Background on the Haitian Earthquake

Coordination

1. 
   Capacity for coordination
   

The approach of the WASH cluster was to start with two dedicated coordinators and build up to a team of 14 by the end of the third month, including 5 information managers. In this model, functions which were normally fulfilled by WASH cluster members, such as tankering, were taken on by the cluster, and cluster members were not expected to take on coordination responsibilities. In Child Protection, staff of cluster members did take on some of the coordination responsibilities at the sub-national level, and for working groups under the national sub-cluster, combining this with their own agency programme responsibilities. Whilst this responsibility-sharing is well viewed by the cluster membership, in some cases the coordination roles and expectations were poorly defined and understood, resulting in tensions between organizations and delays in the adoption of common programme approaches.

1. 
   The global CPWG needs to further develop surge capacity for coordination in child protection, including for information management and ensure that there is a pool of potential coordinators at the correct seniority and with a diversity of language skills.
   
2. 
   As a standard, capacity for both information management and assessment design and implementation should be included in Child Protection coordination teams for large scale, sudden onset emergencies. Standard Operating Procedures should be developed that clearly define the number of coordination staff required depending on the scale of the emergency, and other procedures for getting a cluster up and running.
   
3. 
   The global CPWG should undertake consultations within its membership - both UN and INGO - to develop clear policies for engaging in the child protection sub clusters in emergencies, expectations and commitments to the cluster and possible staffing implications.
   
4. 
   Template ToRs should be developed for working groups and sub national level clusters that clearly define the roles and responsibilities of sub working groups and their coordinators and the relationship with the national level sub cluster and coordinator.
   
5. 
   The global CPWG should continue to advocate both within UNICEF and the donor community, on the importance of allocating sufficient human resources to child protection coordination in large scale emergencies.
   
6. 
   Co-lead arrangements should be considered at the field level in order to share the burden and responsibility of coordination, and template ToRs should be developed clearly spelling out each co-lead agency’s role and responsibilities.
   

2. 
   Child Protection sub cluster membership
   

Although the child protection sub cluster in Haiti was given credit by many for conducting most of its meetings in French and/or providing interpretation, many challenges remained that prevented local organizations from participating fully. The location of meetings at the UN logs base was a particular challenge, both for local and international organizations, as transportation across Port au Prince was difficult and reaching the logs base could take more than an hour. Once there, it was difficult, if not impossible, for local organizations to get through UN security to enter the logs base. The meetings have since been moved to the Ministry of Social Welfare, and it is hoped that this will allow for increased participation of local organizations. Furthermore, future CPiE responses in well-developed settings would benefit from a coordinated strategy to engage with local civil society and thus may need a dedicated full-time or part-time assistant coordinator to ensure this is part of the overall approach from the earliest phase.

Another challenge was the issue of non-traditional organizations getting involved in child protection work for the first time. There were many groups present who had not previously worked in Haiti or in an emergency response; many of them needed an orientation to the cluster system, as well as to child protection principles, FTR systems and other areas of child protection. As a result, sub cluster meetings often focused on information-sharing requiring additional time of the cluster coordinators that would have been better spent on coordination of child protection activities. The establishment of Google groups was helpful as a forum for information sharing. However, if sub-clusters are to be effective, meetings must be a place for strategic planning and decision making with a sense of urgency and not primarily a forum for information-sharing. In addition, child protection is a sensitive area with frequent need for confidentiality, for example when discussing particular cases during sub cluster meetings. This became difficult in Haiti when new agencies, which were not aware of or did not adhere to agreed child protection principles, were present.

In fact in a crisis setting with dozens of actors, an explicit two track approach to coordination may be warranted: a smaller strategic decision making and planning group to include the traditional actors who are experienced in CPIE principles, programming approaches and the cluster system, and a wider group that meets less frequently with new entrants who need extensive educating, coaching, support and sometimes convincing. It must also be acknowledged that this approach is labour-intensive and would require additional coordination capacity.

Further suggestions for addressing this challenge include the development of an information sheet that could be distributed to new organizations containing basic information about humanitarian coordination, the cluster system and child protection; organizing basic CPIE training - 2 half days per week in country; and pre-vetting organisations against minimum standards for operation in emergencies – or some other means of promoting compliance with established interagency programme principles and approaches, such as ‘registration,’ -possibility in conjunction with the government.

Finally, there is a need ensure that coordinators are fully aware of and able to draw on the mandates and capacities of key actors in country, which might not exist at the global level (i.e. national government and DPKO mechanisms and strengths). Coordinators need to reach out early, at different levels and possibly multiple times - to all useful and relevant Ministries and government departments, especially when the governing structures have been severely affected by the crisis.

United Nations Peacekeeping missions and the various branches of the Red Cross movement are by definition emergency-response; thus, their staff and networks may be more resilient to crisis than development-oriented CP structures. It is important for child protection actors to be well-briefed on any relevant UN Security Council mandate and to build on what the mission has put in place, , as well as continuously engaging with the ICRC and national Red Cross to maximise the synergies that are present.

Recommendations:

1. 
   Cluster coordinators should ensure that there is a coordinated strategy for engaging with local civil society from the earliest phase of the response, including holding meetings in local languages, ensuring meeting locations are accessible and where possible building on existing child protection work previously done by local civil society.
   
2. 
   The CPWG should develop and translate short messaging on CP sub-cluster TORs and ways of working that can be easily disseminated to local organizations and non-traditional child protection responders.
   
3. 
   The CPWG should include in guidance for coordinators (including the revision of the CP cluster coordinator handbook) concrete tips on managing membership with options listed and examples of models that have been useful in emergencies of different scales and complexity.
   
4. 
   As a routine measure for large-scale, sudden onset emergencies, the sector should deploy sufficient interagency capacity, either through coordination team or through sub cluster members, for ‘start-up’ training / briefing for new cluster members, which may also be beneficial for new staff of global CPWG members.
   
5. 
   UNICEF should ensure that training, guidance, and pre-departure briefing of coordinators cover roles of key possible sub cluster members such as UN Peacekeeping missions and ICRC.
   

2. 
   The advocacy and representation roles of the CP sub cluster in inter-cluster fora
   

In Haiti, Child Protection greatly benefited from having a separate coordination body to protection and from side by side representation at the inter-cluster coordination and humanitarian country team (HCT) meetings and other such fora. However, several respondents felt that there had been limited outcomes in influencing the HCT. Occasionally, clear asks – such as for space for the call centre for the family tracing and reunification programme - were missing from these inter-cluster meetings, while opportunities to influence other clusters’ work or develop interagency messages for the national and international media were weak or slow.

It must be noted that protection, child protection and GBV run the risk of functioning very independently and need to ensure that they are integrating their work and jointly analyzing and addressing any protection gaps.

In a natural disaster, the child protection sub-cluster is often larger (in terms of both human and financial resources) than the overall protection cluster. Its ability to couple advocacy on better humanitarian practice with actual personnel to assist with improved operations is a key strength for the child protection sub-cluster. An example of promising practice in this regard was the sub-cluster’s work on the prevention of separation and other protection violations during the relocation of displaced families between camps in April.

3.1 UNICEF ensures through the CP coordination training and individual briefings that CP Coordinators have a good understanding of broader protection issues and opportunities.

3.2 While child protection Cluster Coordinators ideally should not represent protection on a sustained basis, and while child protection coordinators should have their own seat at inter-cluster forums in order to ensure that child protection is adequately represented, collaboration between Areas of Responsibility, including at global level in preparedness measures, is to be encouraged through the PCWG.

3.3 The child protection sub-cluster coordinator must consistently ensure that child protection issues are raised at the highest levels, including with the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC) and by participating in the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) meetings.

3.4 In pre-deployment orientation, UNHCR should brief the Protection Cluster Coordinator on the role of the sub-clusters and the importance of a dual approach to representation of the CP sub-cluster within the humanitarian framework. ToRs and other information for Protection Cluster Coordinators should also include this information.

2. 
   The role of government within coordination.
   

Ministries of Social/Family/Children Affairs are often significantly underfunded. It is important during an emergency, particularly a natural disaster, that adequate attention and deference be made to ensure that they can function as effective counterparts. This may mean providing physical space, office and transport equipment, counseling or emergency funds for stabilisation/continuity. In some cases, seconding the cluster coordinator into the relevant ministry has been found to be an effective way to ensure government ownership of coordination.

Even in dire circumstances, the CP sub-cluster must creatively and sensitively find ways to engage the government in the first two weeks of the emergency. If not, problems with support and ownership may occur. It is crucial to use pre-existing analysis of government interests and capacities to determine where strengths and weaknesses will likely lie and who to work with across a range of Ministries and departments. Where government cannot undertake the co-lead of the sub-cluster, it can be facilitated to chair every other meeting, be linked into meetings via telephone or video calls, be bilaterally briefed prior to/post-sub-cluster meeting (which worked effectively for MHPSS), be asked to participate in Strategic Advisory Meetings, etc.

The idea of an MOU between the WG on UASC and the relevant government department was discussed; its aim was to clarify roles related to FTR, interim care, reunification, and other child protection issues. Unfortunately, the government did not proceed with this approach, despite its potential to clarify support to existing orphanages and streamline the assistance that traditional and non-traditional responders were providing to the sector. When this approach did not work, the working group was slow to identify alternative strategies and approaches to working with the government that may have been more effective, such as building on bilateral relationships that existed prior to the earthquake.

From a global perspective, it can be seen that the CPiE response is increasingly systems-focused, rapidly mapping and assessing what structures existed prior to the crisis and what can be built on into the medium and long term response. Thus, the sector has good understanding of the concept of “Early Recovery” and can lay the groundwork for longer-term, broader-based social care of vulnerable children. How Child Protection engages with all of the relevant government departments is critical in this endeavor and was hampered in the initial months of the response in Haiti. Opportunities for strengthening the national child protection system were missed, owing to an inadequate analysis of pre-existing structures, strengths and weaknesses. It may have been possible to undertake much of the analysis out of country given the turmoil of the first few weeks.

Recommendations:

1. 
   In the first month, the CP Coordinator and senior management from the sub-cluster members should have bilateral meetings with key government officials to update them on sub-cluster work and clarify roles and responsibilities.
   
2. 
   Coordinators should be encouraged to assess and provide the relevant government departments with logistical support and training to engage with sectoral coordination from the declaration of an emergency.
   
3. 
   National Emergency Preparedness Plans must include government buy-in on Coordination mechanisms.
   
4. 
   UNICEF HQ should draft two standard initial MOU for presentation to and negotiation with the national government in the first weeks of an emergency. The first should cover roles and responsibilities for coordination and the issue of registration procedures for all agencies working with children in the emergency. The second should focus on work on sexual violence, appropriate psycho-social approaches, basic principles on children facing any kind of separation relating to the emergency (abandonment, secondary separation, trafficking, associated with armed groups and armed forces, etc), and agreed top-line standards.
   

2. 
   The support role of the global level child protection working group
   

The global CPWG undertook a number of roles. A troubleshooting approach – trying to resolve issues in a collegial manner if an organization is not performing to the level expected or if there are problems with the overall child protection response – was activated when the global coordinator and some key members became aware that the scale of the Child Protection response was not sufficient or effective, but unfortunately no improvement in staffing or programming seemed to stem from the bilateral or global CPWG teleconference interventions.

The global CPWG also had a role in advocacy, such as the development of common inter-agency messages that built on previous examples of best practice and relieved some of the burden from field level practitioners. In addition, its efforts to identify and adapt global standards for the Haiti context, which was done with the Interagency Guiding Principles on UASC, were deemed to be of great help in the field. In fact, technical advisors in government distributed and used those guidelines as talking points with both political and donor colleagues.

Other suggested roles have included linking field practitioners with the expertise that exists at the global level, as well as helping to develop messages that can be used with the media.

5.1 The global CPWG Coordinator should continue to convene teleconferences between global and field level members of CP sub clusters in onset emergencies and offer to provide support where possible.

5.2 A CP sub cluster “start up” package, containing contact information and the relevant tools and guidelines should be developed by the CPWG and distributed to field level coordinators and cluster members at the onset of a new emergency.