.9.
1.4.9 Responsibilities of humanitarian common services providers
1.4.10 Global Emergency Directors’ Group
During major emergencies, OCHA often convenes conference calls of the Emergency Directors’ Group, which consists of the global emergency directors, or equivalent, of all major operational UN agencies, major international NGOs (including CARE), and the Red Cross/Crescent movement. These conference calls are used for information sharing at global level, to ensure coordination between major operational agencies and discuss any major issues. On a regular basis, the Emergency Directors’ Group meets three times per year with a particular focus on emergency preparedness and early warning.
The host government or authority is responsible for meeting the needs of the population, and for requesting any assistance from the international humanitarian community. The host government will establish coordination mechanisms with the international humanitarian community for response operations, often in cooperation with the UN system. As far as possible, CARE should promote and advocate for complementary rather than parallel systems.
At a minimum, the host government will usually establish information-sharing mechanisms to ensure that the government is informed about the activities of the international community and to provide information about the government’s response activities, policies and regulations.
In conflict situations, the willingness or capacity of the government or state institutions to lead or contribute to humanitarian activities may be compromised, and this will influence the nature of the relationships established with international humanitarian actors.
In addition to the cluster system, some formal and informal coordination mechanisms specifically for NGOs may be operating in an emergency response. NGO coordination mechanisms exist at a global and field level. At the field level, these should be complementary to the cluster system and not duplicative. Good coordination and cooperation between individual NGOs and its staff is also important to help an effective response.
1.6.1 NGO coordination at the global level
There are a number of global NGO coordination mechanisms and specific member-based organisations or networks at a global level and in the national headquarter countries of CARE members that actively coordinate during emergencies. These include, but are not limited to:
- global NGO coordinating associations (ICVA, SCHR, IWG)
- national NGO coordinating associations in CARE Member countries, for example VOICE (Europe), Interaction (USA), DEC (UK), ACFID (Australia) and Coordination Sud (France)
- quality and accountability networks (such as HAP, ALNAP, Sphere, People in Aid)
- specific partnerships, initiatives or alliance-for example, the ECB project.
For more information about these organisations refer to Annex 40.1 Global NGO Coordination Mechanisms.
1.6.2 NGO coordination in the field
NGO coordination mechanisms at the field level will vary from country to country, but may include:
- formally established NGO coordination bodies or associations
- NGO coordination meetings for all international and/or national NGOs
- informal NGO meetings for smaller groups of peer NGOs (for example, ECB partners or strategic alliances)
- informal, ad hoc coordination and partnerships between individual NGOs.