Cluster Performance Monitoring Preliminary Report€¦ · 3.2 Appli tion and adheren to existing standards a nd guidelines Satisfa ory 3.3 Clarify funding requirements, prioritization,

Cluster Performance Monitoring Preliminary Report

printed 14, July 2015

22

1

of

14, July 2015

Cluster Performance Monitoring

Preliminary Report

Cluster: Education

Country: Central African Republic

Level: National

Completed on: 29/6/2015

This report provides the findings of the Cluster Performance Monitoring to be reviewed by the cluster in order to identify best practices, constraints as well as actions points.



22

2

of

Table 1 Response rate among partners

Partner type Number partners responding Total number of partners Response rate (%)

International NGOs

7 13 54

National NGOs 15 13 115

UN organisations 2 4 50

National authority 1 3 33

Donors 1 1 100

Others 0 0 0

Total 26 34 76



22

3

of

Table 2 Performance status

Green = Good

Yellow = Satisfactory, needs minor improvements

Orange = Unsatisfactory, needs major improvements

Red = Weak

1.Supporting service delivery

1.1 Provide a platform to ensure that service delivery is driven by the agreed strategic priorities

Good

1.2 Develop mechanisms to eliminate duplication of service delivery Good

2. Informing strategic decision-making of the HC/HCT for hum. response

2.1 Needs assessment and gap analysis (across other sectors and within the sector) Good

2.2 Analysis to identify and address (emerging) gaps, obstacles, duplication, and cross-cutting issues.

Good

2.3 Prioritization, grounded in response analysis Satisfactory

3. Planning and strategy development

3.1 Develop sectoral plans, objectives and indicators directly supporting realization of the HC/HCT strategic priorities

Good

3.2 Application and adherence to existing standards and guidelines Satisfactory

3.3 Clarify funding requirements, prioritization, and cluster contributions to HC’s overall humanitarian funding considerations

Good

4. Advocacy

4.1 Identify advocacy concerns to contribute to HC and HCT messaging and action Good

4.2 Undertaking advocacy activities on behalf of cluster participants and the affected population

Satisfactory

5. Monitoring and reporting Satisfactory

6. Contingency planning/preparedness Satisfactory

7. Accountability to affected population Satisfactory



22

4

of

Table 3 Scoring by question (the higher the percentage, the better the performance of this activity)

1. Supporting service delivery (all values in %) All values in %


Good

List of partners regularly updated 100

Regular cluster meetings organised 100

Attendance of cluster partners to cluster meetings 100

Level of decision making power of staff attending cluster meetings 100

Conditions for optimal participation of national and international stakeholders 75

Writing of minutes of cluster meetings with action points 100

Usefulness of cluster meetings for discussing needs, gaps and priorities 75

Useful strategic decision taken within the cluster 75

Attendance of cluster coordinator to HCT and ICC meetings 100

Support/engagement of cluster with national coordination mechanisms 75

1.2 Develop mechanisms to eliminate duplication of service delivery Good

Mapping of partner geographic presence and programme activities updated as needed

75

Inputs of health partners into mapping of partner geographic presence and programme activities

100

Involvement of partners into analysis of gaps and overlaps based on mapping 100

Analysis of gaps and overlaps based on mapping useful for decision-making 75



22

5

of

2. Informing strategic decision-making of the HC/HCT for the humanitarian response

2.1 Needs assessment and gap analysis (across other sectors and within the sector)

Good

Use of cluster agreed tools and guidance for needs assessments 100

Involvement of partners in joint needs assessments 75

Sharing by partners of their assessment reports 75


Good

Analyses of situations done together with cluster partners 100

Analyses of situations identified risk 75

Analyses of situations identified needs 75

Analyses of situations identified gaps in response 50

Analyses of situations identified capacity in response 75

Analyses of situations identified constraints to respond 63

Age (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 75

Gender (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 100

Diversity – other than age and gender- (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 75

Human rights (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 75

Protection, including gender-based violence (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses

75

Environment (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 25

HIV/AIDS (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 50

Disability (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses 38

2.3 Prioritization, grounded in response analysis Satisfactory

Joint analyses supporting response planning 75



22

6

of



Good

Strategic plan developed 100

Partners involved in the development of strategic plan 75

Sectoral strategic plan includes objectives, activities and indicators 100

Sectoral strategic plan reviewed against host government strategy 100

Age (cross-cutting issue) considered in strategic plan No Score

Gender (cross-cutting issue) considered in strategic plan No Score

Diversity – other than age and gender- (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses No Score

Human rights (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses No Score

Protection, including GBV (cross-cutting issue) considered in strategic plan No Score

Environment (cross-cutting issue) considered in strategic plan No Score

HIV/AIDS (cross-cutting issue) considered in strategic plan No Score

Disability (cross-cutting issue) considered in analyses No Score

Strategic plan shows synergies from with other sectors No Score

Strategic plan guided response from partners 100

Deactivation criteria and phasing out strategy formulated together with partners 0

3.2 Application and adherence to existing standards and guidelines Satisfactory

National and international standards and guidance identified and adapted 100

Technical standards and guidance agreed upon and used by partners 75


Good

Prioritisation of proposals against the strategic plan jointly determined with partners based on agreed transparent criteria

88

Prioritisation of proposals against strategic plan reflected interest of partners 75

Cluster supported and facilitated access to funding sources by partners 100

Regular reporting on funding status 75



22

7

of

4. Advocacy

4.1 Identify advocacy concerns to contribute to HC and HCT messaging and action

Good

Issues requiring advocacy identified and discussed together with partners 100


Satisfactory

Advocacy activities agreed upon and undertaken with partners 75



22

8

of

5. Monitoring and reporting Satisfactory

Programme monitoring formats agreed upon and used by cluster partners 75

Reports shared by partners taken into account in cluster reports 100

Regular publication of progress reports based on agreed indicators for monitoring humanitarian response

100

Regular publication of cluster bulletins 100

Changes in needs, risk and gaps highlighted in cluster reports and used for decision-making

75

Monitoring and response of the cluster taking into account the needs, contributions and capacities of women, girls, men and boys

75



22

9

of

6. Contingency planning/preparedness Satisfactory

National contingency plans identified and shared 50

Partners contributed to risk assessments and analysis 25

Partners involved in development of preparedness plan 100

Partners committed staff and/or resources towards preparedness plans 50

Early warning reports shared with partners No Score



22

10

of

7. Accountability to affected population Satisfactory

Mechanisms to consult and involve population in decision-making agreed upon and used by partners

75

Mechanisms to receive, investigate and act upon complaints on the assistance received agreed upon and used by partners

75



22

11

of

Table 4a Partner Comments

SectionNr Comments from partners

0. General

Il n’y a pas assez de coopération entre les ONG nationales elles-mêmes, et entres les ONG nationales et celles internationales. Ces dernières ne possèdent pas les vraies données du terrain et agissent directement en contraste avec les réalités et la culture de la population.

Le constat fait est qu’il n’y a pas de Cluster Sous-national.

Le terme groupe sectoriel n’est pas approprié dans le secteur de l’éducation. Ici, il s’agit d’une évaluation concernant le Cluster et non le groupe sectoriel qui est piloté et animé par le Gouvernement centrafricain.

L’ONG ARND est membre des différents Clusters et de certaines plates formes des ONG en République centrafricaine.

RAS

1. Supporting service delivery

La complémentarité des ONG dans leurs activités ou coopération est faible. Il faut faire encore plus au bénéfice de la population vulnérable.

L’absence de Cluster S/national n’est pas ressentie. Une bonne coordination du Cluster. Absence apparente du co-lead dans la gestion du cluster.

LE SOUTIEN DU GROUPE SECTORIEL EST POUR NOTRE ORGANISATION UN GUIDE DANS LA PRISE DE DECISION POUR L’ORIENTATION ET LE CHOIX DES ZONES DANS LESQUELLES NOUS METTONS EN OEUVRE NOS PROJETS.

Les analyses des capacités ont été des éléments important nous dans le cadre de l’élaboration de notre stratégie d’intervention en RCA



22

12

of

Les priorités du Gouvernement insuffisamment prises en compte. on note un grand penchant vers les avantages comparatifs des membres du cluster contrairement aux problèmes réels.

RAS

Rien à signaler


N/A


Concernant la planification des stratégies, il n’y a aucun problème, mais c’est le financement quasi rare des activités qui pose problème.

RAS

Rien à signaler

4. Advocacy

Le problème crucial est essentiellement celui de financement. Aucun financement, seules les stratégies et idées sont travaillées.

RAS

Rien à signaler

5. Monitoring and reporting

Il est très important de mettre en œuvre les objectifs du plan de transition de l’éducation (Retour à l’école, l’accès et la qualité et surtout la formulation de nouvelles prévisions sectorielles) de manière inclusive ainsi qu’un accent sur l’éducation en alternance en faveur des déscolarisés.

Les matériels adéquats sont insuffisants.



22

13

of

RAS

Rien à signaler

6. Contingency planning/preparedness

Il n’y a pas encore de plan de préparation et de réponse à l’urgence (EPRP). Des formations sur l’éducation en situations d’urgence ont été organisées et des drafts d’un plan d’action national et de 5 plans locaux ont été élabores lors de la dernière formation des autorités éducatives de 5 Inspections Académiques.

Mon organisation s’est engagée à mettre à disposition des ressources nécessaire pour le plan d’urgence

Notre organisation dispose du personnel prêt et capable d’être mobilisé en urgence dans le cas d’élaboration des plans stratégiques ou d’interventions urgentes.

RAS

Rien à signaler

7. Accountability to affected population

Parfois, il faut du temps pour comprendre le fonctionnement réel des populations affectées. Pendant la crise, on peut facilement observer que la recherche de survie dégrade les valeurs, les normes et mœurs sociales chacun voulant absolument et par tous les moyens améliorer sa condition de vie. Donc, il faut surveiller tous ces aspects pour pouvoir donner de réponses aux besoins réels des populations.

RAS

Rien à signaler



22

14

of

Rien n’est parfait au monde, et encore bien moins nos activités. Lorsqu’il existe des réclamations, nous recherchons des solutions palliatives et retenir en mémoire pour les éviter aux prochaines opérations.

Table 4b Coordinator Comments

SectionNr Comments from coordinator

1. Supporting service delivery



4. Advocacy




8. Any other information important to reflect the work of the cluster



22

15

of

14, July 2015

Cluster Performance Monitoring

Final Report

Cluster: Education


Level: National


This report provides the findings of the Cluster Performance Monitoring and allows the reporting of good practices, constraints and action points that will be identified and agreed upon by the cluster during the revision of the preliminary report.

This is a template of the final report to be filled in and shared publicly. The performance status is filled from the results of the survey. The last 2 columns need to be filled according to discussions held with partners during the meeting reviewing the results of the cluster performance

Final Report



22

16

of

Cluster: Education


Level: National




Final Report

Cluster: Education


Level: National




22

17

of



Final Report

Cluster: Education


Level: National






22

18

of



22

19

of

Table 1 Response rate among partners

Partner type Number partners responding Total number of partners Response rate (%)

International NGOs

7 13 54

National NGOs 15 13 115

UN organisations 2 4 50

National authority 1 3 33

Donors 1 1 100

Others 0 0 0

Total 26 34 76



22

20

of

IASC core functions Indicative characteristics of functions Performance status Performance status Constraints: unexpected circumstances and/or success factors and/or good practice identified

Follow-up action, with timeline, (when status is orange or red) and/or support required

Performance status ledgend: Green = Good Yellow = Satisfactory, needs minor improvements

Orange = Unsatisfactory, needs major improvements

Red = Weak

1.Supporting service delivery


Established, relevant coordination mechanism recognising national systems, subnational and co-lead aspects; stakeholders participating regularly and effectively; cluster coordinator active in inter-cluster and related meetings.

Good

1.2 Develop mechanisms to eliminate duplication of service delivery

Cluster partner engagement in dynamic mapping of presence and capacity (4W); information sharing across clusters in line with joint Strategic Objectives.

Good



Use of assessment tools in accordance with agreed minimum standards, individual assessment / survey results shared and/or carried out jointly as appropriate.

Good

2.2 Analysis to identify and address (emerging) gaps, obstacles, duplication, and cross-cutting issues.

Joint analysis for current and anticipated risks, needs, gaps and constraints; cross cutting issues addressed from outset.

Good

2.3 Prioritization, grounded in response analysis

Joint analysis supporting response planning and prioritisation in short and medium term

Satisfactory




22

21

of


Strategic plan based on identified priorities, shows synergies with other sectors against strategic objectives, addresses cross cutting issues, incorporates exit strategy discussion and is developed jointly with partners. Plan is updated regularly and guides response.

Good

3.2 Application and adherence to existing standards and guidelines

Use of existing national standards and guidelines where possible. Standards and guidance are agreed to, adhered to and reported against.

Satisfactory


Funding requirements determined with partners, allocation under jointly agreed criteria and prioritisation, status tracked and information shared.

Good

4. Advocacy

4.1 Identify advocacy concerns to contribute to HC and HCT messaging and action

Concerns for advocacy identied with partners, including gaps, access, resource needs.

Good


Common advocacy campaign agreed and delivered across partners.

Satisfactory


Monitoring and reporting the implementation of the cluster strategy and results; recommending corrective action where necessary

Use of monitoring tools in accordance with agreed minimum standards, regular report sharing, progress mapped against agreed strategic plan, any necessary corrections identified.

Satisfactory


Contingency planning/preparedness for recurrent disasters whenever feasible and relevant.

National contingency plans identified and share; risk assessment and analysis carried out, multisectoral where appropriate; readiness status enhanced; regular distribution of early warning reports.

Satisfactory



22

22

of


Disaster-affected people conduct or actively participate in regular meetings on how to organise and implement the response; agencies have investigated and, as appropriate, acted upon feedback received about the assistance provided

Satisfactory

Documents

Cluster Performance Monitoring Preliminary Report€¦ · 3.2 Appli tion and adheren to existing standards a nd guidelines Satisfa ory 3.3 Clarify funding requirements, prioritization,