the 22 global wash cluster meeting report...6 six key recommendations were reviewed from the mbp...
TRANSCRIPT
The 22nd Global WASH Cluster
Meeting Report
KKKKATHMANDUATHMANDUATHMANDUATHMANDU,,,, NNNNEPALEPALEPALEPAL.... 22222222----23232323 NNNNOVEMBEROVEMBEROVEMBEROVEMBER,,,, 2016201620162016
“Coordinating WASH Emergencies in an evolving humanitarian
landscape”
2
Table of Contents
Executive summary……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..5
Background: meeting overview and agenda………………………………………………………………………………………..7
1. Humanitarian Updates and Challenges…………………………………………………………………………………………….8
1.1.Opening Address from Joint Secretary of Ministry of Water Supply & Sanitation…………………………..8
1.2. Updates from the SAG…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..8
1.3 Updates from the CAST………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….9
1.4. Feedback from the National WASH Cluster Coordinators Meeting………………………………………………10
1.5. Humanitarian Updates………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..10
Group (1) WASH in Natural Disasters………………………………………………………………………………………………….11
Group (2) WASH in Conflict Zone ……………………………………………………………….........................................13
Group (3) WASH in Public Health……………………………………………………………………………………………………….14
1.6. WASH Assessment:…………………………………………………………………….................................................16
Assessment presentations…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………16
Group (1) Planning a coordinated assessment……………………………………………………………………………………19
Group (2) Collecting data…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..19
Group (3) Analysing data……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………19
Group (4) Additional challenges…………………………………………………………….............................................19
Group (5) Using the data……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………20
1.7. Market Based Programming……………………………………………………………………………………………………….21
MBP presentation……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..21
Group (1) Collecting evidence…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….21
Group (2) Assessment and analysis……………………………………………………………........................................22
Group (3) Quality standards (MEAL)………………………………………………………............................................22
Group (4) Capacity building……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….22
Group (5) Partnerships……………………………………………………………………………...........................................23
Group (6) Ethical issues……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..23
2. WASH Cluster Strategy 2016-2020………………………………………………………………………………………………….23
Group (1) Strategic Objective 1………………………………………………………………………………………………………….26
Group (2) Strategic objective 2…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..27
Group (3) Strategic objective 3…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..28
3.1. Humanitarian and Development Presentations…………………………………………………………………………..29
4. Market place session……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..31
Group (1) Sphere……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….31
Group (2) Emergency sanitation………………………………………………………………………………………………………..32
Group (3) Urban WASH……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..32
Group (4) HIF…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….33
Group (5) Elhra………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….34
Group (6) Solar Technology……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….35
Annex 1: Meeting agenda………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….36
Annex 2: List of participants………………………………………………………………………………………………………………38
3
Acronyms and abbreviations
ACF Action Contre Le Faim
ALNAP Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action
BCC Behaviour Change Communication
CAST Coordination Advocacy and Support Team
CB Capacity Building
CCRM Continuing Care Risk Management
CCS Cluster Coordinator Strategy
CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CLA Cluster-Led Agency
DACAAR Danish Committee for Aid to Afghan Refugees
DfID Department for International Development
DRR Disaster Risk Reduction
DTM Displacement Tracking Matrix
ECHO European Commission Humanitarian Aid Office
ENPHO Environment and Public Health Organisation
FSM Faecal Sludge Management
FST Field Support Team
GWC Global WASH Cluster
GWCC Global WASH Cluster Coordinator
HH House Hold
HIF Humanitarian Innovation Fund
IASC TA Inter-Agency Standing Committee Transformative Agency
IASC Inter-Agency Standing Committee
ICRC International Committee for Red Cross
IDP Internally Displaced Person
IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
IM Information Management
INGO International Non-Government Organisation
KI Key Informant
M&E Monitoring and evaluation
MBP Market Based Programme
NCA Norwegian Church Aid
NEEP Nutrition Embedding Evaluation Programme
NFI Non-Food Items
NRC Norwegian Refugee Council
NWCC National WASH Cluster Coordination
ODI Overseas Development Institute
OFDA Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance
PCMA Pre-Crisis Market and Analysis
R&R Rest and Recuperation
R2HC Research for Health in Humanitarian Crises
RTI Ready To Install
4
SAG Strategic Advisory Group
SBP Stand By Partnership
SDC Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation
SDG Sustainable Development Goal
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
SWA Sanitation Water for All
ToR Terms of Reference
TWIG Thematic Working Group
UN OCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
UN United Nations
UNDAC United Nations Disaster Assessment & Coordination
UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
USAID United States Agency for International Development
WASH Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene
WSP Water and Sanitation Program
5
Executive Summary
The Global WASH Cluster (GWC) held its 22nd annual WASH Cluster meeting from 22nd to the 23rd
November, 2016 in Kathmandu, Nepal. The meeting brought together national and international
organisations, UN agencies, donors and private sector actors involved in humanitarian WASH actions
globally. The theme of the meeting this year was; Coordinating WASH emergencies in an evolving
humanitarian landscape. The new GWC Strategy (2016-2020) which highlights partnership development
in the WASH sector was rolled out and endorsed during the event.
The two days included several presentations and working groups on various topics related to the key
theme of the meeting. Day 1 included topics on the following; updates from CAST and SAG, humanitarian
updates: achievements, challenges and action in emergencies; assessments and market-based
programming. On day 2 the focus was mainly on the Global WASH Strategic Plan 2016 – 2020 looking
specifically at partnership building and resource mobilization.
A summary of the key action points from the group work exercises is included below.
Humanitarian Updates: achievements, challenges and actions in emergencies
Three emergency settings were selected for discussion, including; natural disaster, conflict and public
health emergencies. The key points raised in terms of preparedness in emergencies were to collaborate
with the private sector on predesigned agreements to ensure an efficient and effective local response. It
was suggested that preparedness plans need to include a capacity building component and should reach
the sub-national level. Early action-vulnerability mapping for WASH was suggested as an early warning
response. It was further recommended that monitoring and evaluation should focus on quality issues and
not just quantity and counting the numbers. The participants discussed capacity building and the role of
partnerships. It was suggested that there should be a rapid establishment of TWIGs to meet technical
needs and the development of tools and technology appropriate to the context. Capacity strengthening
in the private sector and in public health emergencies was regarded as critical. In addition, the
development and humanitarian sectors were encouraged to collaborate specifically in protracted crises
(including ICRC and UNHCR). Donors were encouraged to endorse the benefits of collaboration and
encourage partners to engage in the field. Donor advocacy was recommended for sustainable solutions
outside of life-saving interventions. A further suggestion included placing a greater focus on behaviour
change communication (BCC).
Assessments
Some of the key points raised during this session were regarding the need to be more open to sharing
information such as assessment guidance for rapid-onset emergencies and the updated Indicator Registry
and Question Bank. It was highlighted that increased support is required for both national level clusters
and partners for all aspects of assessments particularly ones that are coordinated. This includes support
at the early design phase through to analysis at both the national and global level. There was a
recommendation to include in-country assessment training for M&E, programme and IM specialists as
well as global and regional level training for managers.
Market-based programming
6
Six key recommendations were reviewed from the MBP proposal and recommendations suggested.
1) Collect evidence: implement operational research and conduct a gap analysis of research on MBP
2) Market Analysis: ensure that service providers at the national level have capacity to provide services
or goods at the local level and create standards for the private sector to adhere to.
3) M&E: create mechanisms for sharing best practice
4) Capacity building: CB to include the supply chain and staff to follow specific competencies for MBA.
5) Partnerships: GWC were encouraged to engage in Cash Working Groups
6) Ethical issues: it was noted that there should be equal distribution in the market place so no
individual supplier benefits, and a risk analysis should be conducted prior to investing in projects.
Global WASH Cluster Strategy 2016 - 2020
The three main objectives for the Global WASH Strategy 2016-2020 were focused on and
recommendations developed for effective implementation. The three main objectives were;
1) To provide operational support to national emergency WASH coordination platforms to meet the TA
6+1 core functions and improve emergency WASH technical response via timely operational support
2) To ensure that relevant WASH stakeholders (national and global) have the capacity to coordinate and
deliver a high-quality response in emergency
3) To influence and advocate for improved emergency WASH coordination and funding
Capacity building and advocacy and partnership working were cross-cutting issues during discussions.
Capacity is lacking in the WASH sector. It was recommended to build the global capacity of Field Support
Teams (FST) to increase their knowledge of other contexts. Capacity of WASH practitioners needs to be
built across all sectors including the private sector, academia, and southern agencies. A further suggestion
was for capacity building to be institutionalised within organisations that engage in coordination with
information management integrated as a component. A global pool of WASH practitioners needs to be
created so demand can be met at the global and country levels. Funding proposals need to include exit
strategies that incorporate capacity building particularly in protracted countries.
There was a recommendation to define advocacy and create a specific objective for advocacy in the
strategy. For effective advocacy, collaboration with other actors outside of WASH such as academia,
private sector and community based organisations was mentioned as a way of pooling resources. Further
suggestions were to link WASH to other sectors and clusters such as environment, nutrition and
education; noting the link between WASH and malnutrition. There is a need to bridge the emergency
development divide by focusing on SDGs. Further collaboration with partners at a local and national level
to develop tools that that are more contextually relevant is required.
The following report includes a more detailed overview of the two-day forum including presentations and
group discussions.
7
Background
The Global WASH Cluster (GWC) has been formally in operation since 2006 and builds on the capacity of
an existing WASH humanitarian sector working group. It is an open platform led by UNICEF with the
primary purpose of coordinating international, national and local partners in the WASH agenda. It
comprises of 3 CAST members in Geneva and eight (8) SAG members constituting international NGOs and
UN agencies and 32 full members. In addition, it receives support from civil contingency/response
agencies, academic institutions and donors.
The role of the GWC is to contribute to building the capacity of WASH specialists globally and offer
technical assistance in the field. This includes supporting the delivery of a coordinated water, sanitation
and hygiene promotion assistance to emergency-affected populations. It aims to strengthen humanitarian
response and improve technical capacity to respond to humanitarian emergencies by ensuring predictable
leadership and accountability within the WASH sector. Since it was formed, the GWC has held annual
meetings with its partners to share experiences and lessons learned, and to assess progress in the
achievement of set strategic objectives for the WASH sector.
The Global WASH Cluster held its 22nd annual WASH Cluster meeting from 22nd to 23rd November 2016 in
Kathmandu, Nepal. The meeting brought together national and international organizations, UN agencies,
donors and private sector actors involved in humanitarian WASH actions globally. The theme of the
meeting this year was: Coordinating WASH Emergencies in an evolving humanitarian landscape. The
new GWC Strategy (2016-2020) which highlights partnership development in the WASH sector was rolled
out and endorsed during the event.
The agenda for both days focused on operational updates and challenges with the second day
predominately focused on the Global WASH Cluster Strategy 2016 - 2020. The forum offered an
opportunity for GWC partners to review outcomes of the 2016-2020 Strategic Plan, and discuss the key
objectives for developing indicators for the next five years. Some of the other agenda topics include:
a) GWC capacity building project
b) Humanitarian updates (WASH response in recent emergencies)
c) Linking humanitarian to development actions
d) Coordinated assessments
e) Markets-based programming
Please refer to the appendices for a detailed description of the agenda.
The proceeding document encapsulates the learning and action points covered during the two-day forum.
8
1. Humanitarian Updates and Challenges
1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. OPENING OPENING OPENING OPENING ADDRESSADDRESSADDRESSADDRESS
Presenter: Mr. Rajan Pandey, Joint Secretary of Ministry of Water Supply and Sanitation, Government of
Nepal.
The session started with an opening address by
the Joint Secretary (JS) of the Ministry of Water
Supply and Sanitation, Mr. Rajan Pandey. The
Joint Secretary thanked the GWC for organising
the annual meeting in Nepal. He gave a brief over
view of the devastation caused by the
earthquake in Nepal in 2015. The Joint Secretary
praised the hard work of the international
community and the WASH cluster. He also
appreciated the opportunity to work
collaboratively.
The Joint Secretary noted several key improvements and recommendations;
1. It should be agreed if the national WASH cluster should be at the national level only and/or sub-
national.
2. Behaviour Change Communication (BCC) material should be delivered from a neutral stand point;
resources should not be distributed with religious content.
3. It’s important to make sure that INGOs and agencies consult with the government and local partners
before conducting any humanitarian work. In addition, these organizations should also promote
mainstreaming by collaborating with local governments.
4. Be aware of corruption and how it affects relationships with INGOs, agencies and local staff and
ensure there is transparent working.
5. Depending on the context not all governments need to be part of a WASH cluster.
6. Develop plans on the type and length of relationship you want with local authorities and how
sustainable it will be. It has been a year and half since the earthquake and we are no longer in response
but recovery now.
7. Respect the country and culture you are in and the regulations in place.
1.21.21.21.2.... UUUUPDATES FROM THE PDATES FROM THE PDATES FROM THE PDATES FROM THE GWCGWCGWCGWC SAGSAGSAGSAG
Presenter: Jean Lapegue, ACF
To date there are seven members in the Global WASH Cluster’s Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) including:
UNICEF, IFRC, UNHCR, Oxfam, CARE and ACF. Some of the recent decisions made include a vote for the
new FST consortium lead with FST phase II starting from January 2017 (for 12 months). In addition, various
documents have been updated concerning membership with a suggestion to formalize commitments of
members and functions of the SAG. In the next year, three INGOs will be requested to step down from
the SAG and be replaced by other agencies – taking gender balance into consideration and to diversify
organizations represented in the SAG. A monitoring framework is also currently being validated and will
9
be linked to the GWC Strategic Plan for the next 5 years. Finally, for resource mobilization the need to
explore new opportunities under Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 were discussed – including some
of the challenges of mobilizing resources for the GWC in a constrained funding environment.
Further discussions on resource mobilization were held during a separate session at the GWC event.
1.31.31.31.3.... UUUUPDATES FROM THE PDATES FROM THE PDATES FROM THE PDATES FROM THE GWCGWCGWCGWC CASTCASTCASTCAST
Presenter: Dominique Porteaud, CAST, UNICEF
An analysis of the participants for the GWC
meeting showed that there were 59
organizations from 27 countries. Out of these,
22% of participants were from the UN; 51% from
International NGOs; 6% from governmental
ministries; 4% from academia; 3% from Red
Cross; and 7% were government donor
representatives with the remaining 7% a
combination of others. The chart to the right
illustrates a major proportion of members were
from Northern countries; and the least from the
Africa region. Nepal had 32 participants
registered, representing 43 organizations.
The rationale for the selection of the theme for the event: Coordinating WASH Emergencies in a changing
Humanitarian Landscape, was based on participant preferences on the online survey. Several key areas
were identified as important to address and this was also built on the previous priorities from last years’
action plan. The key areas that gave the rationale for the theme and agenda included; a) Climate change:
Natural disasters are becoming harder to predict. How do we then ensure effective preparedness actions
in the WASH sector?; b) Humanitarian access: How do WASH actors determine needs in conflict-affected
areas with restricted access for effective delivery of assistance (including strategies for implementing
remotely)?; c) Local capacity: With increased involvement of local actors in humanitarian coordination,
how does the WASH sector ensure that national platforms have relevant capacity for humanitarian
coordination?; d) Innovation: How do we engage in a social-media savvy and mobile technology equipped
world to improve WASH outcomes?; e) Working with the private sector: How has the sector utilized
opportunities brought about by private sector actors to improve humanitarian WASH response?
Other areas that participants highlighted for discussion in the GWC agenda included; a review of the GWC
Strategy and partnership development along with operational areas of support including surge
mechanisms; and capacity building. Under the GWC TWIG, the area of assessments and markets in crises
particularly CASH WASH links were highlighted as further areas to focus on. Furthermore, response
monitoring was included as an agenda item by looking at quality of response and specifically at Sphere as
a tool.
In 2016, GWC undertook the following activities:
Europe39%
Nepal29%
Asia (Nepal excluded)
10%
Middle East10%
North America
6%
Africa4%
10
• Capacity building: RED-R Coordination and Leadership training; and Triplex Simulation Training
• TWIGs: Establishment of Assessments and Markets Technical Working Groups
• Meetings/ Forums: Attendance of the World Water Week forum; ALNAP meeting; UNICEF WASH Net;
SDC regional meeting
• Strengthening relation with Sanitation and Water for All (SWA) / UNDAC / EHA, World Bank
• Information Management tool kit
• Surge and Remote support to countries (FST and SBP)
1.4.1.4.1.4.1.4. FFFFEEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE NNNNATIONAL ATIONAL ATIONAL ATIONAL WASHWASHWASHWASH CCCCLUSTER LUSTER LUSTER LUSTER CCCCOORDINATORS OORDINATORS OORDINATORS OORDINATORS MMMMEETING EETING EETING EETING
Presenter: Franck Bouvet, Karine Deniel & Jamal Shah, UNICEF
A brief overview was given on what was discussed during the previous day at the National Cluster
Coordinators Day (NWCC). In total 4 sessions were completed including: capacity building, information
management, emergency preparedness, and transition from WASH cluster to sector coordination.
The key action points arising were as follows;
Capacity building: The four pillars of capacity building were identified as; system tools, knowledge
management, organizational and individual capacity. Best practices and challenges of capacity mapping
during 2016 were further addressed.
Emergency preparedness: The session identified what is needed in the field at a minimum standard for
emergency preparedness. Following this, an action plan was prepared and challenges discussed.
Coordination for preparedness and IM was identified as an important component to emergency
preparedness.
Cluster - Sector transition of WASH coordination platforms: There are two clear messages- a) national
ownership and b) each country has its own system. Deliberations from the group work session concluded
that: national authorities may not always step up to coordinate humanitarian WASH structures due to the
capacity gaps, lack of a clear role (mandate) and lack of resources for humanitarian coordination. There
was a consensus that a country specific road map was required and a strategy for capacity building so that
resources could be channelled in the required places.
Information Management: The session discussed the consolidated IM tools; the major bottlenecks; and
ways of improving and making the most out of the IM skills for WASH cluster/sector coordination.
For more details on the NWCC event please refer to the separate report.
1.5.1.5.1.5.1.5. HHHHUMANITARIANUMANITARIANUMANITARIANUMANITARIAN UPDATESUPDATESUPDATESUPDATES:::: AAAACHIEVEMENTSCHIEVEMENTSCHIEVEMENTSCHIEVEMENTS,,,, CCCCHALLENGES AND HALLENGES AND HALLENGES AND HALLENGES AND AAAACTIONSCTIONSCTIONSCTIONS
This session focused on lessons learned from recent emergency WASH responses in the following
scenarios; a natural disaster, a conflict situation and a public health emergency. The participants were
divided into three groups based on these three areas and asked to discuss and reflect on the following
objectives;
11
1.5.1.1.5.1.1.5.1.1.5.1. WASHWASHWASHWASH ININININ NNNNATURALATURALATURALATURAL DDDDISASTERS ISASTERS ISASTERS ISASTERS CCCCONTEXTSONTEXTSONTEXTSONTEXTS Objective: To highlight innovative approaches of delivering WASH assistance in areas affected by chronic
natural disasters; and reflect on some of the challenges and lessons learned from recent humanitarian
responses.
Presentations: NCA/CARE; OFDA; AKVO; Nepal ENPHO
Haiti, Hurricane Mathew
Presenter: Kit Dyer (NCA), Nick Brooks (CARE)
El Nino in Southern Africa,
Presenter: Melissa Opryszko, (USAID/OFDA)
Impact: 1.4 million required assistance, with the
poverty level of the population reaching 70%.
Coordination: WASH was led by DINEPA
(Direction Nationale de l’Eau Potable et de
l’Assannissement- Haiti Government). No
activation of WASH cluster.
NGO Response: Hygiene promotion (house to
house messaging, Aquatab distribution, hygiene
kit distribution) and for water (water trucking,
quick fixes), and sanitation (plans)
WASH Indicators: As of 17th November, 2016 the
response shows low levels of sanitation
interventions compared to water.
Challenges: Safety and security, lack of French
speaking staff, obtaining transit visas,
challenging terrain, limited assessment data,
limited infrastructure for sanitation activities
and lack of BCC for vaccination campaigns, no
water exit-strategy.
Impact: More than 60 million people affected.
Resulting in drought, the worst in 35 years.
WASH interventions: Well rehabilitation,
deepening and new construction; short-term
water trucking; increasing available taps as local
wells were dry; promotion of water rationing; and
household water treatment.
Challenges: Wide geographic impact; high
vulnerability due to 2 years of failed rains; urban
and rural both impacted; difficult to determine
when emergency begins resulting in slow
response; reluctance to declare a disaster (huge
political influence; disconnect between resilience
and response.
Achievements: Programming and coordination
across sectors; improvements in forecasting for
disseminating information; private-public
partnerships increased access to water (engaged
with water vendors).
Way forward: Early exit-strategy; develop DRR;
engage with the private sector.
Use of Mobile Technology in WASH
emergencies:
Presenter: Deepak Menon (AKVO)
ENPHOs learnings on Promotion of Safe WASH in
emergency
Presenter: Bipin Dangol: Executive Director
Background: Online dashboard for data
collection and monitoring, 14 hubs and satellite
stations globally, 93 staff.
Background: Chlorine solution Piyush for water
treatment, Ready To Install (RTI) toilets & faecal
sludge management (FSM).
Challenges: Monitoring households, public
acceptance, BCC, inconsistent use; pits fill up
12
Achievements: Ministry of Education in Fiji using
the tool for mapping schools affected by cyclone
Winston to assess infrastructure damage.
Benefits:
- Fast and accurate data makes a difference
- First 72 hours – can upload all the data and GPS
maps
- Mobile phone infrastructure is resilient, quick
to repair, and a priority after disasters
- Preparedness (data inventory, standardized
surveys, training, data drills,) - Real-time monitoring - combine data sets
quickly - require emptying every 4 months, unsafe
disposal of faecal sludge, lack of appropriate
treatment systems.
Benefits:
- Have potential to scale up in emergencies as
well as normal situations;
- Cost can be reduced with bulk production;
- Good option for institutions and temporary
shelters
FFFFEEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE NATURAL DNATURAL DNATURAL DNATURAL DISASTERSISASTERSISASTERSISASTERS’’’’ GGGGROUPROUPROUPROUP SESSIONSESSIONSESSIONSESSION
Achievements
• Support for GWC on sudden onset (Haiti, El Nino response)
• Establishment of standards for the response (through the sector coordination mechanism)
• High involvement of local authorities/disaster management
• Phased response
• Preparedness (still requires improvement)
• Early warning system (pre- existing data analysis framework)
• Capacity building
• Real time monitoring (mobile technology - AKVO)
• Collective agreement on needs of cost effectiveness/impact analysis of water trucking-statement
Challenges
• Political backlash/reluctance of action
• Logistical arrangements (planning process to be followed)
• Lack of assessed data (what to support, where to support)
• Separate arms of government on sanitation resulting in mismatch of standards (established
community led total sanitation (CLTS) in Haiti conflict emergency support)
• Wide geographic impact makes it difficult to manage and coordinate
• Disconnect between resilience and response (relief/ rehabilitation/ response)
• Lack of monitoring of water quality to the end users
• Faecal sludge management is difficult, there are options to link to normal situation
Action points for Natural Disaster Settings
1)1)1)1) Rapid establishment of coordination mechanism to meet technical needs
2)2)2)2) Early warning, early action (vulnerability mapping) to include WASH
3)3)3)3) Monitoring to include quality issues not just quantity
4)4)4)4) Tools and technology-appropriate to the context or scenario e.g. slow onset monitoring
5) Bridge the gap between emergency and development and collaborate with development
and humanitarian actors. WASH clusters to link with other clusters to avoid duplication.
6)6)6)6) Focus on Behaviour Change Communication (refer to the 7th Emergency Health Forum)
13
7)7)7)7) Build the capacity of the private sector for chlorination – sensitise and focus on advocacy
8)8)8)8) Donors to engage in good collaboration and involve partners to engage in the field
9)9)9)9) Strengthen the capacity around public health emergencies
1.5.1.5.1.5.1.5.2222.... WASHWASHWASHWASH ININININ CCCCONFLICTONFLICTONFLICTONFLICT----AAAAFFECTEDFFECTEDFFECTEDFFECTED AAAAREASREASREASREAS
Objective: To highlight challenges of delivering WASH assistance in areas with limited humanitarian access
- and the role of local partners in such contexts.
Presentations: Afghanistan; Iraq; Nigeria; Yemen
WASH in Emergency Monitoring in contexts
with limited humanitarian access
Presenter: Julien Graveleau, UNICEF Nigeria
Impact: 1.8 million people displaced and staying
in host community, high mortality rate, high
malnutrition (SAM >20), 37% IDP have no access
to 15 litres water per day, 96 IDP are sharing one
toilet, L3 emergency declared in August 2016.
Achievements: SMART WASH M&E tools for
indicators implemented by DTM teams in 197
settlements, all partners use the tools, identified
needs- gaps, advocated cluster
members/donors to support on gaps, monitor
progress over time, provided data for sectoral
analysis.
Challenges: Limited access to the field, lack of
staff for field monitoring, harmonised
tools/indicators for M&E, prioritisation of
camps/activities.
Yemen WASH Cluster
Presenter: Marije Broekhuijsen, UNICEF Yemen
Impact: Multiple crisis (cyclone, cholera, IDPs,
returnees, flooding, long term conflict). Funding
need of US$141 million and 14.4 million in need of
WASH assistance (HNO 2017).
Achievements: Local NGO partnerships, identified
most vulnerable, used local suppliers through
vouchers, targeted both IDP and host community,
built on existing infrastructure, collaborated with
health, nutrition, and shelter clusters, developed
joint action plan for urban WASH, engaged
development partners.
Lessons Learned: Target vulnerable, collaborate
with other sectors, use SMART surveys and
secondary data, use existing systems, urban WASH
working group, joint action plan for urban WASH.
WASH Cluster Coordination in Iraq
Presenter: George Massey, ACF - Erbil, Iraq
Impact: Refugee and IDP crisis. Currently, HRP
has targeted 2.9 million people, but 6.6 million
people are in need ($81 million is required).
Challenges: Multiple WASH partners in cluster,
government bodies, NGO conflicting priorities,
security/access constraint.
Achievements:
Lessons learned from emergency response
mechanism, Afghanistan
Presenter: Betman Bhandari, Emergency WASH
Advisor, DACAAR
Background: DACAAR conducted an evaluation of
WASH responses in emergency in Afghanistan
with beneficiaries.
Challenges: Lack of market for hygiene kits, All
IDPs suffered from water related disease, 3%
female can read and write against 8% male,
14
CCS developed with surge team, NGOs co-lead
system with UNICEF, government engagement,
local leadership of WASH - access geographical
areas and multiple camps; accurate reporting
and monitoring, capacity building of local NGOs
cluster standard developed, NFI guidance
includes standardised hygiene kits.
continuity of behavioural change, quality of
emergency response.
Lessons Learned: Provide household water
treatment technology to households using
contaminated water for a long period, Coordinate
with ERM partners and other cluster providing
holistic support for affected families, train field
staff to manage resources effectively, efficiently,
and ethically.
FEEDBACK FROM THE CONFLICT IN EMERGENCIES SETTINGS
Action points for Conflict Emergencies Settings
1) Create standardized tools with flexible
approaches for monitoring
2) Develop outside of the box solutions
3) Design different sustainable approaches
4) Include donor advocacy for sustainable
solutions outside of life-saving interventions
5) Ensure coordination with ICRC (forums to
align)
6) Build capacity of private sector partners
7) Streamline cluster for advocacy
8) Ensure better communications between
coordination bodies and cross border (mixed
refuges and IDP situations)
9) Ensure development and humanitarian
alignment especially in protracted crisis
1.5.31.5.31.5.31.5.3.... WASHWASHWASHWASH ININININ PUBLICPUBLICPUBLICPUBLIC HEALTHHEALTHHEALTHHEALTH EMERGENCIESEMERGENCIESEMERGENCIESEMERGENCIES
Objective: Explore how lessons learned from public health emergencies (Cholera, Zika) have been
integrated in preparedness actions for WASH.
Presentations: Nepal (DWSS); UNICEF PD
Title: Cholera: Nepal - Cholera epidemic
Presenter: Aeati Shrestha Department of Water
Supply and Sewerage, Nepal
Impact: 168 confirmed cases of Cholera as of
14th November 2016, water supply coverage
83.6%, Water quality e-coli 71% and e-coli
households 82%. Sanitation: 87.2%.
Title: Zika, vector control: what role for WASH?
Presenter: Tim Grieve, WASH Senior Advisor –
UNICEF PD
Impact: Since 2015, 69 countries have reported an
outbreak of Zika mainly South America, linked to
microcephaly (birth defect) with similarities with
15
Response: Immediate cluster activation, BCC
campaigns, water quality testing and chlorine
added to water sources.
Challenges: Need appropriate multi-media
campaigns to reach whole population; increase
practice of water treatment at community level;
lack of dedicated funds.
Way forward: Improved water infrastructure
and more coordinated leadership at
municipality and/ or district levels; contingency
plan required and convergence between
different sectors; capacity building and
preparedness plans.
Guillain-Barre syndrome. It is spread by a daytime
mosquito which is difficult to eradicate.
Response: Break transmission route at container
level, destroy mosquito and break chain to
humans, environmental management not just
solid waste and pool water but now targeting
larvae sites through fogging, BCC - UNICEF mainly
focused on this - clean up bag yard, dealing with
water, mosquito nets. South America used
community driven approach and mass
communication campaigns.
Challenges: M&E - Measuring mass
communication campaigns can be a challenge,
development of environmental policies, co-
ordination, ensuring an integrated and
coordinated response.
Way forward: UNICEF and public health sector
moving into vector control.
FFFFEEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE WWWWASHASHASHASH IN IN IN IN PPPPUBLIC UBLIC UBLIC UBLIC HHHHEALTH EALTH EALTH EALTH EEEEMERGENCIES MERGENCIES MERGENCIES MERGENCIES GGGGROUP ROUP ROUP ROUP SESSIONSESSIONSESSIONSESSION
Achievements
• WASH partners have a common understanding of public health emergencies and of their role and
responsibilities in these contexts
• WASH partners have a common voice (for example in exchanging with Health Cluster)
• WASH partners have common standards, technical guidance, and harmonised protocols in term of
public health emergencies responses
• WASH partners are aware of the multi sector matrix on roles and responsibilities (accountability) R&R
and apply this matrix as much as possible at implementation level
• WASH partners value the critical need for proper integration of WASH and Health sectors at every
level (global to sub-national)
• Local NGO and sub national level are excluded from Information Management
• WASH partners have a clear understanding of monitoring public health emergency channels (case
reporting, etc.) between Health and WASH clusters
Action points for WASH in public health emergencies
1) Integrated WASH / Health best practices and lessons learned need to be captured and shared with
institutions through international platforms such as SWA
2) Increase research about public health in emergencies, especially about forgotten issues such as
vector control and behaviour change
3) Need to engage government into operational research
4) Basic monitoring such as biological water quality should be done as a routine in areas prone to
outbreaks, not only during the emergency.
16
Preparedness
1) Ensure an integrated WASH / Health early preparedness plan
2) Ensure predesigned agreements with the private sector to ensure an efficient and effective local
response
3) Preparedness plans should reach the sub-national level
4) Contingency stocks hubs (regional) need to be aligned to produce a more effective response.
Advocacy
1) GWC support in situations where government does not transparently share public health data, or
where there is reluctance to declare an outbreak
2) GWC support forgotten issues such as vector control and solid waste management in emergency
3) GWC support health systems to mitigate outbreak risks.
Capacity Building
1) Capacity building needs to be imbedded into preparedness plans
2) Include inter-sectoral training
3) Ensure emergency WASH people attend epidemiology training
4) Extend capacity building down to the municipality level (sub-national)
5) Emergency training like a 1 day on the spot training or refresher training curriculum could be
prepared to be delivered at emergency day 1.
Plenary discussions and Q&A
Addressing the knowledge gap - It was noted by CAST that UNICEF is working in collaboration with partner
NGOs on developing an epidemiology training specifically for WASH specialists. A working group has
further been established to link public health with WASH on a global level. In addition, UNICEF and CDC
are formulating a package for all diseases which is led by the Health, WASH and Education sectors.
Other key points raised were; the usability of the cholera toolkit which is due for an evaluation in the
coming weeks. There were concerns about whether Red Cross should be responsible for every emergency
response as it was suggested they react first. It was determined that it is the government’s responsibility
for public health emergencies with global actors as a support. Oxfam recommended we focus on the role
of private sector in the provision of clean drinking water by focusing on advocacy. DFID were also
supportive of forming effective collaborations with other sectors who can play a role in supporting
engagement in the field. They suggested the idea of including conditions in the contracts to support this.
1.6. WASH Assessments
1.6.1.6.1.6.1.6.1111 WASHWASHWASHWASH AAAASSESSMENT SSESSMENT SSESSMENT SSESSMENT 2016201620162016 ---- SSSSYRIAN YRIAN YRIAN YRIAN AAAARAB RAB RAB RAB RRRREPUBLICEPUBLICEPUBLICEPUBLIC
Presenter: Roberto Saltori, Senior WASH Coordinator
There are three national WASH hubs located in Syria. In addition, there are coordination hubs located in
Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq. Key informants in various sub-districts were used to collect data for
the first time across the whole of Syria. The operation took two years to complete and included seven
17
different surveys and the collaboration of seven agencies. The challenges included amongst others; access
to information and data, and restricted access to conflict areas. It involved effective and continual
coordination bringing several different experts together. The map below illustrates the different data
collection methods used in Syria.
A tool was developed that included a simple set of indicators, two questionnaires (KI and HH) and one
final database. The existing global tools were not fit for purpose in the context.
Lessons Learned in Preparedness:
• Coordinating and identifying the right people on the ground is key (FST as a technical resource)
• Conducting analysis prior to the coordination of the technical assessment is critical
• Understanding the economy of WASH is important for example, 38% of Syrians still get water for free
or at a minimum cost and two-thirds of Syrians need to complement their water supply at a cost.
• Monitoring of data and on-going data analysis is essential for a good preparedness response.
• IM and sharing of information is also a critical component.
• Monitoring the market is critical for prioritisation
1.6.1.6.1.6.1.6.2222.... MMMMULTIPLE ULTIPLE ULTIPLE ULTIPLE CCCCOUNTRY OUNTRY OUNTRY OUNTRY AAAASSESSMENT SSESSMENT SSESSMENT SSESSMENT CCCCASE ASE ASE ASE SSSSTUDYTUDYTUDYTUDY
Presenter: Rose Marie Guevremont
18
The presentation focused on case study assessments in South Sudan, Syria, Somalia, and Niger. The tools
included; a WASH baseline (South Sudan cluster), a WASH assessment for the whole of Syria Framework
(Syria cluster), water market monitoring (Somalia cluster) and a WASH infrastructures evaluation (Niger
cluster).
An Assessment Technical Working Group consisting of 10 individuals from NGOs and UN agencies was
established in October 2015. The purpose was to work together on designing the tools so the data could
be merged from the different countries. The Humanitarian Indicator Registry and Associated Question
Bank 2.0 from OCHA was used as guidance.
The WASH Assessment Toolkit for Rapid-Onset Emergencies provides guidance to WASH platforms to
conduct assessments. This includes guidance on whether a WASH assessment is needed, the type of
information that should be collected, at what level it should be collected and how to analyse the data to
inform decision-making.
Challenges
Data collection:
• Inability to design indicators and proper questions to inform those indicators
• Confusion about methodologies and most importantly sampling strategies
• Confusion about the level of evaluation
Data aggregation:
• Attempts to aggregate different levels of confidence, different levels of analysis, and different
type of data
• Problems evaluating reliability of data (no objective scale, and no knowledge to assess sources)
• No knowledge of the importance of weighting, or capacity to do so
Data analysis:
• General lack of knowledge on how to do proper quantitative analysis or what to do with
qualitative data
• Specifically, it impacts on larger processes such as the HNO
• PIN determination is questionable
• Severity scales are an approximation at best
• The responsibility of data on clusters makes it so that specialists are overstretched by bilateral
demands, where in fact everything should be coordinated because ultimately everyone is doing
the same exercise
1.6.31.6.31.6.31.6.3.... FFFFEEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE EEDBACK FROM THE AAAASSESSMENTSSESSMENTSSESSMENTSSESSMENTSSSS GGGGROUPROUPROUPROUP WWWWORK ORK ORK ORK SSSSESSIONESSIONESSIONESSION
The participants were divided into five working groups to focus on five key areas of the WASH assessment
process. The objective was to identify the challenges and identify action points that could assist in delivery
of coordinated assessments. The five groups focused on the following key areas:
1) Planning a coordinated assessment (getting the right people, indicators, tool)
2) Collecting data (methodology, sampling)
3) Analysing data (comparing datasets, producing output)
19
4) Using the data in programming AND monitoring (how to use the data)
5) Additional challenges of a multi-sector assessment (coordination with other sectors, OCHA)
The groups were asked to think about assessments carried out by one agency as well as coordinated
and/or joint ones and what this means for the cluster, in terms of aggregating and comparing data.
Inter-sectoral coordination was the focus of many of the discussions as a way of improving the assessment
process. It was highlighted how there were many advantages to inter-sectoral coordination;
- It helps to avoid duplication of responses
- Saves money and time – efficiency
- Promotes the concept “do not harm”
- Identifies the priorities
- Fosters advocacy
- Avoids agency bias.
The table below shows reflections on various challenges at each step of the assessment process:
Assessment Area Challenges
Planning a coordinated
assessment
• Different agendas are problematic in an emergency
• Donors and organisations have different indicators
• Government and local agencies have different tools
• Capacity building is lacking at the field level
• Lack of human resources with technical expertise
• Remote assessments and access
• Timing of assessment
• Duplication of assessments being conducted by multiple
organisations, agencies, and sectors.
Collecting data
(Methodology, sampling,
etc.)
• Enumerator bias and survey bias
• Qualitative data often lacks credibility when it may be the only
option
• The demographics of enumerators can affect access to some sample
populations
• Limited access to some populations due to conflict/disaster
• Lengthy survey challenges.
Analysing data • Obtaining the correct software to analyse the data
• Lack of skilled staff with M&E skills
• Lack of access to data from multiple data sources for triangulation
• Lack of established indicators to be able to monitor and a need for
validated measurement tools
• Badly designed data means bad data out
• Political interest in data validation, processing and perhaps analysis
makes life challenging and can take a long time (Ethiopia).
• Challenges in quality of data coming from remote sources.
Additional challenges of a
Multi-Sector Assessments
• Setting indicators - vulnerability assessment (VA) is always a
challenge before the emergencies.
20
(coordination with other
sectors, OCHA, etc.)
• Lack of cash based intervention assessments in emergencies
• Lack of information in preparedness plans on who is going to collect
data, what are the methodologies, who are the target/relevant
participants and who will analyse the data
• Integrated group such as health and WASH and others can have
different agendas but can be difficult to move forward
• The period for assessment, fieldwork is always being moved.
Assessment Area Recommendations
Using the data in
programming AND
monitoring (how to use the
data)
• First steps are to simplify the data so that we have basic information
to use for an immediate response (i.e.1-15 days)
• Multi-sectoral assessment data gives geographical data (i.e. area A-
lack of water, area 2- lack of sanitation) so after receiving such data
we should further go for detailed data
• Ensue the data is timely enough to be useful
• Share assessment data across individual agencies
• Assessment should be continuous so can monitor impact
• Biggest public health risk should be analysed as risk is the
overarching issue
• Sometimes shelter and health assessments are useful for WASH
programmes (e.g. use questions from other sector assessments).
Action points for Assessment Specialist
The previous presentation highlighted several key action points that could be implemented to overcome
these challenges;
Action Point Who By When
Increase support to national-level clusters
and partners for every aspect of
assessments, especially coordinated ones
FST (Assessment Specialist) Continuous
Design a generic SOPs/ToRs for sectoral
assessment in rapid-onset emergency
Assessment TWIG Feb 2017
Finalize and share assessment guidance for
rapid-onset emergencies
Assessment TWIG Feb 2017
Follow up and share the updated Indicator
Registry and Question Bank
CAST - with FST Assessment
Specialist
Feb 2017
Provide in-country trainings to M&E,
program, IM of partners
Interested GWC partners
with support from FST
Assessment Specialist
Continuous, based
on requests and
opportunities
Provide global and regional level trainings to
management
Interested GWC partners
with support from FST
Assessment Specialist
Continuous, based
on requests and
opportunities
Reinforce inter-sectoral collaboration in
every step of the way, with other sectors and
OCHA, from design to analysis AND at both
national and global level
GWC at global level, and
national clusters at national
level
Continuous
21
1.7 Market Based Programming
1.7.1.7.1.7.1.7.1.1.1.1. MMMMARKETARKETARKETARKET----BASED BASED BASED BASED PPPPROGRAMMING ROGRAMMING ROGRAMMING ROGRAMMING
Presenters: Jenny Lamb (Oxfam), James Brown (Oxfam), Kit Dyer (NCA), Rick Bauer (NRC), Johannes Rueck
(German WASH Network), and Rolando Wallusce (CRS)
During the last GWC meeting in Nairobi (October 2015), a mandate was endorsed for a Markets Technical
Working Group with various INGOs. A mapping exercise was conducted on MBP that covers 5 modalities
including; unconditional cash, conditional cash/vouchers, use of contractors for infrastructure, market
support and PPP. A survey was carried out with 7 INGOs to identify how they decide on a response and
evaluate it. WASH market support was reported to be the least covered modality and there was very little
evidence of analysis of the response at the end of the programme.
MBP Position Paper: The position paper was presented and key features of MBP were highlighted. This
included building experience through a people centred approach and ensuring that market assessments
are routinely incorporated into response planning. Opportunities were identified; MBP is relevant at
different stages of the disaster cycle and offers the opportunity to coordinate working with humanitarian
and development partners. The WASH Cluster, CAST and members should be represented at Cash
Working Groups.
Recommendations from the position paper were selected for the subsequent group discussions below:
1.7.21.7.21.7.21.7.2.... MMMMARKETARKETARKETARKET----BASED BASED BASED BASED PPPPROGRAMMING ROGRAMMING ROGRAMMING ROGRAMMING WWWWORKING ORKING ORKING ORKING GGGGROUPROUPROUPROUP
The participants were asked to work in 6 groups to discuss the market based programming
recommendations in the current proposal. The participants were given an opportunity to select their
group before the session. Each group focused on one of the recommendations below:
1) Collect evidence, strengthen institutional understanding, and disseminate learning
2) Provide systematic market assessment and analysis
3) Address programme quality standards & MEAL (monitoring, evaluation, accountability, and learning)
4) Capacity building
5) Working with others
6) Address ethical issues
Within the group discussions participants were asked to focus on three key questions in relation to each
recommendation:
1) Are there any critical disagreements? (Red Lines)
2) What actions or activities are needed to achieve these recommendations?
3) What more do we need to know? (Evidence, research questions)
22
RECOMMENDATION: 1. Collect evidence, strengthen institutional understanding, and
disseminate learning
• Conduct a multi-sectoral consultation to define in which field the research should be oriented
• Conduct a gap analysis of existing research on MBP (example MaMout ACF, from NEEP project)
• Implement operational research, in emergency contexts, but also in specific environments
(urban, camps, etc.)
• Capitalise and share the operational research outcomes
• Design an advocacy strategy based on the evidence collected
• Use a platform to advocate toward governments (such as SWA)
• Advocate toward main emergency and development donors
• Develop an institutional capacity building curriculum, and transfer capacity to governments.
RECOMMENDATION: 2. Promote Systematic market assessment and analysis
• Conduct PCMA based on different scenarios.
• Include Multi-Cluster Initial Rapid Assessment (MIRA)
• Include additional training for emergency PCMA
• Supply vs demand - be realistic about how much stock can be bought against the demand, the
local market may not supply everything that is needed.
• Ensure that we highlight the added value of NGOs in combination with the private sector.
• If we want the private sector to do basic water delivery or sanitation activities like desludging,
then they need to meet certain standards.
Further knowledge
• Understand the market so we do not use just one private service provider and exclude others.
• Understand if the service providers at the national level have the capacity to provide service or
goods at the local levels.
RECOMMENDATION: 3. Address Programme quality standards (Monitoring, Evaluation,
Accountability, and Learning)
• Design a clear and effective M&E system - needs to be simple and easy to implement for a
range of practitioners. Capacity should be built on how to implement it.
• Ensure guidance at the global level to support the national and sub-national level
• GWC could be a platform for sharing lessons learned
• Define standards or moving targets to move towards that can be continuously reviewed.
Further knowledge
• Create mechanisms for agencies to share both good and bad practice in an anonymous
environment
• Create a website where this evidence can be gathered.
RECOMMENDATION: 4. Capacity Building
• WASH sector to develop sector specific plan to find out what other sectors are doing in
terms of MBP (i.e. food cluster where we can we link with others and share knowledge)
• TWIG needs to reach out more to others on MBP
• Involve in real-time evaluation
• Create training methodology for senior managers
23
• Only six organisations are involved, it requires capacity building and identification of gaps
in skills and an understanding of the context by conducting a market assessment analysis.
Further knowledge
• All staff should understand about MBP and have specific competencies to follow
• CB should also focus on the supply chain
• Donors required to support capacity building
RECOMMENDATION: 5. Working with others
• WASH Cluster co-ordinators could identify important working groups in WASH where can
collaborate and advocate
• Engage in cash working groups however, it is not clear who supports who
• Policies need to identify where cash programming worked well
• Identify how TWIG can play a role to practically engage at the policy level, and how SAG
can be involved in this
• Identify mechanisms for pushing the agenda forward
Further knowledge
• Clarification on Cash Working Groups and how it’s not just about cash
• Donors need to be aware of critical role of assessment and monitoring activities.
RECOMMENDATION: 6. Addressing Ethical Issues
• Conduct risk analysis prior to investing in projects such as investing in water can lead to
land/rent price increases
• Ensure there is equal distribution within the markets so everyone has an equal chance
• Identify access issues to purchasing power, based on several barriers such as distance to
markets, transportation issues, power struggles in household of who manages the money.
• Identify impact on markets in an emergency specifically for non-cash actors
• Identify how we monitor and measure the quality of goods and set minimum standards
• Identify how we reduce risk as normally we have an objective to prevent people from
being sick – identify how we reduce risk if we have open markets since donors give us
funding based on low risk
• Identify ways to mitigate the ethical dilemma about water to prevent artificially escalating
the price of water.
Further evidence
• Need to gather more evidence on certain scenarios for example, research to understand how
MBP works in real time emergencies.
2. WASH Cluster Strategy 2016 - 2020
2.1.2.1.2.1.2.1. GGGGLOBAL LOBAL LOBAL LOBAL WASHWASHWASHWASH CCCCLUSTER LUSTER LUSTER LUSTER SSSSTRATEGIC TRATEGIC TRATEGIC TRATEGIC PPPPLAN LAN LAN LAN RRRREVIEW AND EVIEW AND EVIEW AND EVIEW AND DDDDEVELOPMENTEVELOPMENTEVELOPMENTEVELOPMENT
Presenter: Jamal Shah, UNICEF
Background: 38 people were interviewed about the Global WASH Cluster Strategic Plan (GWCSP). The
findings reported that most people didn’t know about the GWC strategy.
24
Who is the Global WASH Strategy for?
• Strategic Advisory Group - to decide/ measure
• Cluster Advisory Support Team (CAST) - to implement
• Cluster Lead Agency (CLA) – to understand/ track progress
• Donors – to fund/ monitor
• National WASH Coordination Platforms (NWCP) – as a reference point
GWC Mission
1. Predictability; 2. Partnership; 3. Accountability; 4. Work to IASC.
GWC Values
1. People-centred; 2. Partnership; 3. Learning; 4. IASC TA/CCRM.
What do we want to achieve?
• Feedback from SAG and CAST members
• Support the national platform
• Monitor the quality of the cluster
• Ensure preparedness so we are ready to respond
• Move to a more coordinated response particularly in protracted situations
• Strengthen collaboration and links with other sectors and partners.
Strategic Objectives: The 3 strategic objectives that GWC are supporting is described below:
Strategic Goal 1: To provide operational support to national emergency WASH coordination platforms
to meet the TA 6+1 core functions and improve emergency WASH technical response via timely
operational support.
Description: This is the 6 + 1 function of the WASH Cluster: it’s the foundation of the GWC work and is
based on a service oriented approach to provide information that can help to develop a country level
strategy for implementation. It’s a guide to what we are doing.
Strategic Goal 2: To ensure that relevant WASH stakeholders (national and global) have the capacity to
coordinate and deliver a high-quality response in emergency.
Description: Capacity Building includes capacity to coordinate; GWC support the design of CB on
management for leadership through involvement in the design of academic courses.
Strategic Goal 3: To influence and advocate for improved emergency WASH coordination and funding
Description: This is the advocacy component that involves strengthening partnerships.
2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2. PPPPARTNERSHIPS AND RESOARTNERSHIPS AND RESOARTNERSHIPS AND RESOARTNERSHIPS AND RESOURCE URCE URCE URCE MOBILIZATIONMOBILIZATIONMOBILIZATIONMOBILIZATION
Presenter: Jean McCluskey
GWC members were encouraged to influence the direction of the GWCSP and identify how they can play
a role. The resource mobilization component of the strategic plan focuses on how the GWC will invest in
partnerships and on what continuum as illustrated in the diagram below;
25
It was recommended that the GWC widens partnerships to include both internal and external contacts.
The overall funding for the WASH sector is lower than other sectors. For example, in Nigeria during 2016,
WASH received the least funding amongst all sectors with $7 million compared to Coordination and
Support Services that received $21.7 million and Health with $7.1 million. A solution was to mobilize
resources by joining in other strategic initiatives such as scaling up nutrition. However, there may be
challenges to obtaining the tools to communicate the message to potential partners and operationalize
the evidence. Therefore, knowledge management was regarded as an area to improve upon. GWC
members were invited to consider how GWC can be fit for purpose and consider whether the plan will be
able to fulfill its mission statement.
The urgency of diversifying funding streams by partnering with trusts and foundations and the private
sector was highlighted. It was noted that conceptualizing coordination in agreement with GWC partners
is critical. Several suggestions on how to deliver planned activities under the strategic objectives were
noted;
- Engaging with other clusters
- Selling the cluster system to donors as integral to emergency preparedness and response
- Tapping into GWC partners thematic funding (or similar)
- Engaging donors at all levels in multi-year preparedness funding
2.32.32.32.3.... GGGGLOBAL LOBAL LOBAL LOBAL WASHWASHWASHWASH CCCCLUSTER LUSTER LUSTER LUSTER SSSSTRATEGIC TRATEGIC TRATEGIC TRATEGIC PPPPLAN LAN LAN LAN GGGGROUP ROUP ROUP ROUP SSSSESSIONESSIONESSIONESSION
Overview: Participants were divided into six groups to discuss the first three strategic objectives of the
GWCSP. The purpose of the session was to glean feedback on whether the outcomes were appropriate
and understandable and clarify any amendments.
Overall feedback on the GWC strategy:
It was noted that the GWCSP was an ambitious document and the indicators and targets would need to
frame expectations. It was highlighted how the GWCSP needs to address the need of commitments for
partners. There were concerns about how to integrate the intercluster/intersectoral and integrated
26
programmes into the strategic plan. Furthermore, there was some confusion by participants about the
role of GWC and the need to be very clear about this in the GWCSP. This was important as it would
facilitate agencies to know how the Global WASH Cluster could be used as a platform for knowledge
management; how GWC can be used as a sharing forum for applicable gaps like hardware and technical
support and how the GWC could be used as a platform for high level engagement at the national level
regarding the cluster.
“Co-ordination is a means to an end, it’s a tool to get to the end result”. (Dominique Porteaurd, GWCC)
Advocacy and capacity building
Advocacy and capacity building are an integral part of the GWCSP. Subsequently, collaboration and
partnership were identified by participants as key to dealing with resource and funding issues and to avoid
duplication. It was suggested by participants that advocacy should be an objective of its own as it involves
multiple components. Furthermore, it was noted that UNICEF as the CLA need to raise their profile to link
with other sectors and campaign for funding and resources. The participants identified that partnerships
with the private sector and academic institutions as well as cross-sectoral working and learning were
essential to capacity building.
The GWC CAST highlighted how the GWCSP provides guidelines on partnership working and identified
that the GWC needs to get better at working with other clusters and broaden its capacity to include other
institutions. Further areas identified were the need to focus on the national and local levels and not just
global to ensure they are actively engaged in all processes of implementation. Lastly, participants
identified that M&E needs to be integrated into all the objectives to monitor the TA 6+1 core functions.
The table below encompasses the collective feedback and action points from the six discussion groups:
SO1 to provide operational support to national emergency WASH coordination platforms to meet the
TA 6+1 core functions and improve emergency WASH technical response via timely operational
support
Outcomes: Action points
Response: In Cluster
Activated or HRP covered
countries, national WASH
coordination platforms
deliver the 6+1 core
functions and monitor the
quality of the response
Preparedness: In countries
prioritized for emergency
preparedness as validated
by SAG, national WASH
coordination platforms have
an operational emergency
preparedness plan that is
agreed among the partners
SO1: Language and definitions
- Re-order the outcome points to reflect the chronology of each
process
- Provide a definition of what we mean by ‘operational support’
- Add national and if appropriate sub-national level
- Add ‘appropriate according to context’ in to the document
- The word ‘emergency’ to be replaced by ‘humanitarian
assistance’.
Response:
- Prefer the word ‘coordination’ rather than ‘cluster’
- Identify if support on preparedness and transition should
include supporting national strategies. For example, providing
a policy advisory role to national strategies.
Preparedness:
27
and consistent with the
national preparedness plan
Transition: National WASH
Clusters have a transition
strategy to national WASH
coordination platforms
Systems: Priority
mechanisms in place at a
global level to support and
monitor the delivery of
emergency WASH
coordination functions.
- Change or remove sentence ‘as validated by SAG’ as it is not
SAG’s role to do this.
Transition:
- Need to clarify transition: are we talking of transition of
cluster or transition of phase (recovery)?
Systems:
- ‘Priority mechanisms’ should focus on evaluation and include
quality of coordination, how response has been delivered,
how global level supports national level. Global evaluation of
the global cluster is required to ensure accountability for what
we do.
- Focus on an enabling environment to capacity building not
just coordination
- The emphasis is still on the global for this objective. The
country level needs to be included.
- Address the reliability of the monitoring systems not only
quality.
SO2: To ensure that relevant WASH stakeholders (national and global) have the capacity to
coordinate and deliver a high-quality response in emergency
Outcomes Action Points
Outcome 1:
GWC has developed systems
and tools at a global level to
reinforce the capacity of
National WASH cluster
coordination platforms and
improve the quality of the
Humanitarian WASH
response
Outcome 2:
GWC partners have
reinforced their capacity to
support the delivery of core
coordination functions of
National Coordination
Platforms
Outcome 3:
The global pool of fit-for-
purpose WASH
practitioners to support
coordination in emergency
Language and definitions
- ‘High quality’ change to ‘appropriate and timely’
- Define whether talking about ‘relevant’ or key partners
- Consider regional stakeholders as well as national and global
- Concerns about the term ‘high quality response’ what do we
mean by ‘high’ as this could be difficult to measure.
Systems and tools:
- Concerns about tools not being used - there was a suggestion
to have agreed standards in an emergency so appropriate
tools are selected
- Develop tools with partners at a local and national level not
just globally as they are more likely to be used if they have
contextual relevance (contextually relevant tools that are
more accessible for use in the field).
Capacity
- Create a global pool of WASH practitioners to meet demand
who are available at regional and country levels
- Build capacity of IM as an integral part of coordination -
capacity is lacking everywhere
- Build capacity of FST at a global level by involving them in
global projects in down time.
28
response is sufficient to
meet ‘normal’ demand
- Capacity building should be institutionalized within
organizations that do coordination. UNICEF should focus on
this and retain coordinators within the organizations.
Universities and courses should be options.
- Develop tools to measure capacity building that identifies
where the capacity is being retained or showing results.
- Develop long-term capacity of the government to emergency
response
- A ‘WASH practitioner’ should include those from the private
sector, academic institutions, and Southern agencies.
SO3 To influence and advocate for improved emergency WASH coordination and funding
Outcomes Action points
Outcome 1:
Increased focus on WASH
emergency coordination and
WASH emergency funding
within global agendas
Outcome 2:
Strengthened and
broadened partnership
Language and definition
- Re-word SO3 and change to; – “To advocate effectively for
relevant stakeholders for an effective WASH response for
resources”.
Advocacy
- Clarify the definition of advocacy
- Advocacy should be broader than WASH, funding is critical but
there are resources like academic bodies and other networks
who are not present in GWC, we need to look at other
resources we can advocate for.
- Collaborate with other sectors – academic, private, CBOs, all
relevant stakeholders not necessarily WASH.
- High level advocacy – linking it to reduction in climate change,
environmental issues, nutrition, and education. This should
be looked at as part of the strategy as it is a more efficient
way of spending money.
- Create a specific objective for advocacy itself.
Partnerships
- Create opportunities for partnership with other sectors and
other clusters on stronger global agendas like education and
nutrition now there is a focus between WASH and
malnutrition
- Bridge the emergency development divide by focusing on
SDGs
- Private sector partnerships – be flexible at a national level to
engage with private sector on the Humanitarian Response
Plan and how they could potentially support. Private sector
has a sense of corporate social responsibility that could drive
this partnership.
- Focus on market-based approach at a country and global level
and look for examples where it worked well
29
- Preparedness - keep the focus on this as limited when in the
middle of an emergency – should invest more time in funding
of preparedness.
- Best practice - need more good examples at a country level to
increase learning in a systematic way.
- Evaluation - need to learn from the last evaluation and need
to learn from what worked and didn’t work. Identify if the
context or capacity issues influenced the outcome and not
just discard it.
- Exit strategies – design effective exit strategies that
incorporate capacity building particularly in protracted
countries and include this in funding proposals
- UNICEF needs to raise their profile and join with different
agencies with a lead figure to campaign for funding.
3. Bridging Humanitarian and Development Actions
3.1.3.1.3.1.3.1. MMMMAKING HUMANITARIAN AAKING HUMANITARIAN AAKING HUMANITARIAN AAKING HUMANITARIAN AND DEVELOPMENT ND DEVELOPMENT ND DEVELOPMENT ND DEVELOPMENT WASHWASHWASHWASH WORK BETTER TOGETHERWORK BETTER TOGETHERWORK BETTER TOGETHERWORK BETTER TOGETHER
Presenters: Jamal Shah and Tim Grieve (UNICEF)
This presentation highlighted a survey that had been undertaken by ODI, UNICEF and the WSP World Bank
to understand the disconnect between development and humanitarian WASH. The focus was on Level 2
protracted crises countries. Primary data collection via interviews with global and national level
stakeholders was conducted.
The demand for this research is against a backdrop of reduced funding, a geographical split, the rise of
new actors, different commitments for action, and increasing politicization. From the survey results a
diagnostic framework was created to visualise the causes of the development and humanitarian WASH
divide. Potential entry points were identified looking at the country, national and international levels. It
was highlighted how there is a need to develop common ground with the implementers and identify the
incentives of working together to advocate.
Recommendations from the research:
• Build global collaboration and potential collaboration with SWA so that we can implement the 6+1
• Increase complementarity at operational level
• Tackle underlying incentives that inhibit complementarity by end of 2018
• Challenge the cultural and systemic barriers that exist beyond the WASH sector.
Plenary Q&A
Q: How can we monitor? Is there a strategy specific for the rural mountain people in Nepal?
A: By a joint monitoring programme, try and look at universality and vulnerability to capture these
groups and have one platform for information management.
30
Q: I noticed the sector wide approach is not mentioned in the recommendations and I think this is a key
component. How can we include a humanitarian platform? How can we make government accountability?
How can we raise our profile? How can we identify the gaps and work together?
A: Use the government systems as much as possible and build on them when crisis happens by linking
them together.
3.3.3.3.1111....1111 SSSSANITATION ANITATION ANITATION ANITATION WWWWATER FOR ATER FOR ATER FOR ATER FOR AAAALLLLLLLL AND THE AND THE AND THE AND THE GGGGLOBALLOBALLOBALLOBAL WASHWASHWASHWASH CCCCLUSTERLUSTERLUSTERLUSTER
Presenter: Alexandra Reis Communications, SWA
SWA creates a platform for political dialogue with the focus on better governance. It provides an
opportunity to learn and share, and is a mechanism for increasing accountability. Annual meetings are
organized with sector ministers looking at joint development strategies for WASH and separately with
finance ministers where countries discuss funding of national WASH strategies. This provides an
opportunity for GWC to influence some of the funding mechanisms. The benefits of working with SWA
include; help to generate mapping, joint SWA conversations with funding ministers, and the ability to
identify joint messaging and best practice and engage in capacity building.
The above diagram represents the governance structure of the platform.
Plenary and Q&A
Q: We are going to have an important summit in April next year with ministers. The WASH cluster is going
to submit so we need to clarify clear advocacy messages that are needed. How best can we get the right
messages across?
A: We could do an online seminar with ministers about what they think are the messages that should
be passing.
31
4. MARKET PLACE SESSION This session provided an opportunity for GWC members to learn more about partners’ different areas of
work. The session was set up like a market place of information stalls where colleagues presented on
various topics. There were six stands set up and GWC members were invited to select three out of the six
to visit. The six topics were; Sphere Review, Urban WASH, Emergency Sanitation Compendium, HIF, R2HC,
and Solar Technology. At each stand the presentation was repeated three times but with a different group.
This ensured that members had an opportunity to visit more than one information stall. Below is a
summary of each of the presentations followed by group comments and questions.
Sphere Presentation and Discussion
Presenter: Kit Dyer (NCA) and Jenny Lamb (Oxfam)
Background:
Last year the SPHERE project conducted a survey to find out who is using the handbook, how they access
it, and what they do with it. As expected, about two-thirds of respondents said they use it in response,
and a similar number use it in preparedness. Somewhat unexpectedly, about one-third of respondents
used it during a recovery phase. The use of the handbook is across the program cycle, guiding assessment,
design, training, policy development, advocacy, research, etc. Additionally, our operating environment
has changed significantly since the last handbook update in 2010, and it is time for an update.
The timeframe for the process over the next twelve months will be to produce a zero draft to be released
for wide consultation in March 2017. The editing team for the WASH chapter (Jenny Lamb and Kit Dyer)
will work with the reference group to produce a second draft, again to be released for consultation in the
second half of the year, with the aim to have a final draft ready for print by the end of 2017. There will
be a review workshop with the intent to validate the book by the end of the year and publish it in 2018.
The session’s focus was to acquire feedback on what’s missing and ideas for the consultation process.
What is missing?
• Protracted crisis
• Urban emergencies (outside of camps)
• Guidance on how the handbook should be used so that governments develop their own emergency
standards. It should be clear that the standards in the guidance should be adapted to the local
context.
• Other sectors such as health where WASH is involved
How can participation be increased?
• Health Emergency Initiative
• Government involvement requires face to face communication
• Civil protection needs to be included
Who uses it and what do you use it for?
• Capacity building and cluster coordination to inform cluster members of the standards (UNICEF)
• Academia should be encouraged to use it but academics must understand how it is used
• Training and technical issue papers (ECHO)
32
Emergency Sanitation Compendium Presentation and Discussion
Presenter: Robert Gensch, WASH capacity development, German Toilet Organization
Compendium of Sanitation and Faecal Sludge Management options in Emergencies
Background: The Compendium provides a compilation of up-to-date multi-agency capacity development
tools. It covers the entire sanitation service chain. The Compendium consists of 16 partners. The
publication is divided in to two parts;
Part 1: Decision support: Includes a draft outline with introduction and key criteria applicable at various
levels. It further includes cross-cutting issues like gender sensitive design, hand washing facilities and
menstrual hygiene management.
Part2: Technology sheets: Includes input/output onsite technology, input/output conveyance,
input/output treatment, input/output disposal/reuse.
Group comments:
1. How are we are looking in to promotion and use of this technology? Answer: it’s mainly the hardware
guide, it doesn’t include all the information about how you do hygiene promotion. We should plan
how to effectively use this hardware guide.
2. What about control on behaviour aspects have you considered this? Answer: Applicability aspects
and cultural aspects should be considered.
3. Perceived as very useful documents –it would be beneficial to select the documents based on
experience of what worked or did not work in a practical setting. A careful quality assurance
mechanism is required (i.e. ensuring sludge is treated properly).
Urban WASH Presentation and Discussion
Presenter: Richard Luf
What is different about Urban WASH?
• People and community
• The nature of urban space
• Market and economy
• More influential stakeholders
A better understanding of settlement typologies is required such as service network centres, slums with
tenure, high-rise tenants, land tenure and peri-urban areas.
Several issues and recommendations were highlighted below;
Prioritisation
• Link to other sectors depending on disaster type
• Coordination should be more focused and linked to context.
Coordination
33
• Area based multi-sector coordination is required
• Create a SAG that is specific for cities since limited agencies are working at municipality level and
therefore, lack a city-wide overview.
• Select a few international organizations that can work to coordinate with the government at the
city level and ensure they are long-term development players.
Recovery
• Ensure there is multi-year programming to ensure long term commitments
Service providers/private sector
• Learn how to work effectively with service providers
• There is a complex mosaic of service providers in urban areas for example, a service may not be
from only one provider.
WASH finance (links to market based approaches)
• Important to work with the markets in urban areas
• Humanitarian sector tends to bring supplies and not aware of WASH finances
Hygiene promotion (don’t promote hygiene, sell it)
• Need to sell the idea of correct hygiene behaviour
Group Comments and questions:
• There are challenges to who owns the land in the slum areas with diverse parties involved. The
slums may have informal water networks which need to be identified. There needs to be more
research on the stakeholders in the area because people may have different functions and roles
that might contradict.
• Long term chronic vulnerability needs to be understood
• There was a question about whether a tool or capacity building model for WASH in urban sector
exists. Various responses suggested there is a global tool for the humanitarian sector, Red-R were
reported to have training available and it was highlighted that the tools are not consolidated.
• A backup system is required for urban services because any disruption would have a huge impact
• How can we get through some political barriers in protracted conflict countries?
• What is the role of the humanitarian sector in an urban area? It needs to clear whether it is
advocacy or something else.
HIF Presentation and Discussion
Presenter: Cecille Hestback, Elhra
Elrha's the HIF is developing its two new focus areas within sanitation. The two areas are; 1. rapid
community consultation (how to give communities the sanitation they want); and 2. sludge disposal
guidelines (how to help practitioners make the best decision around sludge disposal, quickly).
Recommendations for community consultation;
• Need to get the community mobilisers to ask questions, but they don’t know the technical questions
34
• Identify the process NGOs go through before they design and scale the sanitation
• NGOs need to move away from sticking to one solution
• There needs to be understanding of the culture from the start
• Donors need to encourage testing and piloting of prototypes
• The cluster could be used as a communication mechanism for sharing and testing new products
• Develop a proper exit-strategy.
Discussion on disposal sites;
• It was noted there is a big gap in guidelines for sludge management
• It was highlighted how it is often about the least bad solution. There needs to be a better
understanding of what can be done to make that situation safer
• There was a suggestion to create a decision tree model for example, identify next best option, third
best option etc. Advocacy focal points were also discussed as a way of selling the various solutions to
government.
• The development of new tools was mentioned when minimum safety standard is the only standard
available
• It was identified that transportation is key and working with desludging operators. The development
sector has a lot of guidance on this area.
R2HC Presentation and Discussion
Presenter: Maysoon Dahab
R2HC funds humanitarian programs to fill the evidence gap. They donate about $3 million annually.
Funding ranges from $80,000 to $600,000 and lasts about two years.
There are 1) core grants funded to answer a research question and 2) for a rapid response program.
The second option is to release the funding once the crisis event occurs. The program has been running
for three years. Proposals are reviewed rigorously. The thematic groups include about 2 or 3 funded
programs over the last years.
R2HC is interested in funding WASH and funding favours multi-country programs. The funding process
includes a call for proposals in July with funding in March. Anyone can apply except for profit
organizations but consortiums are encouraged.
The first step is an expression of interest which is short listed and then receives $10,000 to move forward
and submit a larger proposal. The current WASH studies include safe water and malnutrition (ACF and
Johns Hopkins), urine diversion toilets, and menstrual hygiene management.
Methodology
The methodology is important and should consider impact, partnerships, dissemination, feasibility, and
value for money. However, the three metrics for impact are less focused on monitoring and evaluation.
Comparative multi-country studies that are applicable to a wide range of countries is also favorable.
Randomised control trials, prescriptive studies and evaluations are included in the range of proposal types
funded.
Group comments and questions
35
• It was highlighted that it can be difficult to conduct research during an ongoing response so
researchers must be comfortable working in those environments.
• The sector should strengthen the links with academic institutions. Relationships with academia
can assist with implementation. It would be good to have academia at this event next time.
• Persistent themes across sectors can be difficult to generalize. • It’s important to consider ethical issues when undertaking WASH in emergencies.
• There is often a lack of evidence for much of what WASH does, there is an opportunity to create
protocols for implementation that could contribute to the sector.
• Dissemination - each study is evaluated with a dissemination criteria plan. If there are common
complimentary studies or common questions, there could be a platform for sharing information.
• Grant size - so long as the program is value for money the ceiling is not a large issue. The average
length of the programs is two years.
For more information you can contact the Humanitarian Research Consultant, Maysoon Dahab, at
Solar Technology Presentation and Discussion
Presenter: James Brown - Oxfam; Rick Bauer - NRC [email protected].
Background
The European Commission Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO) is funding IOM, Oxfam, and NRC to lead a
project which aims to increase the number of water pumping systems running off renewable energy.
Various field visits to the East Africa region identified that solar pumping was unknown or only used at
small or very localized scale in relief operations. The presentation discussed the solar and water initiatives
challenges and main activities.
Purpose: To break down some of the barriers for the use of solar technology.
Challenges:
There is a shortage of skills and expertise amongst humanitarians. There is a lack of evidence to
demonstrate the use of solar. There are a lack of tools and guidance for the use of solar. There are
concerns about whether donors are comfortable about providing a large capital expenditure.
Current activities
Since 2012, solar pumping systems have been successfully installed in refugee and IDP camps in Kenya,
South Sudan, and Tanzania. Solar now matches the performance of other off grid solutions like diesel
generators but incurs minimal operating costs and requires little or no maintenance.
Main activities of solar and water initiatives:
1. Harmonize methodologies
2. Identify locations for implementation
3. Hotline for asking questions
4. Deliver workshops and training on installation and procurement
5. Investigating Public Private Partnerships
36
6. Engage in advocacy to improve appropriate solar projects
7. Produce field based guidance
8. Fundraising drive to link the drive to energy funds
9. Linking with other regions and platforms
Group Comments:
Q: Are there any mapping studies for previous solar systems?
A: The mapping will look at the systems that have already been operating. Examples given were Mercy
Corps who are funding it in Pakistan and Sudan. However, it was mentioned it needs to move to the Middle
East region as well.
37
APPENDICES
Agendas
Day 1: Operational Updates and Challenges
Topic Objective: Operational Updates and Challenges Presenter Facilitator
08:30 Registration
09:00 Welcome to GWC Partners - Opening remarks from Govt of Nepal / housekeeping from UNICEF
09:20
Updates from
The CAST and
the FST
Presentation of the SAG deliberations
SAG –
Jean
Lepegue
GWCC
09:40 Updates from
the SAG GWC Projects / Structure / TWIG /FST / Strategy
CAST-
Dominiqu
e
Porteaud
SAG
09:50
National
Coordinators
Day
Feedback and Actions from the National Coordinators
day -
NCC –
Franck
Bouvet
SAG
10:10 Open
discussion Questions, Feedback.
SAG
10:35 Coffee Break
11:05
Humanitarian
updates:
Achievements,
Challenges
and Actions
3 break out groups: Presentations + discussion (5-slides).
10min p/country and 40min discussion
- Natural disasters: Nepal (ENPHO) / Haiti (NCA/CARE)
/ Southern Africa (OFDA) / Asia Pacific (AKVO
- Conflict: WASH Cluster/Sectors in: Yemen / Iraq /
Nigeria/ Afghanistan
- Public Health Emergencies (Cholera & Zika): Nepal
MoH/ UNICEF PD
Wrap Up / way forward (10 mins)
Country
presentati
on: WCC /
Partner
SAG
CAST
12:30 Lunch
13:30 Assessments
- 35 mins on Presentation on Field assessments
- 4 Working group on challenges of Assessment / how
to push the agenda (30 mins)
Group 1: Planning a coordinated assessment (getting the
right people, indicators, tool, etc.)
Group 2: Collecting data (methodology, sampling, etc.)
Group 3: Analysing Data
Group 4: Using the data in programming AND monitoring
(how to use the data)
Group 5: Additional challenges of a Multi-Sector
Assessments (coordination with other sectors, OCHA,
etc.)
- Restitution of group (20 mins)
Rose
Marie
Guevrem
ont (FST)
+ Roberto
Saltori
(UNICEF) CAST
38
- Conclusion / way forward (5 mins)
15:00 Coffee Break
15:30
Market Based
Programming
(MBP)
- 20 mins on Presentation of outcome of the TWIG
- 4 Working group on challenges of MBP / how to push
the agenda (45 mins)
Group 1 – Collect evidence, strengthen institutional
understanding, and disseminate learning
Group 2 – Provide systematic market assessment and
analysis
Group 3 – Address programme quality standards & MEAL
(monitoring, evaluation, accountability, and learning)
Group 4 – Capacity building
Group 5 – Working with others
Group 6 – Addressing Ethical Issues
- Restitution of group (20 mins)
- Conclusion / way forward (5 mins)
James
Brown
(FST) +
Jenny
(Oxfam)
CAST
17:00 finish…. 19:00 -> Evening Dinner.
Day 2: WASH Cluster Strategy 2016 - 2020
Time Session Topic Presenter Facilitator
09:00 Opening Recap of Day 1
GWCC
09:10
Global WASH
cluster strategy
2016-2020
- Background/ Introduction (20 mins)
- Way of working + Q&A (30 mins)
- GWC Strategy (10 mins)
GWCC
IFRC
GWCC
1 SAG
member
10:10 Partnership
Building Resource Mobilisation Strategy (50 mins) Jean Mc
10:40 Coffee Break
11:00
Global WASH
cluster strategy
2016-2020
Group Work (40 mins):
- GWC strategy (GWC future/ vision; How partners
view their contribution to the GWC vision; Best
practices (GWC as a repository of sector
knowledge? Technical Guidance)
Restitution of 6 group work (5 min each)
Group 1: Strategic objective 1
Group 2: Strategic objective 2
Group 3: Strategic objective 3
Group 4: Strategic objective 4
Group 5: Strategic objective 5
Group 6: Strategic objective 6
1 SAG
member
for each
working
group
CAST
12:50 Lunch
39
13:50
Link
humanitarian and
Development
Presentation of ODI report: “Making humanitarian
and development WASH work better together” (25
mins) + Q/A (15 mins)
Presentation on Sanitation and Water for All (25mns) +
Q/A (15 mins)
Jamal
Shah
(UNICEF)
SWA
SAG
15:10 Coffee Break
15:40 Market place
Market place:
1. SPHERE Review
2. Urban WASH
3. Emergency sanitation compendium / Susana
4. HIF
5. R2HC
6. Solar technology
Various CAST
17:10 Wrapping Up A.O.B and Next GWC meeting CAST
List of Participants:
First Name Last Name Job Title Organization Work City Work
Country
1 Ram
Chandra Devkota Director General Ministry of Water Kathmandu Nepal
2 Rajan Raj Pandey Joint Secretary Ministry of Water Kathmandu Nepal
3 Eric Rheinstein WaSH Head of Dept ACF Dhaka Bangladesh
4 Jean Lapegue Senior Advisor WASH ACF Bagnolet France
5 Giri Raj Khatri ACF Kathmandu Nepal
6 Kamala K.C. Head of Department-
WaSH ACF lalitpur Nepal
7 Giri Raj Khatri Programme
Manager- WaSH ACF lalitpur Nepal
8 Jakub Pajak WASH Technical
Coordinator ACTED Amman Jordan
9 Sudipta Radapanda Country Director ACF Lalitpur Nepal
10 George Massey WASH Cluster Co-
Coordinator ACF Erbil Iraq
11 Deepak Menon South Asia Hub
Manager AKVO India
12 Ayan Biswas AKVO AKVO
13 Hans Maesen Programme Manager Belgian Red Cross
- Flanders Kathmandu Nepal
14 Amy Jennings Project coordinator BORDA Erbil Iraq
15 Nicholas Brooks Emergency WASH
Team Leader CARE Chester UK
40
16 Laura MacDonald Knowledge and
Research Coordinator CAWST Calgary Canada
17 Thomas Handzel WASH Epidemiologist CDC Atlanta US
18 Anu Rajasingham WASH engineer CDC Atlanta US
19 Christine Aumueller Wash consultant Chay ya Austria Krems Austria
20 Rolando Wallusche Saul Global WASH Advisor CRS Sigtuna Sweden
21 Mohammad MoniruzZaman Superintending
Engineer
Department Of
Public Health
Engineering
(DPHE)
Dhaka Bangladesh
22 Tom White Humanitarian Adviser
(CHASE OT) DFID London UK
23
Ahmed
Mohammed
Rajab
Jaradah
Mohammed
WASH Sub-Cluster
coordinator Aden
hub
DRC Aden Yemen
24 Riyadh Noman
WASH Sub-Cluster
Coordinator
Hudeidah hub
DRC Hodeidah Yemen
25 Denis Heidebroek
Global Thematic
Coordinator WASH &
Shelter
ECHO Brussels Belgium
26 Luc Soenen
Regional - Asia -
WASH & Shelter
Expert
ECHO Islamabad Pakistan
27 Cecilie Hestbaek Innovation Adviser
Elrha / The
Humanitarian
Innovation Fund
Cardiff UK
28 Maysoon Dahab Humanitarian
Research Consultant ELRHA-R2HC Cardiff UK
29 Jukka Ilomaki Embassy of
Finland Kathmandu Nepal
30 Yaba Shrestha ENDO Kathmandu Nepal
31 Anne Zimmermann WASH Project
Manager
Federal Agency
for Technical
Relief
Bonn Germany
32 Johannes Rück WASH Network
Coordinator
German WASH-
Network /
German Toilet
Organization
Berlin Germany
33 Robert Gensch Project Coordinator
German WASH-
Network /
German Toilet
Organization
Berlin Germany
34 Dr. Stephen Andersen Faculty of Bioscience
Engineering Ghent University Ghent Belgium
41
35 Karine Deniel
Preparedness and
continuity officer -
FST
Global WASH
Cluster Paris France
36 James Brown Cluster Coordinator /
FST
Global WASH
Cluster Geneva Switzerland
37 Jane Maonga WASH Cluster
Coordinator (FST)
Global WASH
Cluster/ NCA Geneva Switzerland
38 Clara Deniz Buelhoff
Information
Management Officer-
FST
Global WASH
Cluster/ NCA Geneva Switzerland
39 Ammar Fawzi Global WASH Advisor GOAL Dublin Ireland
40 Modawi Ibrahim National Coordinter
Government of
Sudan - Water
and
Environmental
Sanitation
Khartoum Sudan
41 Rose Marie Guevremont Assessment Specialist GWC Geneva Switzerland
42 Prabal Bhusal Hands
International Kathmandu Nepal
43 Bikram Rana Helvetas Kathmandu Nepal
44 Achyut Gaire Researcher IAAS Kathmandu Nepal
45 Robert Fraser Senior Officer WASH IFRC Geneva Switzerland
46 Justine Rolfe GWC Rapporteur Independent
consultant Kathmandu Nepal
47 Richard Luff Coordinator Independent
consultant Oxford UK
48 Richard Luff Coordinator Independent
consultant Oxford UK
49 Henri Meyer
Training et
development
Coordinator
Institut Bioforce Venissieux Switzerland
50 Rea Ivanek
Senior Assistant,
WASH Cluster
Coordination
International
Federation of Red
Cross and Red
Crescent Societies
Vernier Switzerland
51 Narayan
Singh Khawas WASH manager
International
Medical Corps Kathamandu Nepal
52 Rashmi Paudel WASH Officer International
Medical COrps Kathmandu Nepal
53 Dr Syed
Mansoor Ali Senior WASH Advisor
International
Medical Corps London UK
54 Subira Bjornsen
Technical Officer -
WASH/DRR &
Resilience
International
Medical Corps London UK
55 Syed Yasir
Ahmad Khan Global WASH Adviser
International
Medical Corps London, UK
42
56 David Clatworthy
Environmental
Health Technical
Advisor
International
Rescue
Committee
New York US
57 Nabin
Kumar Shahi Kidarc Kathmandu Nepal
58 Dr.Deepika Gyawali Doctor Kist medical
college Kathmandu Nepal
59 Lauren D'Mello-
Guyett Research Assistant LSHTM London UK
60 Colin McCubbin Senior WASH Advisor Medair Ecublens Switzerland
61 Manzoor Hussain Senior WASH Advisor Mercy Corps Islamabad Pakistan
62 Eunice Mugera wescoord
secretariate
ministry of water
and irrigation Nairobi Kenya
63 John Allen Mission East Kathmandu Nepal
64 Kit Dyer WASH Advisor NCA Oslo Norway
65 Radostina Karalanova GWC FST Manager NCA/UNICEF Geneva Switzerland
66 Amar Mani Poudel Deputy Director/
WASH Division
Nepal Red Cross
Society, HQs Kathamndu Nepal
67 Sarah Malone Education
Coordinator
Nepali Disaster
Volunteers Kathmandu Nepal
68 Anamica Gauchan Education
Coordinator
Nepali Disaster
Volunteers Kathmandu Nepal
69 Cyril Eicher Education
Coordinator
Nepali Disaster
Volunteers Kathmandu Nepal
70 James Dornan Construction
Coordinator
Nepali Disaster
Volunteers Kathmandu Nepal
71 Andrew Barratt Marketing
Coordinator
Nepali Disaster
Volunteers Kathmandu Nepal
72 Arild Isaksen Humanitarian
coordinator
Norwegian
Church Aid Oslo Norway
73 Nazar Rehman Norwegian
Redcross Kathmandu Nepal
74 Richard Bauer Special Adviser -
WASH
Norwegian
Refugee Council Oslo Norway
75 John Fitzgerald
Independent WASH
Consultant (former
WASH Cluster C
NRC Geneva Switzerland
76 Amar Mani Poudyal NRCS Kathmandu Nepal
77 Sanjaya Chalise Public Health engieer Oxfam Kathmandu Nepal
78 Biju Dangol Oxfam Kathmandu Nepal
79 Anne Killefer Humanitarian
Technical Manager Oxfam Kathmandu Nepal
80 Andy Bastable Head of water &
Sanitation Oxfam Oxford UK
81 Jenny Lamb Water & Sanitation
Engineering Advisor Oxfam Oxford UK
43
82 Tom Wildman Senior WASH Advisor
for Asia Oxfam GB Manila Philippines
83 Majeda Alawneh National WASH
Coordinator
Palestinian Water
Authourity Ramallah Palestine
84 Harriette Purchas Project Coordinator RedR London UK
85 Tanaji Sen Executive Director RedR India Pune India
86 Laura McCartan Development
Coordinator Rosie May Kathmandu Nepal
87 Katherine Weatherburn Country Director SafetyKnot Kathmandu Nepal
88 Paul
Mungai Gichuhi
WASH Technical
Advisor Samaritan's Purse Manilla Philippines
89 Nutan Dev Pokharel WASH Specialist Save the Children Kathmandu Nepal
90 Abraham Varampath Senior Humanitarian
WASH Advisor Save the Children London UK
91 Peter Goodfellow Regional WASH TA Save the Children London UK
92 Claudio Deola WASH Advisor Save the Children
UK London UK
93 Manoj Suji Research Asssociate Social Science
Baha Kathmandu Nepal
94 Anne-Lise Lavaur
Head of Technical &
Program Quality
Department
Solidarites
International Clichy France
95 Bansaga Saga Senior WASH Advisor Solidarites
International Clichy France
96 Yashoda UNHABITAT Kathmandu Nepal
97 Murray Burt Snr (Global) WASH
Officer UNHCR Geneve Switzerland
98 Ruhul Amin WASH Officer UNICEF Chittagong Bangladesh
99 Syed Hakim WASH Officer UNICEF Dhaka Bangladesh
100 Roberto Saltori WASH Cluster
Coordinator unicef Amman Jordan
101 David Adams WASH Cluster
Coordinator UNICEF Beirut Lebanon
102 Julien Graveleau WaSH Emergency
Specialist UNICEF Abuja Nigeria
103 Syed Fida
Hussain Shah WASH Officer UNICEF Islamabad Pakistan
104 Donald Burgess WASH Cluster
Coordinator UNICEF Juba
South
Sudan
105 Madhav Pahari WASH Cluster
Coordinator UNICEF Damascus Syria
106 Jamal Shah WASH Specialist UNICEF New York US
107 Timothy Grieve Senior WASH Adviser UNICEF New York US
108 Suad Al-Sulaihi Information
Management Officer UNICEF Sana'a Yemen
109 Guy K. Mbayo WASH Specialist
Emergency (Reg.) UNICEF EAPRO Bangkok Thailand
44
110 Arinita
Maskey Shrestha
Emergency WASH
Specialist UNICEF Nepal Kathamandu Nepal
111 Toni Marro WASH specialist UNICEF ROSA Kathmandu Nepal
112 Marije Broekhuijsen WASH Cluster
Coordinator UNICEF Yemen Sana'a Yemen
113 Dominique Porteaud Global WASH Cluster
Coordinator
UNICEF/ Global
WASH Cluster Geneva Switzerland
114 Franck Bouvet Deputy Global WASH
Cluster Coordinator
UNICEF/ Global
WASH Cluster Geneva Switzerland
115 Novel
Bomok Tambal WASH Specialist UNOPS Kathmandu Nepal
116 Linda Kentro USAID Kathmandu Nepal
117 Melissa Opryszko WASH Advisor USAID/OFDA Washington US
118 Ajay Paul Emergency Response
Director Welthungerhilfe Bonn Germany
119 Ali Maher Osama
Environmental
Health Security
Advisor
WHO Amman Jordan
120 Sudan Raj Panthi WHO
121 Corrie Kramer WASH Cluster
Coordinator
Solidarites
International Geneva Switzerland
122 Narayan Khanal Government of
Nepal Nepal
123 Prem Niddhi KC Government of
Nepal Nepal
124 Prem Shrestha Government of
Nepal Nepal
125 Manoj Ghimere Government of
Nepal Nepal
126 Bidur Jha Government of
Nepal Nepal
127 Arati Shrestha Government of
Nepal Nepal
128 Alexandra Reis SWA Geneva Switzerland