Iasc cluster approach evaluation, 2nd phase april 2010

Executive Summary
Introduction
Method
Background
Findings
Conclusions
Recommendations

---

45
Accountability to the HC is 
minimal
Good practice: 
Cluster-HC relationship  
in DRC
Clusters strengthen peer 
accountability
65
   The  interactions  between  the  Humanitarian  Coordinator  and  clusters  were  very 
limited in all case study countries except DRC. This has several reasons, including:
 
•   
Humanitarian Coordinators often lack the capacity to engage actively because 
they  fulfill  multiple  roles,  including  as  Resident  Coordinators  and  deputy 
special representatives;
 
•   
Humanitarian  Coordinators  often  do  not  have  a  strong  humanitarian 
background and therefore lack relevant expertise and interest;
 
•   
The reporting lines between cluster coordinators and Humanitarian Coordinators 
are problematic. Cluster coordinators formally report via their agency heads to 
the Humanitarian Country Team (or equivalent), which is problematic because 
agency heads often lack relevant information. Information about the clusters 
and their performance is therefore often collected by OCHA, which informs 
the Humanitarian Coordinator. In this case, much depends on the capacity of 
OCHA and problems can occur because OCHA has no formal authority over 
cluster coordinators. 
66
   In  DRC,  the  Humanitarian  Coordinator  system  and  the  cluster  approach  were 
mutually  supportive  and  the  Humanitarian  Coordinator  was  able  to  actively 
request  that  lead  agencies  exercise  their  cluster  responsibilities.  This  was  only 
possible  because  OCHA  provided  the  Humanitarian  Coordinator  with  the 
necessary information through unofficial bi-annual cluster assessments. In Haiti, 
OCHA facilitated a processes, whereby clusters conducted strength-weaknesses 
analyses after the end of their main period of activities.
67
   While accountability to the Humanitarian Coordinator can thus have a positive 
effect  on  the  functioning  of  the  cluster  approach,  especially  by  holding  lead 
organizations responsible for fulfilling their roles, the evaluation team found that 
peer accountability and accountability to the affected population were at least as 
important for ensuring the quality of humanitarian response and had so far not 
received sufficient attention in the context of the cluster approach. 
68
   Regarding peer accountability, clusters are showing promising results, despite the 
fact that this was not formally promoted as a goal of the cluster approach. Peer 
accountability has been enhanced because: 
 
•   
Cluster members provide each other with feedback on project sheets for CAP or 
Flash Appeals, as well as country or global-level pooled funds. This increases 
the quality of projects and reduces duplications.