AWG Iraq AWG: coordination challenges and opportunities from the field Iraq Assessment Working Group Iraq AWG: coordination challenges and opportunities from the field CAIM Webinar Wednesday, 9 May, 15h00 – 17h00 Geneva time

Coordinating assessments is challenging, but.. It’s rewarding Intro Coordinating assessments is challenging, but.. It’s rewarding It’s stimulating It’s worthwhile It’s IMPORTANT (HPC) It’s NEEDED (ICCG, partners) Coordinate Assessments in Iraq Coordinate Assessments Coordination Very easy Easy Moderate Somewhat hard Hard Very Hard

AWG set-up in Iraq Understand the context: Country context: read & research, ask & engage in discussions. Assessment context: read & research, ask & engage in discussions. Understanding stakeholders motivations and seeking commitments. Identify assessment focal points / capacity / interest. Establish/strengthen assessment coordination structure Set up first meeting - keep it open to IMOs and CCs (as of Jan. 2018 NGOs membership expanded to include NGOs who were previously represented by NCCI). Prepare, present, discuss and endorse the Terms of Reference. Agree on participation, meeting frequency, objectives/focus - partners want predictability, structure, direction. Offer it. Expect challenges – listen and offer solutions. Work with Clusters and not against them. Try to make their time worthwhile.

AWG milestones Sub-national focus (2017) National (2017-2018) OCT FEB APR JUN SEP NOV JAN FEB APR AWG Roadmap: focus, role and responsibilities CASS Mission Set up coord. mechanism RNA Roll Out RNA Training RNA Mosul Coordination Indicators Database Tool Matrix Finalization of RNA v3 Tool and piloting RNA National Rollout Trainings ERR Surge AWG Set-up AWG TOR RNA Set Up Revised TOR and membership Mini-workplan Linkages with ICCG, IMWG RNA Dashboard AWG Survey (stock-tacking) RNA Mosul Coordination

Assessment areas in which the AWG should be more active Answered: 18 Skipped: 7 Responsible: ICCG, AWG [Source: AWG Survey, Q6, Nov. 2017]

AWG challenges Answered: 18 Skipped: 7 1. COORD./PLANNING Assessment initiatives are not mapped out to ensure complementary of data sources. – 44 % 4. ANALAYSIS There is no agreement on a core set of tools to use for analysis (e.g. agreed questionnaires, methodologies, reporting requirements) – 29% 2. DESIGN Monitoring information gaps is not possible due to a lack of agreed-upon common set of indicators. – 56 % 5. REPORTING Needs assessment data is not shared/reported in a timely and systematic manner – 50% 3. DATA COLLECTION No Secondary Data Review framework is in place to help develop a shared understanding of the situation – 35 % [Source: AWG Survey, Q7-11, Nov. 2017]

Other challenges In addition to the five issues highlighted in the previous slide, the following have also been raised/identified: IM resources: lack of capacity, expertise, funding to coordinate needs assessments intra- and inter-cluster. Resources continue to be reduced as the Iraq humanitarian context stabilizes. Technical capacity: Limited IMOs/staff capacity to help with the data cleaning and the data analysis (e.g. visualize/interpret data; build platforms). Info-sharing: subnational clusters and NGOs indicate/demonstrate lack of knowledge on cluster and multi-cluster tools, as well as coordination platforms/websites, (e.g. RASP, HR.Info, AR, etc) have raised concerns on not receiving updates/info/guidance from national level (includes OCHA, clusters, and their respective country offices) [Source: AWG Survey, Nov. 2017; feedback from NGO partners and sub-national ICCGs; and observations about partner capacity/knowledge]

Capacity Answered: 17 Skipped: 8 *If not time at all, please explain why assessments are not prioritized within your cluster/organization: “the cluster does not seem to have prioritized needs, gap analysis, or information as the basis for anything.” [Source: AWG Survey, Nov. 2017]

Focus areas and next steps for 2018 Revised TOR Calendar with assessment-related training opportunities Facilitate development of common indicators database to inform multi-sector assessments Map out and evaluate the recurrent assessment tools, frequency of data collection, timeline for analysis, products, and eventually have a set of endorsed AWG tools (joint analysis) Bi-monthly product with assessment updates (e.g. available datasets, new training opportunities, guidance/info on new tools, update on recent assessments conducted, etc.) MCNA as a cluster-driven process developed and rolled out within the AWG structure Support with the HNO process AWG Meeting Record, Next Steps: OCHA to circulate the revised AWG TOR with annex of tasks to be completed in 2018 for endorsement. OCHA and REACH to develop a calendar for assessment-related training opportunities. AWG members to provide input monthly and OCHA/REACH to circulate opportunities on a regular basis with national and sub-national ICCGs, as well as interested partners. OCHA and REACH, with input from AWG members, to facilitate the development of a common indicators database to support harmonize multi-sectoral assessments. OCHA and REACH, with input from AWG members, to map out the recurrent assessment tools, frequency of data collection, timeline for analysis, products, etc. AWG to develop guidance and share updates on a bi-monthly basis to national ICCG, sub-national ICCG and interested partners. [Source: AWG Meeting Record, 16 Jan. 2018]

Linking challenges, opportunities and solutions CDI – future tools and revision of tools

AWG Questions? Alexandra Lazau-Ratz Iraq Assessment Working Group Questions? Alexandra Lazau-Ratz Humanitarian Affairs Officer | OCHA Iraq Mob: +964 (0) 751 740 3572 | E-mail: lazau-ratz@un.org | Skype: alexandra.l.ratz