IN SUDDEN ONSET CONTEXTS ASSESSMENT & ANALYSIS IN SUDDEN ONSET CONTEXTS

What is specific to sudden-onset or different from protracted crises…

What is specific to sudden-onset or different from protracted crises: Extreme timelines (earthquake window of survival) Extremely dynamic Delay in having capacity on the ground Rotations Government lead Level of preparedness determining

DECISION SUPPORT 1 STEP IN YOUR STRATEGY – think about your internal set-up 2. coordination and harmonization of assessments, sharing of findings + data, 3. UNDAC data collection: Dir Obs, MIRA,

DECISION SUPPORT Surge decision Type of teams Initial funding allocation Priority areas Priority groups Blanket delivery 1 STEP IN YOUR STRATEGY – think about your internal set-up 2. coordination and harmonization of assessments, sharing of findings + data, 3. UNDAC data collection: Dir Obs, MIRA,

DECISION SUPPORT Strategic Programmatic Operational KEY OUTPUTS less Strategic response planning, policies, goal settings, common situation overview, resource mobilisation Government leaders Humanitarian coordinators/ Resident coordinators Humanitarian country teams Policy-makers Donors Cluster lead agencies NGOs (Regional/Country directors) Strategic Programmatic Operational Situation Analysis (MIRA1) Flash Appeal Revised FA MIRA2 (2nd+1ry data) CERF FocusedSituation Analyses Programme planning, delivery methods, targeting and conditionality, etc. National/local authorities Cluster coordinators Cluster member organisations Inter Cluster Coordination Mechanism/OCHA NGOs (Programme managers) Structure, details, frequency Decision support: Gov / HC / HCT Programmatic + Operational Coordination: USAR / Clusters / Agencies / NGOs / EMT / other bilateral responders Appeals / funding requests: Support building of evidence base for Flash Appeal, CERF etc Situational awareness: Develop shared understanding of the situation: Most urgent humanitarian problems Most affected areas Most affected groups Decisions are normally made at three distinct decision-making levels, and it is important to know what information is needed at each level. Strategic decision-makers do not need to know the details, but rather a summarised analysis, with key priorities and recommendations that will inform the direction of the response. They are concerned initially with the immediate needs for response and resource mobilisation (including the profile that the disaster event/emergency gets) and quickly become concerned with long-term planning and strategies, overall objectives, and strategic priorities. Their decisions have a large impact on the humanitarian community and cannot be reversed easily. At the programmatic level (also called the tactical level), decision-makers are largely concerned with a higher level of detail and processes. They plan for large programmes, decide on allocation of resources, control budgets, and set sectoral policies. At this level, decisions will be made about the size of programmes: the time frame of the project cycle required to address needs, the number of beneficiaries, and geographic coverage. They will know it is likely that not all people in need and geographic regions will be covered and so they will be looking at what criteria can be used to inform targeting, including pre-existing vulnerabilities. Decisions taken at this level are used to form medium-term goals, which form stages in the accomplishment of strategic objectives. A project manager on-site will be involved in operational decision-making and will have less use for just overarching information, but will need more detailed and specific data to make the necessary decisions at a more local level. As the project manager deals with short-term planning and day-to-day monitoring of activities, the primary interest is in detailed, more frequently updated, information. It is at this level that beneficiary selection processes may take place from a very early stage in a crisis, especially if development projects were ongoing and have an in-built buffer to deal with shocks. Therefore, household-level information is interesting to these decision-makers. Even if it is not representative, there is often a high degree of homogeneity across the area and knowing how households are impacted can help inform the micro-decisions of locally based organisations. UNDAC Situation Reports Project implementation, local partnerships, monitoring, training, etc. Project managers Team leaders Project staff Functional specialists more

DECISION SUPPORT KEY QUESTIONS OVER TIME ? How ‘big’ is the disaster What is being delivered Coping strategies Most affected areas Who is delivering Evolving needs Which areas have been reached Risks #people affected Beneficiary feedback Most vulnerable Who has received assistance Recovery needs #people in need of humanitarian assistance Inaccessible areas Recovery interventions Most urgent initial needs Geographic gaps Population gaps What type of assistance Information gaps BIG PICTURE How do we get to the most affected areas GRANULAR PICTURE TIME

ASSESSMENT & ANALYSIS STRATEGY Internal coordination set-up (A&A cell) External Coordination (AWG) Data collection + analysis plan 1 STEP IN YOUR STRATEGY – think about your internal set-up 2. coordination and harmonization of assessments, sharing of findings + data, 3. UNDAC data collection: Dir Obs, MIRA,

1. INTERNAL SET-UP RC / HC OCHA OSOCC FUNCTIONS Management IM Mapping REMOTE SUPPORT Joint Analysis Initiative Coordinated Data Scramble RC / HC OCHA OSOCC FUNCTIONS Management IM Mapping Civ-Mil Media EMT Cell Hubs RDC USAR Cell

UN 2. EXTERNAL COORDINATION R-Cross GOV NGO Civ Soc Private Sector Assessment contexts are typically crowded, dynamic and chaotic Assessments are advocacy opportunities (“look here I am the first to help these poor people – pls fund us”) Partners have different information needs (Gov want to estimate the cost of the impact, donors want to make their money be most effectively invested, operational partners need to plan and execute aid deliveries and programmes, ) Everything needs to move quick More actors conducting remote analysis Interconnectedness etc Main actors: REACH, ACAPS, WFP, NGO R-Cross

2. EXTERNAL COORDINATION: AWG Assessment Working Group Call for your assessment coordination meeting early Main objectives of the meeting: Explain your function Find out who is doing what Agree on information sharing Decide on joint tools as required (identify if multi-sectoral assessment already exists)

3. DATA COLLECTION + ANALYSIS PLAN

3. PLAN: ANALYTICAL FOCUS What, WHO and Where should be the main focus of the MIRA (and of our analysis focus during the first few days). Analyses need always to be goal driven, so it can focus on answering the right question, at the right time, and for the right people. Usual key questions in rapid humanitarian assessments/analysis are: what are the priorities? What are the most important problems, creating the most disruption or endangering the most the affected population? Subsequently, which group is the most in need and where interventions should focus first? When conducting analysis, always keep in mind and refer to those research questions in order not to deviate from your objectives and waste time looking for or analyzing data that does not contribute directly to these answers. WHERE? Priority areas WHO? Priority groups WHAT? Priority sectors

3. PLAN: TYPICAL RESEARCH QUESTIONS Scope and scale of crisis Most affected areas Most affected population groups Most acute problems / sectors Underlying factors + drivers Vulnerabilities and risks Operational Constraints

FIRST PHASE ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK Area #affected #displaced Health WASH Shelter Food Logistics Overall District A District B District C It is not important what model you use, but that you use one. In the first phase of a sudden onset emergency however, a simpler version may be more efficient to use. Variations of this model have been used on several occasions and proved successful. This model can be replicated on a whiteboard or similar where you should summarise information in the various cells. This will quickly show you where the most affected population are, what sectorial needs exits, and what geographical areas are mostly impacted. It will also show you where you have gaps, where you need to go to find more information and what to look for once you’re there.   Please note that the model is generic and should be adapted to the situation and context. Models are useful to think with, but if not customised properly they could easily make you miss important information.

This is an example from a SIMEX in Korea in 2017 where this was used in one of the OSOCCs

ASSESSMENT SCENARIO Scenario Description Opportunities + challenges A Emergency-wide joint assessment (MIRA) Initial multi-sectoral rapid assessment under the leadership of the RC/HC and agreed with cluster leads. Level of preparedness Buy-in vs speed Expectations vs limitations Timeliness of results B Targeted MIRA + assessment coordination A MIRA is conducted in areas with clear information gaps while coordination of sectoral assessment and secondary data analysis in ongoing Assessment proliferation Informing response continuously More granular assessment C No joint assessment instead focus on coordination+ harmonisation Emphasis on secondary data analysis as well as assessment coordination and harmonisation Dependence on data sharing willing + timeliness Adherence to harmonised approach

COMPROMISES Speed vs. buy-in Speed vs. depth Experts vs. generalists Independence vs. supporting Gov + partners Other vs. …..