Memoire Online - Overviews of humanitarian and early recovery coordination, funding mechanisms and strategies in Zimbabwe

International Research and Studies Institute in International and European Relations

Florida Department of State (USA) - Registration number N°H090001721903Crusader House,
www.irerie.org

Presented by: Vedaste Kalima, PhD, Political Sciences/ International Relations

Supervisor: Bernard MTONGA, PhD, Early Recovery Advisor, Office of the United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator, United Nations Inter Agency Support Unit, Zimbabwe

2.4 Organisation's presence 17

IREIRE Institut de Recherches et d'Enseignement supérieur en Relations Internationales et

In connection with the PhD programme of the Research and Studies Institute in International and European Relations( IRERIE ), and further to the approval of the General Manager of the IRERIE, Dr. Bruno Hamard and the UNDP?s Country Director in Zimbabwe, Mrs. Christine Umutoni, I have undertaken a two months stage within UNDP Zimbabwe from September to end October 2010, under the supervision of Dr. Bernard Mtonga, Early Recovery Advisor to the UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator(RC/HC) in Zimbabwe.

Considering the evolving socio-political and economic context in Zimbabwe and with regard to the humanitarian and early recovery challenges, needs, gaps and opportunities, the objective of my stage is focussed on identifying the existing coordination and funding mechanisms and strategies governing the humanitarian and early recovery responses in the country, through the desk review of the existing documentations, reports, meetings, workshops as well as discussion with the different key stakeholders involved in humanitarian and early recovery response in Zimbabwe, especially the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs(OCHA) and the United Nation Development Programme(UNDP) management and staffs.

Operating in Zimbabwe since May, 27^th, 1980¹., the United Nations Development Programme(UNDP) is supporting the Government of Zimbabwe to domestic and international dialogue that can help build consensus on Zimbabwe's challenges, strengthening the capacity of national institutions to deliver on MDGs, provide basic social services with particular attention to vulnerable groups and as well as Support to the transition to recovery and development . These three priority areas of intervention are translated into five specific programme outcomes, which also reflect UNDP's five practice areas of work as follow:

The institutional coordination mechanism supporting the humanitarian and early recovery coordination function in Zimbabwe went through a significant reform in 2004. The (RRU), a joint UNDP/OCHA structure under the operational management of UNDP, originally supported the UNCT?s humanitarian coordination function from 2000. However, at the request of the Government in 2002, the RRU was replaced by a smaller UNDP/OCHA structure with a more modest mandate, the Humanitarian Support Team (HST). The main focus of the HST was coordination for humanitarian response, information management and resource mobilization for humanitarian programs. Both the RRU and HST coordinated the preparation and reviewed the Consolidated Appeals with a common Humanitarian Action Plan that provided a coherent strategy for humanitarian stakeholders to work collaboratively in the various sectors. In addition the RRU/HST continued to monitor the humanitarian context in the country as well as the levels of funding to each of the priority sectors, and produced reports to the Government on the donor response. From 2005, Zimbabwe continued to face tremendous challenges, i.e. rapid decline in public institutional capacity for social services delivery, food insecurity and HIV and AIDS etc... and additional challenges emanating from the country?s policy actions have led to differences with her international partners and resulted in widening and deepening vulnerabilities.

To reinforce humanitarian and early recovery coordination and funding mechanisms and advocacy, the United Nations Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) officially opened its office in Zimbabwe in January 2006 with the aim of coordinating effective and principled humanitarian actions in the country.

¹ Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Zimbabwe and the UNDP signed on May 27t^h 1980 by Mr S.V.MUZENDA,the Deputy Primer Minister and the Minister of Foreign Affairs on behalf of the Government of Zimbabwe and the UNDP?s Assistant Administrator and Regional Director for Africa, Michel Doo Kingue

Through coordination and funding mechanisms, OCHA and UNDP Zimbabwe are currently assisting the Humanitarian and Early recovery stakeholders to alleviate the human suffering caused by food insecurity, HIV/AIDS, epidemics (cholera, measles, etc..), rapid decline in social services; as well as to promote the preparedness and prevention efforts to reduce future vulnerability to natural disasters; advocating for the rights of people in need; and facilitating sustainable solutions to address root causes and to pave the way for durable development.

Zimbabwe and formerly Southern Rhodesia, is a landlocked country located in the southern part of the continent of Africa, between the Zambezi and Limpopo rivers. It is bordered by South Africa to the south, Botswana to the southwest, Zambia to the northwest and Mozambique to the east as shown in the map below.

Zimbabwe has a centralized government and is divided into eight provinces and two cities with provincial status, for administrative purposes. Each province has a provincial capital from where official business is usually carried out.

Zimbabwe's total population is around 12 million²³ .According to the United Nations World Health Organization, the life expectancy for men is 37 years and the life expectancy for women is 34 years of age, the lowest in the world in 2006⁴ and Mineral exports, agriculture, and tourism are the main foreign currency earners of Zimbabwe.

Based on the census 2002 report and CSO 2010 updated projections, the Composition of Population Above and below 19 years of age (CSO Projection 2010, 12.3 Million) is illustrated is the following matrix and chart.

Zimbabwe maintained positive economic growth throughout the 1980s (5.0% GDP growth per year) and 1990s (4.3% GDP growth per year). However, the economy declined from 2000: 5% decline in 2000, 8% in 2001, 12% in 2002 and 18% in 2003⁵

The Economy of Zimbabwe is agro-based ,generally rain dependent ,subsistence farming, and largely rural with limited arable land; exposed to various types of natural, epidemiological and human induced hazards which have occurred with increasing frequency in the last decade. Zimbabweans, particularly the poor, are vulnerable to shocks and hazards such as floods, droughts, epidemics, and population displacements that are due to natural or human induced emergencies⁶.

5 Richardson, C.J. 2005. The loss of property rights and the collapse of Zimbabwe. Cato Journal, 25, 541-565.

Following political changes over the past three years that have had positive effects on the socio-economic situation, Zimbabwe is gradually emerging out of the humanitarian crisis. An Inclusive Government was formed in February 2009, after the signing of the Global Political Agreement (GPA) between the (ZANU-PF) and the two formations of Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) in September 2008. This led to improved humanitarian access to vulnerable populations and greater engagement of the Government of Zimbabwe.

Improved coordination across clusters as a result of deployment of experienced cluster coordinators significantly enhanced the effectiveness and timeliness of humanitarian and early recovery response, especially during the cholera response in 2008/2009. The clusters that have been so far rolled out in Zimbabwe are Agriculture, Health, Water Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), Education, Nutrition, Protection, Early Recovery, Logistics and Food aid (Working Group). However, these clusters are largely concentrated at the national level and do not have active presence outside Harare. Similarly, the coordination system between the clusters and the Civil Protection Unit (the government arm responsible for Zimbabwe disaster response) is weak.

1.2 Socio-Political Situation

The effects of the socio-economic collapse in the past decade and the protracted 2008 elections that led to the formation of an Inclusive Government in February 2009, after the signing of the Global Political Agreement (GPA) between the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) and the two formations of Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) in September 2008 continue. ZANU-PF insists that the GPA will not be fully implemented until the targeted western sanctions are removed. MDC- Tsvangirai has called for fresh elections to break the GPA implementation deadlock and has also turned to regional powers to influence President Mugabe but this strategy appears to be increasingly ineffectual. The Call for fresh elections is unlikely to be accepted by the two other principals to the GPA not only because it contravenes the GPA but also because both political parties do not want an election in which MDC-Tsvangirai would secure an easy victory. Mediation efforts by the South African president has made little progress and it is not clear what more SADC can do given the support President Mugabe commands from both current SADC as well as African Union leadership.

The ongoing process of drafting a new Constitution, which as per the GPA should happen as part of the transition before fresh general elections are called is already behind schedule owing to funding problems, administrative failures and political infighting.. Given the delay, a final draft constitution is unlikely to be ready before February 2011. As a stakeholders conference and referendum on the new constitution must be held subsequently, fresh elections under the new constitution is unlikely before 2011. Even this timetable could change, given that it is to the benefit of ZANU-PF and MDC-Mutambara sections of the inclusive government to maintain the status quo as long as possible so as to weaken the political support of MDC- Tsvangirai and benefit from possible political fallout in the process.

Economic policies continue to be driven by political considerations, with the struggle for influence in the power-sharing government overshadowing policy reforms. The ZANU-PF led indigenization legislation under which all companies operating in the country are supposed to be majority controlled by indigenous (Black) Zimbabweans is likely to deter potential investors and slow economic progress. Similarly, while MDC- Tsvangirai has been trying to improve relations with donor nations and convince them that the transition process is working, ZANU-PF continues to take antagonistic approach to Western states for example through improving diplomatic relations with countries like Iran. Western governments have in turn tied the removal of sanctions to political and economic progress, which has made opening of improvement in funding for development projects increasingly difficult. The friends of Zimbabwe consultative forum that was held in Oslo in June 2010 while promising, continued engagement and support towards the reform process and implementation tied any further substantial financial support to the inclusive government to full political and economic reforms.

1.3 Humanitarian and Early Recovery consequences7

In 2010, an estimated 6 million vulnerable people continue to feel the impact of the erosion of basic services and livelihoods over the past years. Cholera outbreak in 2008/09 that affected 55 out of the 62 districts, with 98,531 cases and 4,282 deaths re-emerged in 2009/2010 and is ongoing, though with significantly less casualties. Measles outbreak in 2009/2010 equally continues to strain the already weak health system. Despite this year?s cereal harvest of 1.5 million MT (similar to last year?s but 31% above the recent five year average cereal production) and an improvement in the food-security situation, Zimbabwe still faces a substantial national cereal deficit. According to recent Zimbabwe Vulnerability Assessment Committee (ZimVac) report, a national cereal deficit of 185,540 MT is projected for the 2010/2011 consumption year, before considering domestic stocks with the Grain Marketing Board (GMB), the private sector and farming households. Food deficit was projected at 220,956 between April and June, 537,514 between July and September, 904 463 between October and December and 1,3million during the peak hunger season from January to March 2011. Of the total number of food-insecure populations, 11 % are labour constrained (hence will need free food assistance) while 89% are not labour-constrained and modality of food assistance should be aligned to the government plan for public works. The country has the fourth highest crude mortality rate in Africa. The HIV/AIDS prevalence rate is one of the highest in the world, despite a recent drop to 13.7%. Some 1.2 million people live with the HIV/AIDs virus, and 343,600 adults and 35,200 children under age 15 urgently need antiretroviral treatment. Access to safe water and sanitation remains a major problem for millions of Zimbabweans. Child malnutrition is a significant challenge to child survival and development. Thirty three percent of children under age 5 are chronically malnourished and 7% suffer from acute malnutrition. The education sector is characterized by severe shortages of essential supplies, high staff turnover and sporadic teachers? strikes. This particularly affects Zimbabwe?s 1.6 million orphaned and vulnerable children, including more than 100,000 child-headed households. Humanitarian assistance to IDPs, child protection issues, and prevention of and response to gender-based violence remain areas of concern.

The need to support humanitarian plus? or early recovery programmes is highlighted by the deterioration in existing infrastructure and loss of employment opportunities. This accelerates the country?s brain drain, affects social capital and creates obstacles for meaningful and speedy economic revival. Emigration and the consequent remittances continue to be the main survival strategy for many vulnerable families.

Currently,10 UN agencies and 66 International NGOs are involved in humanitarian and early recovery response in the country through the CAP,ZUNDAF and other process. The UN Agencies and International NGOs are involved in providing humanitarian and early recovery assistance to fill in the gaps until development funding that can meaningfully restore provision of basic services picks up. In addition to this, there are several other international and national NGOs that are currently implementing humanitarian and early recovery programmes either as implementing partners of the above agencies and International NGOs using funds from the CAP or outside the CAP process.

In 2008, the revised CAP was for US$583 Million and was funded at US$400 million (69%), In 2009, the revised appeal was for US$722 Million and was funded at US$468 Million (65%) whereas in 2010, the CAP is for US$478 million and is currently funded at US$ 209 million(44%)⁸. However, there are also additional funds for humanitarian and early recovery activities that are currently coming into the country through other sources outside the CAP process. The funding outside CAP was US$69 million in 2008, US$190 million in 2009 and so far US$7 million in 2010. Notable trends over the last three years include decrease in food aid requirements and increase in early recovery needs under the «humanitarian plus approach».

The government?s 2010 Budget is $2.25 billion with the international Aid Grant of $810 million (36%) and the internal revenue of $1.44 billion (64%) which the theme is Reconstruction with Equitable Growth and Stability. According to the Minister of Finance, Mr Tendai Biti⁹, the budget is «a pro-poor, broad based and inclusive development framework» with «a strong emphasis on the key issues of education, health and social services». The budget is

anchored on the Three Year Macro-Economic Policy and Budget Framework: 2010-2012 [STERP II] which the inclusive government had come up with as the successor to the Short Term Emergency Recovery Programme [STERP].

The humanitarian and early recovery coordination structures exist at policy, strategic and operational level. The Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) endorsed the cluster approach in Zimbabwe in March 2008. Currently there are eight clusters: Agriculture (FAO), Early Recovery (UNDP/ IOM), Education (UNICEF), Emergency Telecommunications (WFP/UNICEF), Health (WHO), Nutrition (UNICEF), Protection (UNHCR) and WASH (UNICEF). OCHA chairs inter-cluster meetings on a regular basis. The HCT at a strategic level is complemented by expert level meetings of donors and the information management working group. Strengthening cluster coordination at provincial level remains a key priority for humanitarian coordination and resource mobilization in Zimbabwe. In the absence of provincial offices, OCHA field staff operates from Harare and extend coordination support to all provinces through the existing government and NGO structures. Efforts are underway to align humanitarian and Government coordination structures.

1.5 Humanitarian and Early Recovery Strategy

The Consolidated Appeal Process (CAP) is a planning and resource mobilization tool primarily for emergency response in Zimbabwe. As in other countries, it is issued at the beginning of the year and reviewed in June in order to accommodate any changes in the humanitarian situation.

The CAP 2010 continues to be aligned with the priorities of the Government?s Short-Term Economic Recovery Programme (STERP) and includes early recovery and «humanitarian plus» interventions. The CAP 2011 will also focus on early recovery activities to reflect the change in the situation of the country and more synchronisation will be made between short-term humanitarian interventions and medium and long-term plans by Government and other development actors. The envisaged activities are recovery in nature, but in the context of Zimbabwe are considered time-critical and life-saving, such as repairs to water and sanitation systems, food for assets, inputs for assets, strengthening of health systems.

Humanitarian partners have observed the international community?s increased engagement on recovery and transition planning allowing for continued «humanitarian plus» activities into 2010.With a continued mission to assist the most vulnerable in the country, humanitarian and Early Recovery partners in Zimbabwe have identified the following strategic objectives as a priority for 2011:

Save & prevent loss of lives, as well as prevent depletion of productive household assets by providing humanitarian assistance to vulnerable groups (Agriculture)

Support restoration of livelihoods/food security; prevent depletion of productive household assets in crisis situation & support early recovery (Food)

Integration of humanitarian response into recovery and development action (Health)

Advocate for and work with authorities, communities and individuals to promote a protective environment and sustainable solutions with particular attention to women, men, girls, boys, displaced populations and other individuals with specific needs (Protection)

Strengthen national and sub-national level capacity to coordinate, deliver, and monitor near to medium term interventions that save and prevent loss of life in vulnerable populations. (Nutrition)

Support transition and strengthen capacity at national & local level for coordinating and implementing essential recovery activities incorporating disaster risk reduction and sustainability frameworks

Support transition from humanitarian to recovery especially through promoting institutional capacity and sustainable livelihoods, whilst retaining the ability to respond to unforeseen events

The Medium Term Plan (MTP), the overall anchor of economic policy in the next five years (2010-2015), is awaiting cabinet approval before being launched. MTP targets Gross Domestic Product of US$9 billion by the end of 2015 while anticipating double-digit GDP growth rates of an average 15% over the five-year period. According to the Ministry of Finance, the MTP would deal with broad developmental and growth oriented policies while the Three-Year Macro-economic Policy and Budgetary Framework (STERP II) would lay out macro-economic policy instruments that would anchor rolling budgets from 2010-2012. The MTP would dovetail with STERP II which was launched last year and targets a GDP of US$5.6 billion in 2010, US$5.9 billion in 2011 and US$6.3 billion in 2012.

The current Zimbabwe United Nations Development Assistance Framework ZUNDAF (2007-11) was done without a CCA as the political situation did not allow the preparation of the CCA to inform the ZUNDAF. For the Zimbabwe UN Country Team, ZUNDAF activities that started in 2007 at the beginning of the current ZUNDAF continue to be implemented where possible. Following the formation of Government of National Unity (GNU), a review of ZUNDAF was done in 2009 and agreement reached that the GNU would continue with the current ZUNDAF. For the UNCT, government decision to continue with the ZUNDAF meant that there would be no need to prepare a new document neither was it necessary to prepare an addendum to the ZUNDAF, but to simply align Annual Work Plans with the identified government priorities. The UNCT is currently in the process of preparing the next ZUNDAF (2012-2015)

1.7 Projections

Any improvement in the socio-economic environment for the next years will largely depend on who is in power. If President Mugabe remains in power (regardless of whether elections are held or not), little improvement in the economic situation is expected and the status quo will remain. Inflation rates are likely to exceed the official forecast of 5 % in 2010 and spending demands will continue (the administration is facing demands for pay rise of 200-300% from public servants). The government is currently spending 75% of its revenue on salaries and allowances and therefore unlikely to either increase the wage bill or put substantial investment in infrastructure.

The indigenization law will put off potential investors, the ongoing power rationing will negatively impact on domestic industrial growth and services particularly health care and education will therefore continue to deteriorate. IMF has termed the government projections of economic growth of 4.7% in 2010 and 6.3% in 2011 by the Finance Minister as unrealistic and projects a 2.2% growth in 2010 and zero growth in 2011. To foster economic growth, the IMF has also called on the government to «resolve» land ownership issues, improve labor market flexibility and reform the banking sector. But such moves would be politically controversial and are unlikely to be implemented by the current government within the next years. The humanitarian needs in the country under this scenario are therefore likely to remain the same, with the gradual shift to early recovery activities

Tensions between the various political parties are likely to increase as the process of new constitution making continues. There are signs that the constitution outreach programmes will spark ZANU-PF violence against MDC formation supporters in rural areas since MDC is perceived to be seeking limits on President Mugabe?s powers. This is likely to lead to more displacement and increase in vulnerability. Increasing discontent within the MDC- Tsvangirai party is also likely to lead to either a split within the party or its withdrawal from the government of national unity as currently constituted.

An election in 2011 or any time within this period under this scenario would cause violence among supporters of different political parties, leading to displacement and increase in humanitarian needs. Few investors are also likely to invest in an election year or when there is uncertainty over when elections would be held. However, the outcome of the elections could gradually alter the dynamics, the investment environment, donor attitude and the subsequent humanitarian needs if new leadership (Other than President Robert Mugabe) is elected.

2. Humanitarian and Early Recovery Coordination and Funding Mechanisms and Strategies in Zimbabwe 2.1 The Main humanitarian and Early Recovery stakeholders

Governmental decentralized structures under the Ministry of Local Government and Urban Development (MLGUD) ensure the liaison between local and national authorities, NGOs and the United Nations in the event of any disaster that requires response that exceeds the national capacity.

According to the current arrangements as stipulated in the Joint Inter-Agency Contingency Plan agreed on between the Government of Zimbabwe and the Humanitarian Coordinator (on behalf of all humanitarian agencies operating in the country)¹⁰, The Department of Civil Protection headed by a Director is the main focal point for any disaster in the country. The Civil Protection Committee of which OCHA,UNDP as well as other UN Agencies and International and National NGOs are members and which is chaired by the DCP, comprises key government ministries, government departments, security forces (Zimbabwe Army and Police), Zimbabwe Red Cross Society and the City Council of Harare. The Civil Protection Committee (CPC) is responsible to coordinate disaster response with national and international humanitarian actors and direct Provincial and District level Protection Committees to coordinate relief and preparedness at the Provincial and district level.

The Civil Protection Unit (CPU) is the main entry point for disaster preparedness and response at the Provincial and district level. These are headed by the Provincial and District Administrators respectively. At the National level, the Department of Civil Protection, in collaboration with civil society and humanitarian agencies, has been conducting national disaster preparedness workshop annually for last three years in selected disaster prone areas.

In 2009 and 2010, this has been extended with OCHA?s support, and in partnership with international NGOs, civil society and UN agencies. These workshops have played catalytic role in activating district level disaster responders and bring them under the CPU framework.

2.1.3 The Humanitarian and UN Country Team

The Humanitarian Country Team(HCT), established in Zimbabwe in March 2009, is the highest level coordination body for humanitarian and early actors. It is strengthening humanitarian action in the country through setting common objectives and priorities, promoting implementation of various global IASC guidelines and procedures on humanitarian action, promoting closer linkages with, and undertaking periodic oversight of, the cluster approach, the ERF/CERF arrangements, and other initiatives within the overall humanitarian reform agenda.

The HCT is composed of Heads of UN agencies namely FAO, IOM, UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNICEF, WFP, WHO, the World Bank; Heads of 5 NNGOs/INGOs¹¹. OCHA acts as the secretariat. The HCT has standing observers namely: Heads of ICRC, IFRC, ZRCS, NGOs and Humanitarian Reform Project Officer.

¹⁰ OCHA Zimbabwe ; Interagency National Contingency Plan July 2010-July 2011, Harare, June 2010

2.1.4 The Clusters

An Inter-cluster Forum was established in Zimbabwe following the guidance provided by the global IASC, IASC-WG and IASC Task Forces, and the Humanitarian Reform Agenda. The Inter-cluster Forum seeks to improve the planning and coordination between and across clusters in pursuit of a more transparent and predictable response to priority areas of humanitarian and early recovery assistance.

Each cluster has a work plan that is used to guide their work. OCHA assist to coordinate efforts and thereby eliminate duplication and also seek opportunities for clusters to work together such as Health and WASH during the cholera outbreak.

Through the Humanitarian Country Team(HCT), the Humanitarian Coordinator in Zimbabwe has designated Cluster Leads in sectors relevant to the Contingency Plan as follows:

Indirectly, all communities likely to be affected by future disasters and receiving assistance by the above stakeholders are stakeholders.

2.2 Humanitarian and Early Recovery Assessments: Linkage to the Actions

In view of the changing context in Zimbabwe and the increasing shift to recovery and development activities to address the remaining needs which are more or less of a chronic nature, the scope of existing humanitarian coordination structures need to be broadened.

In the CAP 2011 Workshop facilitated by OCHA office in Zimbabwe from the 1rst to the 2^nd September 2010, it was agreed that the CAP 2011 should focus on early recovery which will address current challenges and pave way for long term relief and restoration of livelihoods. A key task is how to effectively link ongoing humanitarian activities to recovery and development initiatives that are simultaneously undertaken by development partners and the Government of Zimbabwe. This calls for an adoption of a multi-sector approach in responding to the needs on the ground and the integration of humanitarian response in development actions. OCHA and UNDP Zimbabwe can and should play a vital role in ensuring there is a clear interface between the actions of different Humanitarian Clusters and between these clusters and their corresponding development forums.

In addition, the need remains for accurate monitoring of the humanitarian situation and inter-agency assessment in vulnerable regions to get a better understanding of socio-economic and political situation and to improve humanitarian programming and targeting. More has to be done in terms of improving the available information on humanitarian needs and collaboration with local structures in this regard. In 2009, with concerted efforts and advocacy with the Government, there were significant improvements in the areas of protection monitoring and a joint assessment was conducted with the government to get an overview of the needs of Internal Displaced Peoples(IDPs). The joint assessment brought out the keys needs of various IDP communities. However, the number of IDPs in Zimbabwe is not known and there is a need to conduct a comprehensive national-level IDP profiling so that the demographic and

economic characteristics of these communities are further studied and recommendations for durable solutions are made.

In 2010, the Government of Zimbabwe launched Food Deficit Mitigation Strategy and National Small-farmer Input Support Programme to address food insecurity in a holistic and inter-sectoral approach. While this is a welcome development, there is a need to ensure humanitarian and early recovery principles are upheld in implementing these programmes and that there are complementariness between these initiatives and the actions of the Humanitarian and development community. The humanitarian and early recovery community must build on progress made so far and should conduct more sectoral and thematic joint assessments with the government, or/and among humanitarian and early recovery partners to enhance the effectiveness of humanitarian and early recovery response: Therefore, there is a need:

To strengthen advocacy activities through accurate and regular monitoring and dissemination of humanitarian information, humanitarian and early recovery principles and humanitarian law

For an effective coordination between humanitarian and early recovery stakeholders and government counterparts to improve on common planning, preparedness, coordination and response on humanitarian and early recovery situation. There exists a misunderstanding between many government counterparts who generally view the clusters as parallel arrangements and who still insist that humanitarians should follow development structures, many of which are largely non-functional. This entails operationalising clusters at field level and expanding humanitarian and early coordination to sub-national levels. There is also a need for adapting the humanitarian and early recovery structures to the evolving context and ensure strong linkages are created between humanitarian and development forums.

The CAP 2011 workshop participants emphasized the need for strengthening coordination at national and sub-national levels. It highlighted the need for a close collaboration between humanitarian coordination forums and recovery and development structures. Increasing collaboration through constant consultations and by ensuring the involvement of relevant Government line ministries at cluster level coordination structures is recognized as a key factor in aligning humanitarian priorities with the Governmental plans. There is no clarity in how cluster-level discussions feed into recovery forums and this needs to be strengthened.

The Workshop participants also agreed that a program-based approach rather than project-based in the selection and funding of CAP projects will give a strategic focus to the exercise and will allow monitoring of gaps in humanitarian and early recovery response. The success of the new approach will depend on the acceptance and buy-in of the Donor community and hence it was also agreed that a corresponding funding strategy should be produced.

Lessons learnt from 2008 and 2009 seasonal disasters, including cholera, indicate that the capacities of local actors need to be strengthened so that emergency preparedness initiatives are in place and relief and recovery response is better coordinated at the field level. This is to be achieved by designing specific contingency plans that address the risks involving all the local stakeholders. While development actors take the lead in capacity building, the Humanitarian Community should support in the areas where they have unique expertise mainly in disaster preparedness and mitigation.

2.3 Needs Assessments

In Zimbabwe, information on coordination and advocacy needs was collected during the last 2 years through regular consultations with partners and various internal and external reviews of ongoing activities, including the following:

Mid Year Review of the Zimbabwe 2010 Consolidated Appeal (June 2010) and Zimbabwe 2011 Consolidated Appeal(September 2010): http://www.humanitarianappeal.net/

Zimbabwe Cholera Response Review Report: December 2009 (OCHA and Oxfam GB) C4 Epidemiological Report: June 2009 (MoHCW)

Zimbabwe Rural Vulnerability Assessment (ZIMVAC) October 2009 (UN, I/NGOs, Government):

1st Round Crop and Livestock assessment Report, February 2010 (Agritex) Joint IDP assessment Report, August 2009 (UN, Government)

The Joint Recovery Opportunities Assessment(JROA) is currently in progress. The 4 Consultants hired by the UNDP are collecting data with regard to past, present and future assessments from various sources (UN Agencies, NGOs, Cluster Coordinators, Donors, GoZ, etc) to identify recovery opportunities. They are making and will continue to make appointments to meet all the stakeholders as per their mandate and TORs.

A Joint concept paper is underway being developed between the Office of the UN Humanitarian/Resident Coordinator and GoZ (MRIIC) to clarify the harmony, understanding and linkage between CAP and Early Recovery.

2.4 Organisation's presence

Currently, the Humanitarian and Early Recovery activities in Zimbabwe cover all the eight Rural Provinces of Zimbabwe as well as the cities of Bulawayo and Harare through UN Agencies and NGO fields presence as well as frequent field missions from Harare to the provincial and districts locations as indicated in the following map¹²

In addition, humanitarian and Early Recovery partners are seeking complementary funding for their core coordination activities and are working through the funding mechanism such as the CAP,UNDAF,CERF etc...

Humanitarian and Early Recovery programmes are currently funded by different donors (multi-donor funding), which ensure that the costs are distributed on the budgeted activities and the different contributions are used to cover these.

The following map updated by OCHA Zimbabwe in April 2010 shows humanitarian organization?s presence with area of intervention in Zimbabwe¹³

2.5.1 The direct Beneficiaries of the Humanitarian and Early Recovery coordination mechanisms in Zimbabwe

The direct beneficiaries are all present and incoming humanitarian and Early Recovery actors (Governmental line ministries, UN, NGOs, IOM, Red Cross Movement) at the capital and provincial levels.

The HC /RC trough OCHA and UNDP offices is providing coordination, advocacy and information management services and act to support the national governmental actors and the wider humanitarian and early recovery community. While the intent is to improve the efficiency of the delivery of humanitarian and early recovery assistance to alleviate the suffering of vulnerable populations, the direct beneficiaries are the humanitarian community itself. In Zimbabwe, this includes 70 INGOs, 1,200 NGOs, 11 UN agencies and four relevant government line ministries as stakeholders¹⁴

Humanitarian organizations and local government structures (CPU and District Administrators in each district of operations) operating in Zimbabwe are benefiting directly from strengthened coordination structures and support. Additionally, the local population in areas assessed to be at high risk of natural hazards such as floods, cyclones and drought will be direct recipients of comprehensive cluster disasters response preparedness programming.

The direct beneficiaries of humanitarian and early recovery?s coordination mechanisms are identified as those that meet the following criteria:

International and national humanitarian organisations involved in the direct implementation of humanitarian activities in Zimbabwe;

Donor governments and organizations that provide or are likely to provide financial support to humanitarian activities in Zimbabwe;

Government actors that bear primary responsibility for meeting the assistance and protection needs of vulnerable populations in Zimbabwe;

Actors identified through both HQ and Zimbabwe-based group and bilateral coordination meetings. Meetings at HQ level -> IASC

Participatory assessments, Interviewing of beneficiaries, consultations with stakeholders on different levels and in the frame of the cluster coordination

Establish contacts through the HCT, HC and the IASC Needs Assessment Framework (NAF)

2.5.3 Involvement of Direct Beneficiaries in the designing of the actions

The different humanitarian and early recovery stakeholders are involved through various consultations and planning mechanisms:

The indirect beneficiaries of humanitarian and Early Recovery?s coordination and funding mechanisms are the vulnerable populations in Zimbabwe that benefit from the activities implemented by all stakeholders. This includes all vulnerable population in Zimbabwe as defined in the CAP 2010, including:

¹⁵ All the information has been consolidated from the Cluster response plans outlined in the CAP 2010 MYR

	Zimbabwe, ACF
Food	WFP,GoZ line Ministries, Food sector partners include WFP, C-SAFE (comprised of World Vision International - WVI, CARE and Catholic Relief Services - CRS), Cadec, Caritas, Ministry of Labour and Social Services, Ministry of Regional Integration and International Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, OCHA, OXFAM GB, Plan International, Stichting CARE Nederland (SCN), Stichting CARE UK (SC-UK), United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), UNICEF, WHO. WFP works through cooperating partners including: Africare, Christian Care, Save the Children, Goal, Organisation of Rural Associations for Progress (ORAP), CRS, WVI, Mashambanzou Care Trust, International Organisation for Migration - IOM, Plan, Concern, Care, Oxfam GB, and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC)
Agriculture	FAO,GoZ line Ministries, International Relief Teams (IRT), FAO, Africa Self-Help Assistance Programme (ASAP), Zim Pro, Coordinating Committee of Voluntary Service (COSV), Practical Empowerment & Networking Youth Association Trust (PENYA), Africare, ADDRA Zimbabwe, Achieving the Potential in Crops (APOC), New Hope Child Environmental Trust, Christian Care, Mercy Corps, Christian Aid, Environment Africa (EAFRICA), Development Aid from People to People (DAPP), Oxfam GB, Farmer's Association of Community Self-Help Investment Groups (FACHIG), MACHOSET, Africa 2000 Network (A2N), Concern, World Vision, River of Life, Action Against Hunger (ACF), CARE International, Manicaland Development Association (MDA), Southern Alliance for Indigenous Resources (SAFIRE), Zimbabwe Trust (ZIMTRUST), Sustainable Agriculture Trust (SAT), ISL SAFIRE, Solidarites, Single Parents Widows Support Network (SPWSNET), Tjinyunyi Babili Trust (TBT)
WASH	UNICEF, GoZ line Ministries, Australian Aid International (AAI), ACF, Adventist Development and Relief Agency - Zimbabwe (ADRA Zimbabwe), CARE International, Cooperazione E Sviluppo (CESVI), CRS, GOAL, International Medical Corps (IMC), IOM, International Rescue Committee (IRC), Integrated Sustainable Livelihoods (ISL), Mercy Corps, OXFAM GB, Practical Action Southern Africa, Solidarités, WVI and Zimbabwe Community Development Trust (ZCDT).
Early Recovery	UNDP, Goz Line Ministries, CFCS, IOM, Association of Evangelicals in Africa (AEA), Oxfam GB, Concern Worldwide (CW), IRT
Education	UNICEF, GoZ line Ministries, FAO, SC-N, Plan, IRT, Netherlands Development Organization (SNV), Norwegian People's Aid (NPA), CRS, Actionaid, Flemish Office for Development Co-Operation and Technical Assistance (VVOB), UNESCO, Natcoms, Chiedza Child Care Centre (CCCC), Camfed, Africare, IOM
Multi-sector	IOM (lead), Goz Line Ministries, WFP, SCN-Z Norway, District Aids Action Committee (DAAC), UNICEF, UNFPA, Patsime Trust, and local immigration, police, Ministries and Departments of Labour and Social Services and Development in Limpopo Province, South Africa, Beitbridge and Plumtree, Zimbabwe and Francistown, Botswana.
Cross-cutting: HIV/Aids Gender	All humanitarian and early recovery stakeholders involved in cross-cutting issues

2.6 Humanitarian and Early Recovery objectives, Results and Activities: Operational Overview of the Actions¹⁶

Action	Strengthening Humanitarian and Early Recovery Field Coordination in Zimbabwe
Principal Objective	A well-coordinated and enabling environment for humanitarian and early recovery action
	Intervention Logic	Objectively Verifiable Indicators	Sources of Verification	Risks and Assumptions
Specific Objective	Provide effective support for coordination forums at country and provincial levels to establish linkages with recovery/development forums, to adopt a multi- sectoral approach and to ensure the integration of humanitarian response in development activities	Reduced duplication of efforts between development and humanitarian actors. Improved targeting of humanitarian resources. Enhanced joint programming between humanitarian and development actors. Monthly consultations and meetings between the government, UN, donors and NGOs on early warning, situation analysis, emergency preparedness and response. Number of coordination fora for exchange of intra and inter-sectoral information on response	Sector evaluation reports (piloted in all sectors). Field Mission reports Data bases (3ws, Mailing lists etc) Thematic maps developed and produced Minutes of meetings held (HCT, Clusters/Sectors , Inter-Cluster Forum, Donor and NGO consultative meetings) Weekly and	Assumptions: 1. The economy makes a modest recovery and experiences growth but humanitarian needs remain. 2. Food requirements of the population cannot be completely satisfied through harvest and imports. 3. Joint assessment efforts are not prevented by authorities (ZimVAC, Crop Assessment, IDPs assessment, Early recovery assessment) 4. NGOs and the UN Agencies are not obstructed from accessing the vulnerable populations. 5. Consultation is maintained with line ministries responsible for humanitarian and recovery assistance 6. ZUNDAF and Government clusters relating to social services become functional and able to collect and share information. 7. A common understanding with the Government on the prioritization processes and the best ways of responding to the needs

¹⁶ Data have been consolidated from OCHA Project Proposals to ECHO, Spain, and Norway as well as from some Early Recovery Cluster working documents, reports, etc...

		and early recovery activities. Number of coordination meetings between humanitarian and development actors. Number of clusters integrating into development coordination frameworks. Number of active members attending and participating in clusters and other humanitarian and early recovery coordination mechanisms. Number of Joint Assessments supported through active participation in developing survey plans, methodology, piloting, questionnaire design, field missions, data collection cleaning, analysis and mapping. Number of NGO, HCT members and donor participation in humanitarian and early recovery information sharing and use of information products.	Monthly Humanitarian Updates ERF donor monthly updates. Joint assessment reports Interagency contingency plan. Training report for training offered to humanitarian community Donor reports on humanitarian and early recovery responses	of the most vulnerable. 8. There is generally a good level of acceptance of UN and NGOs activities by government 9. Issues of access, security of humanitarian workers, constraints to information exchange among stakeholders do not deteriorate Risks: 1. Possible lack of access to vulnerable populations especially during preparations for possible general elections in 2011. 2. Information sharing ineffective as deemed too sensitive by GoZ and not authorised 3. Ideological differences that impact negatively on capacity building initiatives in the preparedness, prevention and response to emergencies 4. Lack of Government support for humanitarian/emergency activities in their desire for the country to rapidly transition to early recovery and development.
		Number of Information products
		(maps/graphs/analysis presentations/reports) used in meetings, Joints
		Assessments and in various phases of humanitarian and early recovery response.
		Number of trainings on humanitarian principles humanitarian reforms and early recovery process
Result 1	Synergies established	Number of coordination	Minutes of the	Risk anticipated: Stakeholders in Zimbabwe are
	between humanitarian and developmental structures	meetings (Cluster, HCT, donor meetings, NGO	coordination meetings.	focused on recovery and development. There is a risk that remaining humanitarian needs and gaps
	with a view to supporting appropriate transition to	consultative meetings, and thematic groups)	Field missions undertaken and	are overlooked with possibility of not having adequate funds for humanitarian actions.
	recovery.	held.	mission reports	Insufficient involvement, interest and
		Number of coordination	including	understanding of key stakeholders in the agreed
		meetings to address	recommendation	humanitarian and early recovery coordination
		continuing humanitarian vulnerabilities and emerging recovery priorities. Number of sectoral coordination meetings between humanitarian and development partners to address vulnerabilities and emerging recovery priorities. Number of interagency assessment missions	for actions. Humanitarian coordination mechanisms operating at field level. Minutes of meetings held (HCT, Sector WGs, Donor and NGO consultative meetings). Reports for	mechanisms.
		and/or joint missions with GoZ undertaken in collaboration with humanitarian and early recovery partners.	workshop and training for NGOs and local government.
		% of Cluster meetings attended by relevant line ministries and donors.
		Cluster approach effectively implemented and operational at Field
		Level as per agreed standards.
		Number of clusters supported with assessment based situational analysis.
		Number of meetings held with development actors and GoZ on transition of clusters.
Result 2	Improved humanitarian	Number of times the	Contingency	Risk anticipated: Government structures and
	preparedness supports	interagency contingency	plans.	other humanitarian and early recovery partners
	targeted interventions.	plan is updated through	Early warning	have their planning tools and may not be willing to
		involvement of all partners. Number of times early warning indicators are updated and reports shared.	reports. Disaster strategic plan and policy document produced.	participate in inter-agency planning processes.
		Number of CPU supported district disaster risk reduction in targeted high risk areas.	Early warning and situation analysis reports.
		Number of Early Warning
		and Emergency Preparedness and Response workshops done for UN agencies, NGOs, churches and Districts Administrators at District or Provincial level.
Result 3	Information management tools/products updated in accordance with the current/evolving context and best practices shared and made available to all partners on regular basis.	Number of Maps (incl. thematic and administrative) updated, produced and provided by at Harare and Field level. All cluster websites pages established on OCHA Online pages for Zimbabwe and regularly updated.	Who does What Where (3W) reports. OCHA and UNDP Zimbabwe website. Cluster websites. Maps produced by OCHA AND UNDP.	Risk anticipated: Insufficient involvement of key stakeholders into the analysis and processing of information; limited access to the field.
Result 4	Capacity building supports the establishment of a common approach to the humanitarian response and early recovery actions.	Number of seminars and/or trainings organized on Humanitarian Reform and preparedness and mitigation.	Training reports and evaluations. NGO and CPU capacity building trainings.	Risk anticipated: Insufficient involvement, interest and understanding of key stakeholders in the capacity building efforts.

2.7 Monitoring, evaluation

Humanitarian and Early Recovery partners in Zimbabwe are continuously monitoring their actions and activities on several different levels:

As steward of the humanitarian reform and recovery process, partners are constantly involved in the functioning of the cluster approach in Zimbabwe through participation in cluster meetings, field assessment mission, and interacting with line ministries.

Humanitarian Country Team meet once a months in order to formulate recommendations to both cluster leads and the Humanitarian Coordinator, who has the main responsibility for humanitarian coordination in the country, for improving cluster functioning wherever necessary.

Partners conduct monitoring and evaluation of their performance in relation to their work plans and programmes.

Ensuring the smooth transition from relief to recovery and long term development in both post-conflict and post-disaster situations is a core part of OCHA and UNDP?s mandate. This objective is also expressed on the General Assembly Resolution 46/182, but also a corporate priority in OCHA and UNDP?s Strategic Framework and . The role of OCHA and UNDP in transition contexts is mainly to support recovery and development actors in:

Questions and concerns regarding the gender balance and cross -cultural responsiveness are both considered by humaniratian and early recovery stakeholders in planning of activities and outcomes as well as in needs assessments and responses.

Humanitarian and early recovery partners are also playing a vital part in the mainstreaming of gender and HIV/AIDS in the various interventions, Contingency Planning, CAP, ZUNDAF, assessments and training activities to ensure that the policies on these issues are fully applied, monitored and evaluated.

2.9 Continuum strategy (Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development)

Currently, Humanitarian and early recovery partners operating in Zimbabwe are working towards consolidating gains achieved in humanitarian coordination. The introduction of the cluster approach in 2008 and continued rolling out of clusters at district and provincial level, an increased cooperation between the international humanitarian community and the Government of Zimbabwe are also contributing to an improvement in coordination between key actors.

The Government of Zimbabwe and the Humanitarian Country Team(HCT)s are also working towards strengthening relationships with a wider group of operational partners, and other relevant actors to advance humanitarian and early recovery action. This is being achieved through enhancing engagement and partnership with counterparts in the Government, NGOs, regional bodies and donors, in support of humanitarian and early recovery actions in order to allow for efficient response and transparent coordination with participation of all key stakeholders.

To ensure an efficient response and fully de-link the humanitarian and early recovery responses from the political motivation, response planning is based on rigorous and jointly assessed situation analysis. With increased information management capacities, the humanitarian and early recovery partners are focused on tailoring more user oriented information products to better support inclusive assessment, planning and needs based response.

In addition, humanitarian and early recovery partners are ensuring a more systematic coordination of the common programme cycle. With the roll-out of the cluster approach in 2008, the improvement of the ERF and CERF and gradually more inclusive CAP process, there is increased engagement in the development of the common humanitarian action and early recovery plan. It remains a priority to ensure that effective coordination and response mechanisms support the Humanitarian Country Team and clusters at national and provincial level for joint assessments and analysis, resource mobilization and humanitarian response.

Meanwhile, The UNCT hosted a retreat on coordination arrangements in Zimbabwe on 25 January 2010. The retreat resulted in a clear understanding of existing coordination mechanisms and structures of the Government of Zimbabwe (GoZ) as well as Donor Partners and the harmonization of UN coordination structures for humanitarian and development assistance to Zimbabwe appropriately linked to national structures and mechanisms as follow¹⁷:

1. Specifically, to what extent there may be opportunities in each sector for existing forums to serve dual functions

2. These are offered only as a basis for conversation and to illustrate possibilities - the underlying assumptions are based on superficial understanding.

· Each sector needs to look at the opportunities and needs for different forums...

The following diagram identifies possible sectors, and superficial impressions of the way in which membership and issues might overlap across development and humanitarian contexts¹⁸.

2.10 Current Humanitarian and Early Recovery co-ordination structure in Zimbabwe

The Organisation's participation in coordination mechanisms in Zimbabwe are clusters, International and National NGOs,

UN agencies, Donors, Movements of the Red cross and other international organisation.

Following is the current Humanitarian and Early Recovery Coordination structure in Zimbabwe as updated by OCHA

Meetings	Chair	Frequency	Membership	Main Objective
Humanitarian Country Team	Humanitarian Coordinator	Every two months alternating with HCT/Donor	HCT members (HC; Heads of UN agencies; Heads of 5 elected NGOs)	Discussions and decision-making on humanitarian strategies and policies
HCT + Donors Technical Meeting	The Humanitarian Coordinator	Every two months alternating with HCT/Donor	HCT members (HC; Heads of UN agencies; Heads of 5 elected NGOs) and Donors Technical	Discussions and decision-making on humanitarian strategies and policies
Donors Technical Meeting	Head of OCHA Office	Every two months	Donors Technical. Cluster leads can be invited to discuss specific issues.	Consultations with donors at technical level to agree on priority areas for funding as well as brief donors on the latest developments in humanitarian response in Zimbabwe, including challenges faced in implementation, gaps in funding and ERF related issues; Building consensus on advocacy issues.
1. Inter-Cluster Task Force Meeting	Head of OCHA Office	Bi-weekly (Tuesdays directly preceding the HCT)	Cluster Leads, Co-Leads, Gen CAP advisor	Operational discussions and development of inter-cluster strategies and response activities; Development of inter-cluster operational guidance materials; Advise HCT on changes to (inter-cluster) humanitarian strategies; Formulate strategic and/or policy proposals for HCT decision-making	2. Humanitarian Contact Group
Head of OCHA Office	Monthly (third Monday of each month)	Open participation by humanitarian stakeholders - all at technical level	Exchange of technical information on humanitarian action and challenges in Zimbabwe	3. HC/NGO Consultative meeting
The Humanitarian Coordinator	Quarterly (third Tuesday of first months of each	HC and Heads of NGOs	Consultations with NGOs on humanitarian issues, challenges, bottlenecks and related developments
		quarter or when the need arises)
4. Cluster Meetings	Cluster Leads	Monthly	Cluster members	Strategize and coordinate humanitarian activities at cluster level and share information and address challenges and bottlenecks faced by cluster members; Report the Inter-Cluster Task Force on issues of concern, gaps and overlaps between clusters

2.11 Relation with the National and local authorities

Humanitarian and Early recovery partners are systematically coordinating activities with national authorities at national and sub-national level and the UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator( RC/HC) is frequently acting as interface between the humanitarian and early recovery community and Governmental authorities. In Zimbabwe, Humanitarian and Early Recovery Partners are strengthening coordination through the organisation of regular meetings, contacts and bilateral consultations as well as coordinating their activities with established authorities directly, through relations with relevant bodies as well as exchanging relevant information with various line ministries engaged in activities on regular basis.

Humanitarian and Early recovery partners are also indirectly coordinating with line ministries and relevant authorities through supporting the clusters and their members who in turn should be coordinating closely with those authorities. Where needed and appropriate, humanitarian and early recovery partners are advocating through the existing coordination mechanisms such as meeting, joint assessment etc...

2.12 Security and Contingency Plans

As per UN Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS) risk assessment, the whole country falls in phase 2 i.e. a region of low risk. However, this might change, especially if general elections are held any time in 2011 or later, resulting in sporadic violence that might have an impact on the implementation of all humanitarian or early recovery programmes. Apart from this, other natural hazards like a major flood or cholera outbreak may have impact, mainly on humanitarian and early recovery programmes since the government and non-government stakeholders may get occupied in the same.

In the event of deterioration in the humanitarian and early recovery situation in Zimbabwe, partners would comply with all security measures determined necessary by the UNDSS. If such deterioration were to occur, partners would revise their operating procedures in the affected districts so as best to continue their functions.

Currently, the security situation in the country remained generally calm though future developments are unpredictable and the interagency contingency plan has been updated in June 2010²⁰ and might be tested through a simulation exercise before end December 2010.

2.13 Communication, Visibility and Information

The UN and Humanitarian Country Team developed an advocacy and communication strategy that include humanitarian and recovery issues affecting Zimbabwe and highlight financial contributions received. Also, the UN and Humanitarian Country Team conducted reporting training for the cluster coordinators in October 2010 and plans are underway to organise a media exercise to the Head of Agencies. Meanwhile, field trips and joint initiatives are being organised to highlight humanitarian and early recovery issues affecting the country.

Working in collaboration with the United Nations Communications Group (UNCG) and UN agencies involved in humanitarian work, The RC/HC office through OCHA and UNDP offices is coordinating the collection, consolidation and dissemination of humanitarian and early recovery information about Zimbabwe through publications and reports.

In addition, partner?s reports, maps and other information products are being disseminated within the humanitarian and early recovery community during coordination meetings and field visits, by e-mail, etc... and partners are also using their website to publish maps and situation reports.

At the end of the 2 months of the stage period, and through the methodology set up at the beginning, I noticed that through the coordination and funding mechanisms and strategies in place in Zimbabwe, the humanitarian and Early Recovery planning and response provided by all stakeholders over the last four years contributed to saving lives across the sectors by responding to the cholera outbreak, providing food and agricultural assistance to vulnerable populations; and supporting vital social services including health, nutrition, water and education at a critical times. Access improved in 2009 and emergency response capacity was stepped up as cholera continued to spread and the food security situation deteriorated. While there continues to be room for improvement in the planning processes for emergencies, early recovery and engagement of all relevant humanitarian and development partners on transition, there has been increased synergy between the stabilization of the vulnerable population and the emergency rehabilitation and recovery work to be undertaken within the framework of the Short-Term Economic Recovery Programme (STERP). Significant progress was also made in support to the agriculture sector and targeted food aid support. These improvements, coupled with the general improvement in socio-economic situation resulted in reduction in food aid requirements from approximately 7 million people to the current 1.68 million. The level of support to schools with learning and teaching materials and support to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene infrastructure also markedly improved. Health partners in conjunction with the government also made good progress towards prevention and response to disease outbreaks. There was also overall improvement in coordination of humanitarian and early recovery assistance across clusters/sectors while better resource mobilization led to enhanced donor support.

However, the humanitarian and early recovery situation in Zimbabwe is still fragile due to the prevailing degradation of infrastructure in the basic sectors of health, water and sanitation, and food security. Humanitarian and early recovery efforts continue facing challenges that are rooted in the political and economic situation. The broader population remains vulnerable due to the above mentioned factors including to natural disasters (floods, drought) induced by climate change and have benefited only marginally from general improvements in the socio-economic situation. The country also faces continuing underlying economic and political challenges. The coalition government remains fragile over the slow implementation of the GPA and the political transition envisioned there under. While some early recovery activities are ongoing as part of humanitarian action, the lack of major funding for recovery and development remains one of the key hindrances to moving the country out of a situation of generalized humanitarian need.

In light of the above context, OCHA and UNDP are maintaining a pivotal role in facilitating planning and response to and advocating for emerging and on-going humanitarian, early recovery and development needs in Zimbabwe. The OCHA and UNDP presence during this period of transition is key for establishing and strengthening coordination mechanisms at the national and regional level, mobilising timely resources for emerging needs and providing essential information management services.As indicated in the 2011 CAP workshop²¹, there is a need to link humanitarian activities with and complement development activities which aim at long-term human development and economic growth with focused humanitarian action which target socially marginalised households and communities as well as individuals and households that are vulnerable to a variety of risks in a manner that is targeted, pro-active, inspired by humanitarian and recovery principles and based on systematic needs and vulnerability assessments at the local level.

As part of the transition planning, and considering the evolving context in Zimbabwe, consultation should be started by the RC/HC through OCHA and UNDP with other Heads of UN agencies and Programs, heads of mission for NGOs, the diplomatic community, and relevant state actors on aspects of the transition from humanitarian relief to early recovery and delivery of the remaining humanitarian activities in order to ensure that coordination and funding structures and strategies at local and national levels will continue to operate in a coherent and cost-effective manner.

It is therefore necessary for the HC/RC through OCHA and UNDP ZIMBABWE to extensively consult all stakeholders, especially the Government of Zimbabwe, the UN Country and Humanitarian team, the donors, the Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery Overview (BCPR)²² and The UN Development Operations Coordination

22 http://www.undp.org/cpr/we are/we are.shtml » Created in 2001 by UNDP's Executive Board, the Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery (BCPR) works around the world to restore the quality of life for men, women and children who have been

Office (DOCO)²³ before implementing a deliberate transition strategy which will allow all stakeholders to work under a unique coordination structure and the humanitarian community to progressively down size and phasing out their activities in the country, having put in place the appropriate mechanisms, raised commensurate awareness and enabled communities sufficiently to reduce tomorrow?s humanitarian caseload at the central and field level. The focus should remain on preparedness and capacity building, with a reduced element of direct delivery of assistance wherever possible.

devastated by natural disaster or violent conflict. Operating through some 100 country offices, the Bureau provides a bridge between the humanitarian agencies that handle immediate needs and the long-term development phase following recovery. Carving stability out of chaos, BCPR continues to seek new ways of preventing conflicts and of doing business - faster, earlier and in riskier situations «

23 http://www.undg.org/?P=15 « The UN Development Operations Coordination Office (DOCO) promotes social and economic progress by helping UN organizations deliver coherent, effective and efficient support to countries. The Secretary-General created DOCO (formerly the Development Group Office) and the UN Development Group (UNDG) in 1997 to unite the UN system and improve the quality of its development assistance. Coordination leads to more strategic UN support for national plans and priorities, makes operations more efficient, reduces transaction costs for governments, and ultimately helps people attain the Millennium Development Goals and other internationally agreed development objectives.»