HEADQUARTERS CORE ACTIVITIES AND PROJECTS
|Consultant Fees and Travel||–||–||–|
|Supplies, Materials, Furniture and Equipment||–||–||–|
|Fellowships, Grants and Contributions||–||–||–|
|Programme Support Costs||283,576||294,697||578,273|
|Total Expenditure (US$)||2,524,798||2,558,934||5,083,732|
|Income for Core Activities is recorded in total under the Trust Fund for the Strengthening of OCHA|
The Coordination and Response Division (CRD) has three
major responsibilities: to support the Emergency Relief
Coordinator (ERC) as principal adviser on humanitarian
issues to the Secretary-General and coordinator of
the international humanitarian response; to support
and guide United Nations RCs/HCs in the field on
complex emergency and natural disaster issues; and to
support the field, including through the management of
OCHA’s regional and field offices. CRD is responsible ‘for
supporting the coordination of country-level humanitarian strategies in
natural disasters and complex
emergencies, and is the working-level interface with
member states and partner humanitarian organizations.
CRD is also OCHA’s primary interface with partner agencies involved in early recovery and reconstruction.
In 2006, CRD led OCHA’s response to rapid-onset emergencies, including the South Asia earthquake, the crisis in Lebanon, the Yogyakarta earthquake and the drought in the Horn of Africa. At the same time CRD continued to support existing field operations, with particular attention to the effects of the Darfur crisis on Sudan, Chad and the Central African Republic (CAR), the worsening humanitarian situation in Sri Lanka, and the continuing challenges in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). OCHA played a key role in the Juba Peace Process between the Government of Uganda and the Lord’s Resistance Army, with CRD staff providing technical support to the peace secretariat.
CRD consolidated the responsibilities of its country desks as part of OCHA’s broad reorganization and realignment of functions. It also developed new procedures and accountabilities for reviewing CERF applications and supporting the implementation of the cluster approach.
In 2006, CRD worked closely with OCHA field offices and HCs on neglected crises such as Afghanistan, Iraq, CAR, Chad, Timor-Leste, Kenya and Myanmar. In CAR and Chad, this resulted in additional Security Council and donor attention. In Kenya, OCHA supported the Secretary-General’s Special Humanitarian Envoy for the Horn of Africa to highlight the plight of the populations in northern Kenya suffering from devastating flooding. CRD missions to review OCHA’s presence and activities were undertaken in Eritrea, Chad, CAR, Sudan, the Republic of Congo, Burundi, Guinea, Indonesia, the Russian Federation and Pakistan.
CRD prepared for the establishment of the Emergency Preparedness Section (EPS) in Geneva, with considerable efforts made to ensure complementarity between EPS and the Early Warning Unit. CRD and the Emergency Services Branch (ESB) jointly updated the existing guidelines for natural disaster response, and continued their close cooperation with the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction and Capacity for Disaster Reduction Initiative.
In preparation for the consolidation of country desks in New York, a number of management issues were addressed, including updating the terms of reference for desk officers, reviewing the role of regional offices and integrating early warning and contingency planning functions. The need to strengthen information management was identified as a priority – within CRD, and between CRD and the field – and efforts were made to harmonize reporting from the field and information exchange between Geneva and New York. All these topics are being managed systematically through working groups and thematic focal points.
CRD worked closely with the Departments of Political Affairs and Peacekeeping Operations on integrated mission planning, including: downsizing the United Nations mission in Burundi; the expansion of the United Nations mission in Timor-Leste; and preparations for United Nations support to the African Union mission in Darfur. CRD also worked with both departments to provide inputs for Security Council briefings. CRD collaborated with UNDP’s Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery and the United Nations Development Group Office in developing more coherent and predictable strategies for coordination in transitional settings, and began to operationalize these in Indonesia and Sri Lanka.
|Consultant Fees and Travel||29,445|
|Supplies, Materials, Furniture and Equipment||9,364|
|Fellowships, Grants and Contributions||2,987|
|Programme Support Costs||167,017|
|Total Expenditure (US$)||1,451,050|
The Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) is the IASC’s primary instrument for humanitarian strategizing and fund-raising. Since 1992 a total of 240 consolidated and flash appeals have raised US$ 30 billion. The purpose of consolidated appeals is to bring humanitarian implementing organizations together with a common analysis, strategy and action plan. It is also to combine what would otherwise be overlapping, competing single-agency appeals and disconnected projects into a comprehensive compendium of priority projects that avoids gaps and serves as a meaningful funding barometer for each crisis. More than 100 organizations (including the United Nations, IOM, NGOs and occasionally the Red Cross) list project proposals in CAPs and flash appeals each year. The relevant General Assembly resolution and IASC rules require a consolidated or flash appeal for any situation requiring an inter-agency response.
In 2006, the CAP Section launched seven flash appeals for breaking emergencies, mid-year reviews for all 17 of the 2006 consolidated appeals, 15 new consolidated appeals for 2007 and eight miscellaneous appeals. The Section organized a global launch of the appeals in New York, a ‘Programme Kick-off’ donor meeting in Geneva, and a mid-year review launch at the Economic and Social Council.
The FTS is now firmly established as the world’s leading source of real-time humanitarian funding information. A total of 8,100 humanitarian funding items were recorded for 2006, to 117 countries, from 323 donor countries and organizations, through 673 implementing organizations, for 175 different natural or conflict-based disasters. In 2006, the FTS made new tools available, including: tables showing requirements and funding per cluster or thematic area, and per country for multi-country appeals; donor profile tables; a powerful new custom search function; the ability to show funds passing through pooled or common funds (as used in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo) and the CERF; and tables for regional and country-based humanitarian websites. The FTS was also reintegrated within the revamped ReliefWeb site.
The Secretary-General’s signature on the Humanitarian Appeal 2007 (the set of new consolidated appeals launched in November 2006) demonstrates the continuing high profile of CAPs. Appeals, together with the FTS, highlight the most severe and neglected humanitarian crises, and allow stakeholders to direct resources where they are most needed.
The CAP Section provided major support and inputs to the timely launch and function of the CERF in 2006, including: development of guidelines, criteria and procedures; identification of under-funded crises for CERF allocations and estimation of correct apportionment; tracking of CERF allocations on FTS; contributions to the design of a CERF management database; training of stakeholders on CERF (and its interaction with appeals and other elements of humanitarian reform) at headquarters and in the field; and participation in CERF Advisory Group meetings.
|Consultant Fees and Travel||–|
|Supplies, Materials, Furniture and Equipment||–|
|Fellowships, Grants and Contributions||–|
|Programme Support Costs||90,063|
|Total Expenditure (US$)||782,813|
As part of the strengthening of OCHA’s ability to rapidly deploy to crisis situations and its timely support to the field, in 2005 the Surge Capacity Project was upgraded to the Surge Capacity and Contingency Planning Section. This decision was made in response to a steady rise in the number, size and complexity of humanitarian emergencies, which had often overstretched the field capacities of both OCHA and the United Nations humanitarian system. Global strategic priorities for OCHA in 2006 made direct reference to ‘strengthening response mechanisms and tools, including OCHA’s surge capacity’, and the OCHA Senior Management Team’s report in September 2006 highlighted the need to integrate all of OCHA’s surge capacity services under one managerial entity to ensure coherence and effective coordination of resources.
The capacity of OCHA and the international humanitarian community to respond quickly and professionally to disasters and emergencies was rigorously tested in 2006. New challenges arose in the face of the Lebanon crisis, drought and fl oods in the Horn of Africa, displacement in Timor-Leste, the ongoing crisis in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and the continued response efforts to the South Asia earthquake, among many other crisis and emergency situations.
The main tasks of the Section were to support OCHA field structures, RCs/HCs and CTs at the sudden onset or intensification of a crisis where it was beyond the capacity of the CT, and to provide internal support at headquarters if needed. The Section provided immediate interim leadership when an OCHA office was understaffed or just established in a country (Zimbabwe, DRC). It facilitated and guided the contingency planning, early warning and preparedness efforts of IASC-CTs in crisis-prone countries (Serbia, Zimbabwe). In the field, it supported CAP and mid-year review processes, guided inter-agency coordination processes and promoted the application of the humanitarian reform agenda. It also developed a comprehensive inventory of all critical OCHA tools and services available to be deployed rapidly in response to disasters and emergencies, and was instrumental in strengthening OCHA’s existing specialized rosters.
Specific activities of the Section in 2006 included: filling key coordination positions (Ethiopia, Zimbabwe); assisting in the establishment of OCHA field offices and hubs, or filling critical gaps (DRC, Kenya, Syria, Timor-Leste, United Arab Emirates); providing substantive advice to RCs/HCs and CTs on coordination mechanisms; piloting projects for implementation of the cluster approach and pool funding (DRC, Ethiopia); updating and drafting contingency plans (Senegal, Serbia, Zimbabwe); preparing CAP documents (Chad, Liberia, Yemen); and providing working support at headquarters. Contingency planning activities were carried out in close cooperation and consultation with the Contingency Planning Cell in the Coordination and Response Division (CRD) in New York.