Inter-Agency Real Time Evaluation of the Humanitarian ... - alnap

IA RTE of the humanitarian response to Pakistan’s 2010 Floods crisis
they been a platform where government and international community met to communicate and
plan operations.
124. However, according to several interviewees, 11 clusters are too many and they have
diverted attention from critical areas. The initial response plan (PIFERP) envisioned seven
clusters, in accordance with NDMA’s criteria. However, as the revised appeal was launched in
September, the number of clusters rose to 12 (including Camp Management which is no longer
functioning) and was implemented like a standard model for emergencies in an uncoordinated
manner without the GoP’s approval (see also funding, part four). Hence, instead of aligning and
reinforcing national structures, the UN imposed the ‘clusters approach verbatim’. Many
organisations questioned the appropriateness of having so many clusters activated, especially in
relation to the ongoing ‘mega‐disaster’ as there was an imminent need for resource
prioritisation (human and financial).
125. Furthermore, the clusters are considered to be “too heavy, with too much coordination”,
taking focus away from operations. Clusters main purpose has been information sharing –
exemplified by 3W maps which, to some extent, were useful for avoiding duplication, but not as
a planning and programming tool. All organisations considered the cluster meetings to be very
time‐consuming, with far too many meetings and comparatively little outcome.
126. Considering that many organisations have invested heavily in cluster coordination – OCHA
alone has approximately 40‐50 staff members whose time is dedicated exclusively to
coordination activities – the general appreciation that clusters are being used primarily for
information sharing. This does not add up with the financial and human resources invested in
these coordination structures. Interestingly, on asking different agencies in Pakistan on how
much have been invested in coordination through the clusters, no one was able to give accurate
figures or estimates.
127. A consequence of the many clusters being rolled out is that clusters were generally
characterised as “operating in silos” with little or no interface with other areas or sectors. The
exception was the more thematic areas approach taken on byWHO, UNICEF and WFP. The more
integrated coordination was also due to already existing partnerships between line ministries
and some UN agencies, like UNICEF and WHO. Added to this comes the fact that the inter‐
cluster coordination mechanism is considered to be lacking sufficient strength and leadership in
order to provide the necessary strategic guidance.
128. Some cluster leads, organisations, donors and Government representative argues that the
response lacks more integral approaches in order to become more effective and efficient. The
10.Monitoring and reporting 11.Advocacy and resource mobilization 12.Training and capacity building
13.Provision of assistance or services as a last resort
Riccardo Polastro, Aatika Nagrah, Nicolai Steen and Farwa Zafar
50