HORN OF AFRICA – DROUGHT 2011

  1. Overview of the crisis in the Horn of Africa

Causes and scope of the overall emergency

The current crisis, both conflict and draught oriented, is affecting more than 12.4 million of people in various countries across the sub-region destroying the livelihoods of number of people and increasing the influx of refugees and people on the move. While Somalia, Ethiopia and Kenya have recognized the state of emergency, other countries in the HoA might be in need of assistancein a near future.

Common and cross-border main child protection risks and issues

‘Protection’needs to be understood as a lifesaving component of the response and considered part of the holistic programmatic response alongside with nutrition and food. While assessmentscontinue to be carried out, the followings are the key child protection issues that have been identified across the region:

  • Psychosocial impacts caused by the emergency but also from lack of access to adequate basic and more specialized services;
  • Risks of separated children in route, in the IDP/refugee sites and outside of camp settings;
  • Risks of gender based violence in route, in the IDP/refugee sites and outside of camp settings;
  • Risks of negative coping mechanisms (early marriage, child labor, sexual exploitation) because of the loss of livelihoods.
  • Risk of trafficking

Populationtargeted for Child protection response

  • Refugees
  • IDPs
  • Population in host communities
  • Affected population that stayed in their place of origin

Child protection sub-cluster response

The overall response that is provided by members is allowing launching and/or scaling-up:

  • Community based child protection to address mine risk reduction, psychosocial support, malnutrition and referringand coordinating response with other services and sectors
  • Family tracing and reunification programs (IDTR)
  • GBV/SGBV response
  • Vulnerability screening and tracking system of vulnerable children
  • Child protection / protection monitoring network including MRM

Child protection sub-cluster gaps

The overall gaps in terms of programs are mostly in term of the following activities

  • Need to expand the scope of the current response
  • Mainstreaming CP in overall response and advocacy regarding access to basic needs and livelihood response
  • Preventing and providing psychosocial support including to SGBV survivors
  • Preventing and responding to family separation and reunification programs (IDTR)
  • Preventing and responding to children associated with armed forces and groups
  • Evidence based information including displaced population including unaccompanied minor and separated children to feed into program planning
  • Data collection of program implementation activities and results
  1. Coordination regarding child protection

UNICEF’s first core commitment for children is regarding coordination. Child protection coordination in the region is constituted of a regional network as well as country based mechanisms;synergy is currently being developed between them. To provide the expected outcomes, this overall structure requires that each level be fully functional.

2.1Sub-regional coordination

2.1.1Mechanism and leadership

The pre-existing regional mechanismon child protection - RICPN (Regional Interagency Child Protection Network), is beingutilized to address coordination needs for the HoA. It responds to the importance of strategizingpreparedness, prevention and response of child protection common and cross-border issues in the HoA. There is an agreed understanding from the members on the need of a regional coordination mechanism.

  • Responsibility: While there is no formal coordination obligation on UNICEF’s part, UNICEF assumes the leadership and conveys the meeting.
  • Architecture: This network is not part of the cluster structure. Under UNICEF’s leadership, it brings together organizations that have a regional presence as well as the representative of each country based coordination mechanism (not necessarily as a response to the cluster requirements).No government representatives.
  • Current situation and identified gaps in term of operationalization
  • Frequency of meetings: The meetings are conveyed by UNICEF and have been scaled-up to bi-weekly basis where normally they are held only bi-monthly. Minutes of meeting are produced which highlight progress and future plans including reference to other coordination products such as 3w.
  • Membership: The number of active members has increased over the past few weeks and includes the majority of the organizations active in child protection response to the drought in the HoA. This includes CESVI, DRC, IRC, Islamic Relief, Save the Children, Plan International, UNHCR, UNICEF, UN Women and WV. ICRC is in loop.
  • ToR: The draft ToR is currently being updated based on the generic ToR of cluster coordination and will be submitted to members for approval.
  • Reporting into OCHA’s Sitrep for HoA: Inputs from members should be provided to OCHA on a weekly basis (contact persons: Matthew Conway - ruphosaAnjichi-Kodumbe- )
  • Current and future needs in term of staffing
  • Current staffing: A member of the RRT (rapid response team) on Surge capacity from the Global-CPWG has been deployed till September 2nd to the HoA based in UNICEF-ESARO. The RRT member will be assuming responsibilities beyond the current ToRuntil the arrival of dedicated ‘cluster’ coordination at country level.
  • Future needs: a) Coordinator: It is expected that requirement for a sub-regional coordinator exist beyond September 2nd (end of mission of RRT member). Negotiation for extension of mission or therecruitment of another expert should start immediately; b) Information Management Officer (IMO): Considering the fact that there is no data collection system and no or scarce information provided in the OCHA Sitrep for the HoA on Child Protection situation and response till now, the support of an IMO could bridge this gap. A request for training IMOs could be forwarded to the RRT-Global CPWG.

2.2Kenya

2.2.1Mechanism[i] and leadership

The pre-existing mechanismon protection –NPWG for IDPs (national Protection Working Group for IDPs) is currently beingutilized to address the coordination needs for Kenya. The gap - both in terms of targeted IDP population as a result of the post-election violence as well the geographical location - has raised the need to analyze the feasibility to create a specific task force linked to the NPWG.

  • Responsibility: After the 2008 PEV conflict related emergency, the cluster has been transitioning into a government led coordination mechanism. This coordination mechanism is under the responsibility of the Kenya Commission of Human Rights with the Ministry of Justice as the co-chair. UNHCR and UNICEF are providing support.
  • Architecture: While not being part of the cluster structure, at the national level this coordination structure responds to the focal point model where child protection activities are coordinated under a protection framework. At the sub-national level, child protection has their specific working groups which reports to the sub-national protection working group.
  • Current situation and identified needs in term of operationalization
  • Frequency of meetings: The meetings are conveyed by the chair and co-chair and are held on a monthly basis. The need to upscale frequency of meeting is foreseen. Minutes of meeting are produced which highlight progress and future plans including reference to other coordination products such as 3w.
  • Membership: While the participation of the government is very high, a certain number of child protection actors in the country are not taking part to the national meetings while at the participation is significantly better at the sub-national level.
  • ToR: The ToRreflects the mandate of the working group. ToR for the task force will need to be developedif ever approved.
  • Reporting into OCHA’s Sitrep for Kenya: Inputs from members should be provided to OCHA on a weekly basis (contact person: ThardieMwape )
  • Current and future needs in term of staffing
  • Current staffing: The CP emergency officer provides support on the behalf of UNICEF - double-hatting with program and coordination at the national level. Very little support has been to the COWG at the sub-national level because of lack of time.
  • Future needs: a) Coordinator: It is clear that requirement for coordination goes beyond the current arrangements. In this regard, a request has been submitted for a ProCap to NRC to fulfill coordinator’s task as part of the overall mandate. Discussions are in progress between the CP head of section in UNICEF Kenya and UNHCR/OCHA as they need to approve the ToR although the NRC candidate is ready to be deployed from now; b) Information Management Officer: While no consolidated information is being produced by the working group regarding child protection, the need of an information manager should be assessed together with the chair, the co-chair and UNHCR.

2.3Ethiopia

2.3.1Mechanism and leadership

While the government is a driving force, two specific CP coordination mechanisms are led by the international community at the national level. These are the Child Protection forum – co led by UNICEF and save the Children –and responds to CP in the development context. In response to emergencies, within the Protection cluster, the joint GBV/CP Working Group is activated under the leadership of UNFPA and UNICEF. The CPWG has been first running in midyear 2009.

  • Responsibility: When activated, the CPWG falls under the cluster systems where UNICEF is the lead where Save the Children co-chairs the meetings. UNICEF is representing the CPWG within the Protection cluster.
  • Architecture: When activated, the architecture of the CPWG is the pure sub-cluster/working group with separate meetings where CPWG reports and is represented in the protection cluster meetings.
  • Current situation and identified gaps in term of operationalization
  • Frequency of meetings: The meetings are conveyed by the chair and co-chair on a monthly basis. The need to upscale frequency of meetings is foreseen. Minutes of meeting are produced which highlight progress and future plans including reference to other coordination products such as 3w.
  • Membership: The number of active members has decreased over time mostly as a consequence of government decision. The main members are: UN agencies (UNICEF, UNHCR, UNOCHA, UNFPA), INGO (IRC, SC and others), NNGO (represented by an umbrella organization) & government represented by the Ministry of women and Children – with a marginal participation.
  • ToR: The ToRof the GBV/CP Working group exists.
  • Reporting into OCHA’s Sitrep for Kenya: Inputs from members should be provided to OCHA on a weekly basis (contact person: Kristen Knutson )
  • Current and future needs in term of staffing
  • Current staffing: The CP emergency officer recently deployed by NRC, will provide support on the behalf of UNICEF - double-hatting with program and coordination at the national level.
  • Future needs:To be discussed with the CP head of section when back to duty station. Contact with Ethiopia has been regularizing only recently. Knowledge of situation needs to be updated when cluster approach is being activated.

2.4Somalia

2.4.1Mechanism and leadership

A Protection cluster has been established in Somalia in 2010 where recently a dedicated coordinator has been assigned by UNHCR.The CPWG has also been created in 2010 and is running since then.

  • Responsibility: The CPWG falls under the cluster systems where UNICEF is the lead where Save the Children co-chairs the meetings. UNICEF is representing the CPWG within the Protection cluster.
  • Architecture: The architecture of the CPWG is the pure sub-cluster/working group with separate meetings where CPWG reports and is represented in the protection cluster meetings. The national CPWG is based in Nairobi while a sub-national CPWG should be up and running in Mogadishu shortly which will allow national organizations to become active.
  • Current situation and identified gaps in term of operationalization
  • Frequency of meetings: Until recently the meetings were conveyed by Save the Children bi-monthly as agreed with UNICEF. The scaling up of the frequency of the meetings has been agreed by all members to respond to the current crisis. Minutes of meeting are produced which highlight progress and future plans including reference to other coordination products such as 3w.
  • Membership: a) national CPWG: until the famine was declared in the South Center of the country, a very limited number of international organizations has been active in this region. While the need for increased CP response in this region is acknowledge, the arrival of new international actorsis slowly increasing (mostly as implementing partners for UNICEF) andare becoming members of the CPWG. Mobilization of additional actors needs to be done more systematically. While the presence of national organizations is very limited; b) sub-national CPWG: mobilization of members and launching the working will require energy and time. Government representatives are not considered to become member.
  • ToR: The ToRare currently being developed.
  • Reporting into OCHA’s Sitrep for Kenya: Inputs from members should be provided to OCHA on a weekly basis (contact person: Rita Maingi
  • Current and future needs in term of staffing
  • Current staffing: Till recently, the CP emergency officer (TA) has been providing support to the CPWG - double-hatting between program and coordination. Since the contract ended, the CP team has taken on the responsibility.
  • Future needs: a) Coordinator: Considering the different contextual factors and coordination needs, a dedicated CP sub-cluster coordinator will be deployed on August 19th; b) Information Management Officer: While no consolidated information is being produced by the working group regarding child protection, the need of an information manager should be addressed by either contracting an IMO to look for two clusters at the Somalia level (such education & CP) or having an IMO for CPWG in the sub-region based in the regional office (see section 2.1.3).

To increase a speedy response for coordination regarding the foreseen needs in neighboring countries of the HoA, the possibility of prepositioning a country coordinator in Kenya regional office should be analyzed.

25 August 2011

[i]Coordination of all sectors of intervention regarding refugees is being done under the leadership of UNHCR a part from the cluster approach.