Improving Partnership Can Improve Humanitarian Action Summary of Global Humanitarian Platform Discussion: Recommendations, Action Points, and Challenges Amman, Jordan May 19, 2008

Conclusions Discussions underlined the importance of: Strengthening partnership by defining priorities together Developing better relationships without losing sight of the ‘external’ environment with civil society, governments, and beneficiaries Training staff on the Principles of Partnership (PoP) to change organizational behaviour Understanding organisational strength and weakness to know each other better Providing leadership, advocating on humanitarian principles and protecting humanitarian space, to add value to humanitarian action

Conclusions Engaging in honest and frank dialogue to resolve potential misunderstandings and to clarify roles and responsibilities Acknowledging perceptions created by remote programming (international NGOs & staff confined to Amman) Supporting local capacity as key to the improvement of humanitarian action Understanding capacity and access, noting in particular the complexity in identifying local and national partners. Expecting flexibility in funding and speed in disbursing funds based on needs. UN safety and security systems limiting humanitarian action and exerting pressure on national organisations to intervene putting national staff at security risks, creating double standards.

Recommendations Partnership Thorough assessment of capacities’ needs Build the capacity of local NGOs & government structures at all levels. Expand local partners’ base & build on existing capacity to address complex emergencies Creative partnership measures are needed to respond Solicit resources to support extra efforts for coordination De-politicize Sector Outcome Teams (SOT)

Recommendations Equality/Equity Involving Partners at all stages including planning, project design & programming Acting on feedback and criticism Sharing credit as appropriate Review DSS rules & handling security of national / international humanitarian workers Ensuring balanced representation at the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) and Sectoral Outcome Team (SOT) All need to be active and contribute to coordination/ provide meaningful constructive inputs Views of all partners need to be reflected at the global strategic level

Recommendations Result-oriented approach Understanding & capitalizing on Strength & added value. UN, RC/C & NGOs Adapting policies to local needs. no ‘one size fits all’ Applying procedures to ensure a faster response (funding; emergency etc) Strengthening partnership between UN agencies Establishing a Humanitarian Iraq Country Team. Promoting better understanding of complementarity at a global level

Recommendations Responsibility Sufficient planning and preparedness Understanding of assets and capacities Sustainability and appropriateness of response Civil society/ beneficiaries involvement in program design Empowerment of local partners and communities Expansion of humanitarian space Joint advocacy with a unified and strategic vision with the UN taking the lead role. Application of SPHERE standards

Recommendations Complementarity Involvement of national authorities, local councils & policy makers International organizations to ensure: capacity building, good needs assessments and financial management, Identification of strength of local partners to be used Coordination mechanisms in Amman include NGOs operating in Baghdad and provinces Ensuring that national authorities are involved in policy development and emergency planning Improving coordination among humanitarian actors on the ground Ensure voices of local partners are present in strategic / policy discussions

Recommendations Transparency Should be emphasized in funding criteria, priorities and mechanisms Creation a Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) for Iraq with equal representation and involvement in strategic discussions Educating the donor community about GHP and advocating for transparent funding mechanisms based on needs Ensure UN funding mechanisms are transparent and involve partners in prioritization/ project selection

Challenges Partnership UN agencies perception of NGOs as “contractors” & NGOs perception of the UN as a “donor” Security and access restrictions Building on capacity rather than prescribing what is needed Equal dialogue with partners on strategic issues Equality/Equity Implementation of ‘behavioral change’ at HQ and field level

Challenges Result-oriented approach Political discourse often encroaches on humanitarian space and humanitarian priorities Complementarity International organizations access to local contacts due to security/ political reasons National/ local partners access to international funding channels