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

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:

Participation in the design of the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) as well as the Mid Year Review (CAP MYR); and Common Humanitarian Action Plan (CHAP). Consultations with representatives of the humanitarian community through interactions with NANGO and NGO Heads of Agencies monthly forum. Consultations with stakeholders in regard to the information management tools, such as maps, website content, Who Does What Where, through cluster and inter-cluster meetings, consultations with Government counterparts in Harare as well as during field missions and the HCT meetings in Harare.

2.5.4 Other potential beneficiaries

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:

1. An estimated 6 million vulnerable people who continue to feel the impact of the erosion of basic services and livelihoods over the past years.

2. Victims of cholera re-emerged in October 2009 and the 55 affected districts (out of the 62) in 2008/2009.

3. Around 2 million food-insecure people.

4. 1.2 million people living with HIV and AIDS, and 343,600 adults and 35,200 children under age 15 with urgent need of anti-retroviral treatment.

5. Millions of Zimbabweans with no or limited access to safe water and sanitation.

6. Thirty-three percent of children under age 5 chronically malnourished.

7. 1.6 million Orphans and vulnerable children, including more than 100,000 child-headed households.

8. An unknown number of internally displaced persons (IDP) deprived of basic shelter and livelihood opportunities.

2.5.5 Direct beneficiaries per sector:¹⁵

Sector	Number of beneficiaries
Coordination and support services	HCT members, Local NGOs, International NGOs, Government counterparts, National Association of NGOs (NANGO), Donors and faith-based and civil society organization.
Protection	UNHCR, GoZ line Ministries , IMC-UK, IRC, African Network for the Prevention and Protection Against Child Abuse and Neglect in Zimbabwe (ANPPCAN), HT, IOM, CRS, IMC, ISL, UNFPA, Save the Children, Medair UK, UNICEF, ZCDT, Coalition Against Child Labour in Zimbabwe (CACLAZ), Oxfam GB, Childline Zimbabwe
Health	WHO,Goz line Ministries, CESVI, IMC, IOM, GOAL, Merlin, Save the Children, UNFPA, UNICEF,
Nutrition	UNICEF, Goz line Ministries, WVI-Z, Save the Children, Plan Zimbabwe, OPHID Trust, Linkage trust, IRT, IOM, Helen Keller International (HKI), Goal, ADRA

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.