Iasc cluster approach evaluation, 2nd phase april 2010

participation of the government
20.3% 
Separate governmental and 
international coordination 
mechanisms
15.4% 
Sectoral coordination  
(co-)led by the government 
14.1% 
Don’t know 
12.3%  
Geographic/area-based  
coordination
7.1%  
Other
3.5%  
None
70% 
Yes
14.5% 
No
15.5%  
Don’t know

---

137
Coordination at global level
75% of respondents felt that the introduction of the cluster approach had improved 
coordination  and  information  exchange  at  the  global  level.  They  perceived  the 
effects of working in global cluster as very beneficial, creating healthy dynamics 
(expectations to coordinate and partnership) among the members. WASH, Logistics 
and Education were cited several times as very well functioning, inclusive clusters, 
while  several  respondents  criticized  the  confusion  over  leadership  roles  in  the 
Emergency Telecommunications Cluster and in particular the stance of WFP.
Accountability 
a) Peer accountability
   In your experience, did/do cluster members (informally) hold each other 
accountable? 
Total number of respondents: 164 
 
 
Several respondents mentioned increased peer accountability for projects financed 
by pooled funds as a positive point. Peer accountability most often takes the form 
of follow-up on action points from previous meetings.  
49% 
Yes
33%  
No
18%   
Don’t know

---

138
b) Accountability to affected population
  Did your cluster(s) promote accountability to the affected population  
  at countrylevel?
  
Total number of respondents: 183 
 
 
Contrary to the findings of the country missions, many respondents answered this 
question in a positive way. Detailed answers, however, show that respondents have 
very different understandings of what “accountability to the affected population” 
means,  ranging  from  providing  assistance  according  to  needs  assessed  to 
humanitarian organizations consulting with the government. The WASH Cluster 
was mentioned several times as a good example of promoting accountability to 
the  affected  population.  Only  two  respondents  mentioned  that  country  cluster 
coordinators/leads advocated for better accountability, despite the fact that it is in 
their terms of reference. 
In your view, how could accountability to the affected population be (further) strengthened 
through the cluster approach?
Several  respondents  suggested  introducing  a  complaints  mechanism  either  in 
clusters or overseen by the Humanitarian Coordinator. Others suggested providing 
trainings  to  cluster  members  on  how  to  implement  accountability  to  affected 
populations, done by NGOs that tend to have more experience and knowledge on