1. “How well does UNICEF carry out its CLA role and what should it do for the future?” Preliminary Draft Findings – Not for Distribution Evaluation of UNICEF’s Cluster (co)Lead Agency Role Draft Findings July 2013 This is for UNICEF’s (co)leadership of 5 clusters/AoRs: WASH, Nutrition, Education, GBV and Child Protection

2. Overall: Summary of key findings Preliminary Draft Findings – Not for Distribution  High perception of overall effectiveness; Increasingly robust cluster coordination services; strong country level partnership performance.  CLA role well integrated in broad policy level and improvements with consolidation of clusters in one unit. Broad match between UNICEF programme capacity and CLA role  Significant improvement in cluster surge capacity (RRT, Stand-by partners)  Active participation in IASC and Transformative Agenda work  Strong perception of partners that cluster outcomes justify investment  Investment in CLA role not excessive  High perception of overall effectiveness; Increasingly robust cluster coordination services; strong country level partnership performance.  CLA role well integrated in broad policy level and improvements with consolidation of clusters in one unit. Broad match between UNICEF programme capacity and CLA role  Significant improvement in cluster surge capacity (RRT, Stand-by partners)  Active participation in IASC and Transformative Agenda work  Strong perception of partners that cluster outcomes justify investment  Investment in CLA role not excessive  Some weakness in global partnership performacne and lack of clarity on coordination roles and responsibilities: internally and externally with partners  Challenges in UNICEF representation of cluster members in HCTs  Fragmented HR approach and lack of coordination career path. Limited capacity development of staff. Double- hatting reduces effectiveness.  Lack of organisation-wide cluster policies and guidance  Clusters increasingly filling gaps beyond emergency coordination and much investment at field level in long-term sectoral coordination contexts.  Cross cluster collaboration insufficient  Some weakness in global partnership performacne and lack of clarity on coordination roles and responsibilities: internally and externally with partners  Challenges in UNICEF representation of cluster members in HCTs  Fragmented HR approach and lack of coordination career path. Limited capacity development of staff. Double- hatting reduces effectiveness.  Lack of organisation-wide cluster policies and guidance  Clusters increasingly filling gaps beyond emergency coordination and much investment at field level in long-term sectoral coordination contexts.  Cross cluster collaboration insufficient What is UNICEF doing less well What is UNICEF doing well

3. Nutrition Cluster: Survey Respondents 25 participants in global survey 80 participants in national survey

4. Nutrition cluster: Summary of findings Preliminary Draft Findings – Not for Distribution  UNICEF generally fulfills partnership principles in its leadership role and partners actively involved in the cluster.  For country partners there seem to be adequate tools and guidance.  Partners overwhelming feel the outcomes and objectives of the cluster justify their investments.  Partners feel support by the cluster to monitoring and assessment has helped to reach people and has improved programme coverage.  National partners feel cluster is effective at supporting needs assessment, advocacy, resource mobilisation (to lesser extent).  Country level coordination and IM staff for the most part have the right technical and coordination skills.  UNICEF generally fulfills partnership principles in its leadership role and partners actively involved in the cluster.  For country partners there seem to be adequate tools and guidance.  Partners overwhelming feel the outcomes and objectives of the cluster justify their investments.  Partners feel support by the cluster to monitoring and assessment has helped to reach people and has improved programme coverage.  National partners feel cluster is effective at supporting needs assessment, advocacy, resource mobilisation (to lesser extent).  Country level coordination and IM staff for the most part have the right technical and coordination skills.  Amount and type of resource support to national clusters from the global cluster is less strong than for available tools and guidelines.  Inter-cluster collaboration is modest, globally and nationally.  UNICEF is not capitalising on its programming and technical capacity to support the outcomes of the cluster.  Perception of global partners of cluster performance and comparative advantage of UNICEF is less positive than national partners.  Improvements could be made to preparedness support provided by national clusters.  Cluster de-activiation procedures are weak or not applied.  Amount and type of resource support to national clusters from the global cluster is less strong than for available tools and guidelines.  Inter-cluster collaboration is modest, globally and nationally.  UNICEF is not capitalising on its programming and technical capacity to support the outcomes of the cluster.  Perception of global partners of cluster performance and comparative advantage of UNICEF is less positive than national partners.  Improvements could be made to preparedness support provided by national clusters.  Cluster de-activiation procedures are weak or not applied. What is UNICEF doing less well What is UNICEF doing well