Induction Package for the Emergency Livelihoods and Social Cohesion Cluster. The aim of this Induction Package is to introduce new-comer to what the Emergency Livelihoods and Social Cohesion Cluster (EL&SC) is and how it aims to support people in Iraqi. For further information or to schedule a meeting (face to face, by phone or by skype) please write to el.sc@undp.org or call 0750 4565285 or 0780 0345484. Contents. 1. Diagram of Humanitarian Coordination Globally The diagram shows how a humanitarian response is coordinated and who is responsible for what at the Global Level. 2. Diagram of Humanitarian Coordination in Iraq This diagram shows how the coordination structure has been specifically tailored to the Iraqi context. 3. Terms Of Reference (TOR) of the Emergency Livelihoods and Social Cohesion cluster The TOR explains the link between social cohesion and livelihoods, gives the definitions of both in the Iraqi context and clarifies how they contribute to Early Recovery. The TOR also clarifies the roles of the EL&SC coordinators and members. 4. EL&SC Humanitarian Needs Overview (HNO) The HNO outlines the rationale for identifying which groups are most vulnerable to poverty and social tension and why. It also outlines the currently available data. For the overall Iraq HNO please refer to https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/iraq/document/elsc-hno-2016. 5. EL&SC Cluster Response Strategy (CRP) Based on the evidence of the HNO the EL&SC CRP outlines how the cluster has decided to respond based on targeting the most vulnerable, the capacity of partners and the most appropriate activities to meet needs. For the overall Iraq Humanitarian Response Plan please refer to https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/iraq/document/elsc-cluster-response-strategy-crp. 6. Map of the most Vulnerable Groups The map shows the areas where Internally Displaced People (IDPs), host communities and people living in post conflict areas are most vulnerable to both social tension and poverty are concentrated. 7. Conflict Sensitive Do No Harm Guidance If aide is not delivered in a well-planned manner it is possible, or even probable, that harm will be caused even though the delivering agency intended to do only good. This guidance note was helps implementing agency to avoid doing harm and optimize the opportunity for doing good. 8. One Stop Shop report (OSS). Is a custom built data base which shows all monitoring indicator for EL&SC. Active cluster partners are requested to report achievements using it https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/iraq/document/one-stop-shop-report-oss 9. Contacts 10. Useful Links
Diagram of the Coordination Mechanism H E A L T H Secretary General (Ban Ki Moon) Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC) (Steven O Brian) Humanitarian Coordinator (HC) - HCT (Lise Grande) Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) E D U C A T I O N P R O T E C T I O N S H E L T E R (ER) SOCIAL COHESI ON & SUSTAI NABLE LIVELIH OODS Clusters N F I F O O D S E C. W A S H C C C M
Terms of Reference National Emergency Livelihoods and Social Cohesion Cluster, Iraq Revised October, 2015 Introduction At the country level the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC 1 ), a senior UN official, has the responsibility for ensuring the coherence and effectiveness of the overall humanitarian response to a crisis. The HC is responsible to the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC 2 ) based in New York. The HC chairs the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT), which is composed of UN agencies and NGOs (both national and international) that have a humanitarian mandate. The HCT acts as a steering committee for the Humanitarian Response and for the development of a Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP). The Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) supports the HC and the HCT in all aspects of coordination of the response including providing data, managing the production of the HRP acting as secretariat to the HCT etc. The HCT, with the support of OCHA, has activated the UN Cluster Coordination system in Iraq to ensure that all thematic areas of the required response are adequately coordinated. Below is a diagram of the clusters activated in Iraq, showing which agencies are leading the. Figure 1. Source: https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/coordination/clusters/what-cluster-approach 1 Lise Grande Is the HC in Iraq. She also holds the positions of Regional Coordinator (RC) and Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary General (DSPSG) 22 The current ERC, based in New York, is Stephen O Brian and is directly responsible to the Secretary General.
Each Cluster coordinates the UN agencies and NGOs working in a specific thematic area and all clusters coordinate with each other via the Inter-cluster Coordination Group (ICCG). All clusters together provide a holistic response to the Humanitarian Crisis which has evolved following the displacement of more than 3 million people and impacted the lives of more than 8 million people in Iraq, since 2014. At the global level there is a the Cluster Working Group on Early Recovery (CWGER 3 ) to compliment the other clusters. However, early recovery needs differ from country to country and the Early Recovery cluster is usually renamed to provide a more accurate description of areas covered. Based on a consensus that: the Iraq Humanitarian Crisis is likely to be protracted; early recovery, in addition to relief, is required within any humanitarian response; humanitarian funding is limited; IDP dependency on humanitarian assistance will increase if opportunities to earn an income are not available; Iraqi economy is under stress and levels of services and income are in decline; Iraq is populated by diverse politico-socio-ethnic groups with a complex history of tension; Iraq is also hosting more than 250,000 Syrian refugees; perceived or real competition from IDPs over employment opportunities and community resources is increasing; increased tensions between host communities and IDPs, and between IDPs themselves, are likely to be triggered by the above; the Humanitarian Country team agree that there was a need to include coverage of emergency livelihoods and social cohesion in the Iraqi Humanitarian Response. These two key issues were not covered by any other cluster and were therefore identified as critical response gaps to be filled by an Early Recovery Cluster. Thus the Early Recovery Cluster was established in August 2014, and as per Inter-Agency Standing Committee guidelines, re-named to clarify the components of response covered the Emergency Livelihoods and Social Cohesion Cluster. 1. Scope of the Emergency Livelihoods and Social Cohesion Cluster 4 The Emergency Livelihoods and Social Cohesion (EL&SC) cluster has adapted global definitions of emergency livelihoods and social cohesion to the Iraq context to better articulate the specific scope of work required by Cluster members as part of the Iraqi Humanitarian response, as shown below. Definitions Emergency Livelihoods can be defined as relatively immediate and short term, non-agricultural, 5 activities that enable a vulnerable person or family, to earn an income by a dignified means and so enable them to make independent decisions of how best to meet their needs. Emergency Livelihoods reduce aide dependence, promote resilience, stimulate the local economy and increase access to services and basic commodities by providing income. 3 http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/crisis-prevention-and-recovery/guidance-note-on-early-recovery-cwgerapril-2008.html 4 http://www.save-iraq.info/response-plan/emergency-livelihoods/ 5 Agricultural Livelihoods are covered by the Food Security and Agriculture Cluster
Social Cohesion in the current context of Iraq, is defined as a general condition of stable co-existence within communities, when IDPs, refugees, and host community members accept socio-ethnic differences, have equitable access to livelihoods and other community resources, and feel safe and secure in their homes. In line with these definitions, the EL&SC cluster will mobilize agencies, UN organizations and NGOs to respond to humanitarian needs of IDPs in a strategic manner guided by this Terms of Reference. The Cluster will coordinate a comprehensive, coherent, effective and balanced approach to emergency livelihoods and social cohesion across all regions of Iraq, where IDPs are living. The EL&SC cluster will work closely with the Food Security and Protection Clusters which cover closely aligned issues. It will also work with the Iraq and KR-I Joint Coordination Committees and relevant line ministries to provide sustainable support to relevant government agencies. In addition the EL&SC cluster will participate in inter-cluster coordination mechanisms to ensure a combined and comprehensive approach to humanitarian action and to promote the inclusion of conflict sensitive, social cohesion good practice is adopted as a cross cutting issue by all clusters. 2. Attention to priority Cluster cross-cutting issues In addition to promoting conflict sensitivity and social cohesion as a cross cutting concern at the inter-cluster level the EL&SC cluster will: Promote integration of priority cross-cutting issues including: age; socio-ethnic/religious/political diversity; environment; gender; and human rights; in all aspects of work especially during needs assessment, analysis, planning, monitoring and response ; Promote the use of participatory and community based approaches in needs assessment, analysis, planning, monitoring and response. Emergency Livelihoods and Social Cohesion Cluster Objectives 6 1. To Support and Coordinate Service Delivery Facilitate clusters/sectors in selecting, designing and utilizing appropriate program emergency livelihoods and social cohesion options for a coordinated response to displaced populations and host communities affected by conflict. This will be accomplished in line with a response strategy based on; o Identification of population needs and resource gaps; o Identification of geographical priority areas; o Identification of thematic priorities; o Mapping program activities of NGOs, INGOs, government partners, UN agencies and others in cluster-related activities, nationally. o Drawing lessons learned from past activities and revising strategies accordingly; o Developing models of good practice to be shared with all Cluster members; o Managing and sharing accurate information; o Developing an exit, or transition, strategy with local and national government to transition from emergency response to development. 6 IASC Reference Module for Cluster Coordination at Country Level, revised July 2014.
2. Inform the Humanitarian County Team of Cluster Related Issues Relay information and analysis of emergency livelihoods gaps and arising social tension to the HCT; Formulate and defend a Cluster Strategy including priority vulnerable areas and targeted communities within the HRP. Develop/update EL&SC response strategies and action plans and ensure that these are adequately articulated in overall country strategies, such as the Humanitarian Response Plan and 3RP; Align the EL&SC cluster strategy within the framework of the overarching HCT priorities and strategy and inform the HCT of barriers or challenges to alignment; 3. Plan and Develop Effective Strategies In an effort to provide a cohesive EL&SC strategy based on evidence, lessons learned and best practice the EL&SC cluster will; Provide data, analysis and reference information and facilitate opportunities for cluster members to discuss needs, priorities, evidence based response options; Maintain a library of relevant assessments and best practices related to Cluster objectives; Coordinate and disseminate results of EL&SC members livelihood and social cohesion needs assessments and analysis; Explore, monitor, and analyze root causes of social tension as well as linkages between social tension, livelihoods and service delivery; Maintain protection protocols within their own organizations and between others, of all sensitive data and tension reports from entities who could use them inappropriately (e.g. media outlets, political parties, etc.) Develop and update guidance products for Cluster members, based on current livelihoods and social cohesion experience and best practices; Develop and implement conflict sensitive Do No Harm guidelines for use by Cluster members, other cluster, UN agencies and government partners. 4. Monitor Performance as a Cluster Establish standards and maintain processes for information management; Ensure adequate monitoring mechanisms are in place to review impact of EL&SC initiatives and progress against planned targets; Ensure adequate reporting and effective information sharing, with due regard for age and sex disaggregation, as required by the HCT (with OCHA as secretariat). 5. Build National Capacity Broaden and connect emergency livelihoods and social tension responses in humanitarian and development programming to national social safety nets and protection systems wherever appropriate. Engage with relevant line ministries and the JCC to ensure national capacity to address livelihoods and social cohesion needs prior to an HCT exit strategy. Engage with and where possible support the capacity development of national NGOs. 6. Advocacy Develop and advocate for the general use of Conflict Sensative Do No Harm practices across the Humanitarian Response.
Identify core advocacy concerns, including resource requirements, and contribute key messages to broader advocacy initiatives of the HC and to other actors; Advocate for donors to fund priority EL&SC activities, while at the same time encouraging cluster members to mobilize resources for their activities through other funding resources. Participation All UN Agencies, NGOs and donors active or interested in livelihoods and social cohesion programming are invited to participate in the Cluster meetings. Membership responsibilities outlined in this TOR, and decision making in the cluster, will be placed upon the organizations who have current programs or are preparing for implementation of livelihoods and/or social cohesion activities. Responsibilities Chair and Co-Chair UNDP is the designated Early Recovery cluster lead agency at the global level and in Iraq and as such is accountable to the Humanitarian Coordinator for the cluster efficiency. Danish Refugee Council (DRC) is the designated national Cluster Co-coordinator. The EL&SC Cluster maintains effective links with all other clusters as necessary through the Intercluster Coordination Mechanism. However, the EL&EC will maintain particularly close ties with the Protection and Food Security Clusters and the Cash Working Group, as they are closely aligned to the EL&SC scope of work. EL&SC Cluster Members Members commit to considering the recommendations of the Cluster and to following the agreed upon recommendations below. Regular and active participation in cluster meetings Represent and take decisions on behalf of their organizations Respond promptly to queries related to critical program gaps and duplication of efforts Commit to mainstream protection principles and conflict sensitive Do No Harm guidelines in their program design and delivery Participate in actions to improve accountability to affected populations Share information (assessments, need analyses, program activities) and lessons learned with the Cluster and other members Respond to requests for data in a timely manner through agreed mechanisms, especially the EL&SC One Stop Shop monthly report Actively engage in the Cluster and participate in temporary taskforces as needed. Operating Modalities EL&SC Cluster national level meetings are currently held in Erbil on a monthly basis. (NB: The relocation of the national cluster to Baghdad is anticipated within the coming year as the geographical areas of need has expanded to Anbar and Baghdad. Many cluster members have signaled an intention to extend operations and administrative centers to Baghdad in the coming months. The transfer will be timed to align with the strengthening of the Baghdad sub-cluster, by
capacity building of national NGOs and increased decision making capacity of UN agency and INGO representatives in Baghdad) While the National EL&SC cluster remains in Erbil, the cluster coordinators will link to OCHA and the inter-cluster Coordination Group (ICCG) in Baghdad either in person or via video linkages as scheduled. EL&SC Sub-National Clusters in Dohuk, Sulimaniyah and Baghdad regional hubs meet every two weeks, or as necessary, and are chaired or co-chaired by a designated cluster member who report to the national Cluster. EL&SC coordination mechanisms will be adapted over time to reflect the capacities of local actors and the engagement of development partners.
EMERGENCY LIVELIHOODS AND SOCIAL COHESION EMERGENCY LIVELIHOODS AND SOCIAL COHESION HNO 2016 No. of people in need breakdown: PEOPLE IN NEED By sex By age TOTAL Female Male Children (<18 years) Adult (18-59 years) Elderly (>59 years) 5.70 M 2.80 M 2.90 M 2.70 M 2.70 M 0.30 M Severity map: Vulnerability - + Overview As the crisis in Iraq carries on into its second year, social tensions continue to rise, particularly in areas in which IDPs and host communities face economic or social hardship. Displacement and its subsequent economic repercussions upon host communities directly contribute to conflict between displaced and host communities, according to a recent impact assessment conducted at the cluster. 7 Debt is growing among displaced communities, as well as Iraqi society as a whole, creating greater reliance on a diminishing social protection floor. The ability of the protracted displaced population to find sustainable job opportunities continues to be severely limited, with income generation remaining amongst one of the top needs of displaced populations. Affected population IDPs displaced for protracted periods, and the communities which host them are most affected by livelihoods and social cohesion needs. Over 8.5 million people are in need of livelihoods assistance across Iraq. Host community individuals specifically those that are less educated or working within the informal sector 8 are especially vulnerable to livelihoods losses due to the crisis. Populations which are economically vulnerable remain the most prone to engaging in forms of conflict. Social tensions and conflict are much more likely in those districts that have relatively balanced demographics (such as a 50-50 split between Sunni and Shi a populations) and which have witnessed high levels of ethnic intermixing due to incoming IDPs. Districts such as Karkh (Baghdad), Kirkuk, Al-Muqdadiya & Khanaqin (Diyala), and Tilkaef (Ninewa) are especially prone to violence given their demographic composition. 7 Host Community Impact Assessment (HCIA) conducted by UNDP, July 2015. 8 Informal sector of employment is defined as those being employed without contract or without state-regulated social protections.
Humanitarian needs In Iraq, an estimated 5.7 million displaced individuals and host community members will need some form of assistance in 2016 by the cluster. Of these, 2.85 million are individuals who only need livelihoods assistance, 1. 1 million are individuals who only need social cohesion-building measures such as community dialogue and mediation activities. The remaining 1.7 million are the critical population for whom livelihoods vulnerability is a social tension risk and thus need both livelihoods and social cohesion support, most of whom are located in areas along the disputed internal boundaries (DIBs). Livelihoods needs often lead to social tension erupting in conflict. Over 1.2 million people are expected to be prone to social conflict 9. Assessments have shown that both displaced and host community populations which are unable to address their needs or which struggle economically are significantly more likely to have poor relationships with other communities. This is confirmed by the reality that IDPs continue to face ethnic and socioeconomic discrimination, and host community individuals often view recent economic hardship as caused by incoming displaced populations. Where economic grievances may lead to social tensions, specific livelihoods interventions are needed to support vulnerable households. In Kirkuk Governorate, social cohesion between populations improved after livelihoods activities provided much-needed income to households. Other activities have integrated both livelihoods and social cohesion activities, such as the integration of different populations under a single value chain. Additionally, an estimated 1.1 million individuals are critically vulnerable to environments of social instability 10. This is due to a range of socioeconomic and demographic factors that have, in the past decade, shown to be strongly correlated with incidences of social conflict. Such factors include the demographic balance between different socio-ethnic groups: a recent conflict analysis done by UNDP found that communities that are ethnically mixed (i.e. the proportions of opposite social groups are relatively equal) are much more likely to witness violence or tension. In addition, poor or disenfranchised youth have been found in Iraq to be the majority of the perpetrators of inter-community violence. For these individuals, mitigation of social tensions and promotion of nonviolent engagement and dialogue is needed. Debt is increasing among displaced families, impacting social tensions as well as the ability of families to live in dignity in Iraq. Only 36 per cent of the country s displaced households earn a consistent income and are able to afford basic needs 11, leaving around 2 million individuals unsupported by a steady source of income. In addition, an alarming 85 per cent of all displaced households in Iraq are in debt. The average total debt of displaced households stands at around US$3,040. 12 Employment and income in Iraq is decreasing amongst crisis-affected people. Around 42 per cent just under 1.5 million individuals of all displaced people have identified employment and income as their top priority need, a statistic that has grown over the course of the conflict. In host communities with significant numbers of IDPs, elementary or unskilled host community workers experienced an average drop of US$50 in their monthly wages 13. In urban areas, host community unemployment has jumped from an average 8.4 per cent to 9.6 per cent, as a result of labor competition with IDPs. Host community individuals who experience problems with their employment are 5 times more likely to view IDPs negatively. Displaced populations and host community individuals who view poor service provision as a result of increased competition (due to population movements) are 33 per cent more likely to experience social tensions and, in the worst cases, engage in forms of violence 14. Social conflict can be pinned to very specific socioeconomic and demographic traits. A recent Conflict Risk Assessment found that social tensions and violence were strongly correlated to a single demographic: the perpetrators of ethnic violence in tense communities are often the unemployed and disenfranchised youth 15. Over 30 per cent of the people in need (1.74 million) face a toxic mix where existing livelihoods vulnerability is 9 Population in Need Calculation, ELSC Cluster, October 2015 10 Population in Need Calculation, ELSC Cluster, October 2015 11 IOM group assessment 12 REACH MCNA Round 2 13 Host Community Impact Assessment (HCIA) conducted by UNDP, July 2015. 14 Host Community Needs Assessment conducted by UNDP and REACH, July 2015 15 Conflict Risk Analysis, UNDP, August 2015
a risk to social tensions. For these people, relationships between communities have deteriorated due to both underlying social tension risk (due to pre-existing demographic or socioeconomic preconditions) and increased economic vulnerability due to the crisis. Within this group, 56.7 per cent of these extremely vulnerable populations (985,533 people) are located in Kirkuk, Baghdad, Diyala, and Salah al-din governorates 16. Needs for livelihoods and social cohesion are accelerating, due to the increasingly protracted nature of the crisis, and are expected to continue to do so. Between March and April 2015, over 200,000 additional people became vulnerable, according to statistical estimates and multi-cluster data released by REACH and IOM. By late 2015, between September and October, 500,000 additional people became vulnerable within a one-month period. The total people in need of livelihoods assistance is expected to rise sharply to 5.7 million people by the end of 2016. Data for visuals: POPULATION IN NEED (in million) ECONOMICALLY VULNERABLE BASIC NEEDS POPULATION IN NEED (IN MILLION) MAURIS FINIBUS NUTRITION 3.4 3.5 3.7 4.0 4.4 4.9 5.5 5.7 30% have overlapping needs 1 out of 3 host community members who cannot afford basic needs have poor relationship with IDPs March 2015 October 2015 16 Population in Need Calculation, ELSC Cluster, October 2015
Emergency Livelihoods and Social Cohesion Cluster Strategy and Monitoring Plan 2016 Iraq Humanitarian Response Plan A. Cluster Strategy to Address Needs Lead Agency: Co-Coordinator Agency: UNDP Danish Refugee Council # People in need: 5,700,108 # People targeted for assistance: 253,000 Total funding required (USD): 26,528,055 # of partners: 22 1. Whole of Iraq Focus: Describe the cluster s goal, strategic objectives, and practical steps that will be taken to provide humanitarian response to people targeted across the country, including in hard-to-reach areas. Note the different operational modalities required and applied in different contexts or geographical areas. The goal of the cluster is to build resilience of conflict affected population across Iraq by promoting tolerance and social stability between diverse groups and thus preventing an increase in social tension with the potential to spill over into violence, secondary displacement, forced returns and a reduction of access to services. The strategic objective of the cluster is to address social tension through an integration of tolerance building activities with emergency livelihoods. High unemployment is a predominant trigger of tension. The cluster will support: returnees, remainees and the newly displaced with a first line response to preserve existing assets and promote tolerance; and chronically displaced IDPs and their hosts under protracted stress in Iraq to meet their immediate needs, prepare for return or integration, ensure open dialogue and problem solving systems are established to maintain social stability. To ensure needs are meet across the whole of Iraq, where safely accessible the cluster will focuses on; Prioritization of populations that are doubly at risk of social tension and rising poverty. These populations are those that are socioeconomically vulnerable due to poverty and unemployment and that also have a demographic propensity towards social conflict. As illustrated by the data analysis and mapping in the cluster HNO, this overlap between economic vulnerability and social tension is particularly substantial across the Central governorates of Iraq, including Kirkuk, Anbar, Baghdad and Diyala. Further prioritizing areas that are coping with a mix of displacement and returns in addition to being at high risk of tension, primarily Kirkuk and Diyala governorates. Experienced UN and NGO agencies will partner and build the capacity of national NGOs willing but as yet inexperienced in implementing emergency livelihoods and social cohesion activities in order to more effectively reach areas outside KRI, especially Baghdad and newly accessible areas. Strengthening the cluster coordination mechanisms, especially in terms of promoting conflict sensitive best practice and Do No Harm, at the sub-national levels to support partners in new areas of operation will be a priority for the cluster. While a renewed focus will be placed on supporting cluster activities to meet immediate needs in the rest of Iraq, the cluster will also ensure continued coverage of priority areas across the Kurdish Region of Iraq and endeavor to maintain the level of support currently available. 2. Protection Mainstreaming: Describe 2-3 practical steps the cluster will take to mainstream protection in 2016. Bullet points are recommended.
Ensure the mainstreaming of specific conflict sensitive Do No Harm guidelines, developed by the cluster, across all activities. All partners implementing first line and full cluster response activities assess do no harm concerns, including a conflict analysis, at the onset of new interventions and throughout project implementation. This approach includes a component of basic training in Do No Harm and conflict analysis for all cluster partners. Through dissemination of the Protection cluster s existing materials and with support of the identified EL&SC cluster focal point, the cluster will be support protection mainstreaming within the clusters and among partners. In response planning, target populations including men, women, youth and vulnerable groups will be equally assessed and provided meaningful access to response activities. The cluster will collect and analysis sex- and age-disaggregated indicators and respond to specific vulnerabilities/risks accordingly. 3. Accountability to Affected Populations: Describe 1-2 practical steps the cluster will take to strengthen the collective accountability to affected populations The cluster strategy will build further accountability to affected populations through two key activities; one, assessing projects against the needs and feedback expressed by the target populations and two, by mainstreaming accountability activities at both the agency and inter-agency level. Accountability mechanisms, such as complaints and feedback lines, monitoring systems and confidential reporting systems will be established at the agency level by all partners. In addition the cluster will continue to support inter-agency accountability systems, such as through the IDP Call Center and other initiatives. Particular attention will be paid to training partners on the importance of two way feedback mechanisms and on confidential reporting of misconduct. Throughout 2016, the cluster will monitor and assess whether or not feedback provided has been effectively used to inform and adapt project activities 4. First-Line Response: Describe what will be provided and done as part of the first-line response, noting both the context or geographical area, and timing, when this would be implemented. First line activities will be undertaken during the first three months of a major upheaval which may be a new wave of displacement, returns or improved access to IDPs previously un-accessible. The First Line response is centred at the household level to mitigate the main risks of livelihood and income loss and promote tolerance social. This will be achieved through the provision of immediate access to income and assets replacement (primarily lost tools) for vulnerable households and social awareness activities. Examples of first line response activities include rapid assessments (skills, assets, social tensions), community outreach to reduce or prevent social tensions, emergency short-term employment with public and community services (CFW that is deployed to improve or rehabilitate schools, clinics, roads/awareness raising campaigns etc) and provision of livelihoods asset (tool replacement). Activities will be implemented across priority areas targeting IDPs in camps, IDPs outside of camps, host communities, returns areas and refugee locations. Special attention will be paid to people in difficult to access areas where cluster partners demonstrate they have the capacity to safely and effectively reach the target population Do no harm principles and guidelines will be mainstreamed across first line response activities
5. Second-Line Response: Describe what will be provided and done as part of the second-line response, noting both the context or geographical area, and timing, when this would be implemented. (None only first line and full cluster response) 6. Full-Cluster Response: Describe what will be provided and done as part of the full cluster response, noting both the context or geographical area, and timing, when this would be implemented. The aim of the Full Cluster response is to build the resilience of IDPs, host communities and enable them to become self-reliant during chronic crisis, in their chosen location of Iraq, through initiatives which support access to regular income, maintain channels for dialogue, establish systems for mediation and problem solving and which through group activities (C4W or volunteer groups) improve access to community services by rehabilitation of infrastructure including clinics and schools. The Full Cluster response will be activated as soon as beneficiaries have settled and met the majority of life threatening needs e.g. shelter, water and food, and the cluster partners have established a relationship with the newly displaced, or newly accessible, and host community. The Full Cluster response is centred at the community level with the objective of maintaining social stability and promotion of tolerance by improving equitable access to regular income and by supporting and expanding channels for dialogue between different community groups, engaging diverse socio-ethnic-religious groups in group activities that provide services to all e.g. rehabilitation of a road. Examples of full cluster response activities include monitoring trends in social tensions, in-kind and cash grant and technical support to micro and small business development, income creation activities through job referrals and placements, developing community, civil society and/ or local government problem solving mechanisms and intergroup community actions (Quick Impact Projects - QIPs). Activities will be implemented across priority areas targeting IDPs in camps, IDPs outside of camps, host communities and refugees. Special attention will be paid to people in longer term displacement settings at a heightened risk of social tensions. Conflict sensitive Do no harm principles and guidelines will be mainstreamed across full cluster response activities especially by ensuring that conflict analysis is undertaken and beneficiary selection is based on need rather than status (i.e. IDP, host, refugee etc.). 7. Refugee Response: Describe what will be provided and done as part of the refugee response, in brief, taken from the 3RP information As the crisis in Syria protracts into its fifth year, refugees in Iraq, in both camp and non-camp settings, have become increasingly settled. Most have been in the country for at least 12 months and have little likelihood to return in the medium term. While the sector will continue to address the emergency livelihoods needs of the expected 30,000 new arrivals, it has become critical to move towards longer-term, innovative programming that focuses on fostering the resilience of refugee and impacted populations. Resilience for refugee and host communities depends on a multiplicity of factors; one is the consistency of income generation and the self-reliance of households to regularly
meet basic needs or a minimum set of living standards. Recent assessments have found that the nature of refugee labor is transient or unstable the majority of which is in either agricultural waged labor (38%) or construction (24%) in host communities or in small-scale exchange and services in camps. To address the above-mentioned priority needs for inclusive economic growth, job creation, and sustainable livelihoods, the sector has prioritized interventions in creating economic opportunities, supporting a longer-term, market-oriented approach to fostering resilience and peaceful co-existence of refugee and local populations. These interventions aim to bolster self-reliance of the impacted populations with a resilience-building approach. In particular, innovative approaches are needed to work within a constrained environment that has prevented refugees from accessing livelihoods opportunities. 8. Caseload Targeting: Describe how the cluster has arrived at its target number across the six differentiated caseloads--idps in camps; IDPs out of camps; host communities; returnees; refugees; and population in AOGcontrolled areas as well as between male, female, elderly, etc. as relevant. With growing need across the country, the cluster has sharpened its targeting mechanism from last year. Recent assessments and analyses done at the cluster-level has empirically confirmed that the lack of livelihoods has increasingly become, a major risk factor for social tensions in Iraq, particularly when one target group (such as IDPs or host communities) are given preferential treatment despite being in a similar economic condition. Communities most at risk are those that, as a result of displacement or return, have a diverse socio-ethnic-religiously mixed population with historical patterns hostility combined with a high level of youth unemployment, poor access to services and general poverty. Targeting for the 2016 HRP focuses on those communities whether in areas of displacement, returns and especially on those where the two exist in parallel. In order to calculate the populations and geographical areas where the highest risks are, the cluster gathered district-level figures of IDPs and host community individuals who could not afford basic needs and those who were prone to have social tensions within their community. Through a statistical analysis and weighting of needs in each of Iraq s 110 districts, the cluster calculated that just over 5.7 million are in need of either livelihoods support, are at risk of tension or both: this number is further disaggregated to those that need only livelihoods assistance (2.85m), those that only need social cohesion-building measures (1.12m), and the critical group for whom these two sets of needs overlap (1.74m). Thus the EL&SC cluster has prioritized those of the 1.74 m for whom economic vulnerability is an inherent tension risk factor. The cluster s enhanced targeting strategy reflects the need to identify populations particularly vulnerable to both economic vulnerability and social tensions, and those demographics that are most often found in the link between the two. Disenfranchised or unemployed youth, are particularly at risk: they are the perpetrators of around 72% of all incidents of ethnically driven violence in the past decade; and also most at risk of radicalization. Moreover, labour market pressures faced by informally employed or undereducated workers have been linked to increasing friction between displaced and host communities.
The EL&SC cluster does not have capacity to respond to 1.74 million people and thus field visits and qualitative and quantitative assessments, has also identified priority vulnerable groups, within the overall targeting areas whose needs can be met. 9. Exit Strategy: Describe the steps that the cluster will take to hand-over, as appropriate, the responsibility for the provision of assistance to relevant authorities. The cluster exit strategy aims to; Support affected populations regain the assets, skills and capacities needed to access regular incomes in order to build self-reliance and reduce their dependency on aid reducing the overall caseload of households in need Encourage the government to support populations that remain dependent through Government social safety net systems; Promote community stability, tolerance and dialogue systems, supported by GoI, which are robust enough to prevent exacerbation of tension/conflict. The Cluster will reach these objectives by; Developing the capacities of the target communities to be self-reliant through independent self-sustaining livelihoods; Integration of Tension Monitoring and Mitigation information into GoI systems. (Statistics Office); B. People in Need INSTRUCTIONS: The below figures are provided as reference for planning purposes. The figures represent the current caseload of people in need in 2015. People in Need:
C. Expected Caseload for the Cluster (TBC) INSTRUCTIONS: Indicate below the targeted caseload for the cluster in 2016. The numbers represented here are the people that you will realistically be able to reach in 2016. The caseloads should be broken by governorate, sex and groups of beneficiaries/target population where possible. People Targeted: Governorate: People Targeted IDPs, in Camps: IDPs, Non- Camp: Host Community: Returnees: % Adult % Female % Elderly Babylon 1,637 115 1,031 491 63 52 1 Baghdad 41,467 2,903 26,124 12,440 59 52 2 Dahuk 44,398 3,108 27,971 13,319 71 51 2 Diyala 36,597 1,967 17,707 8,432 8491 65 50 1 Erbil 7,556 529 4,760 2,267 66 48 1 Kerbala 2,151 151 1,355 645 67 51 3 Kirkuk 41,551 2,909 26,177 12,465 64 50 2 Najaf 10,722 751 6,755 3,217 59 49 3 Ninewa 31,149 - - - 31149 74 53 1 Qadissiya 1,637 115 1,031 491 76 51 1 Salah al-din 8,741 - - - 8741 78 50 3 Sulaymaniyah 25,381 1,777 15,990 7,614 63 53 2 Total 252,987 14,322 128,902 61,382 48,381 *People Targeted = Sum of IDPs in Camps + IDPs non-camp + Host Community + Returnees + D. Monitoring Matrix: Objectives, Activities and Outcome Indicators INSTRUCTIONS: Using the cluster goal, objectives, and approach identified in the narrative written in part A, create a logframe for the cluster s plan for 2016. Include the cluster goal and 2-4 objectives for the cluster, supporting activities, and SMART indicators that measure the achievement of the objective and a target for each. Each cluster should have a goal and an outcome indicator that measures that goal. Each cluster should have a maximum of 2-4 operational objectives which are linked to accomplishing the purpose. Each objective should have a maximum of 4 indicators, which can realistically be reported on at the mid-year and end year 2016. Indicators should be selected based on the feasibility of collecting data on a regular basis, e.g., monthly or quarterly.
Each cluster should have a specific target for each indicator, which partners aim to achieve this year. Each cluster should list a few indicative activities that partners will implement to meet the cluster objectives. This should not be an exhaustive list. Cluster Logframe: Cluster Goal: Vulnerable displacement affected populations including IDPs, host communities and returnees are enabled to cope with the impact of the conflict, in their chosen location in Iraq, through access to income, support to community assets and participatory social dialogue in areas at high risk of tension. Supporting Strategic Objectives: HRP Strategic Objectives Two and Three (SO.2 / SO.3) Indicator: In Need: Baseline: Target: Male: Female: % of people in need across target populations accessing income as a result of the cluster response % of people in need across target populations participating in community or social dialogue as a result of the cluster response 4,588,374 0 2,849,711 0 Cluster Objective 1: Supporting Strategic Objectives: Maintain the resilience of displaced people, host communities, and returnees and enable them to cope with the impact of crisis, in their chosen location in Iraq, through immediate access to income for vulnerable families and social awareness, in areas at high risk of tensions. 1, 2, 3 Indicator: Activities: In Need Baseline Target M: F: Result Status # of individuals reached through social tension assessments # of community outreach initiatives completed to reduce or prevent social tensions # of people benefitted from temporary employment activities within 3 months of population movement # of people benefitted from replacement of lost tools to enable use of existing skills, within 3 month of population movement Conduct rapid assessments of social tension and potential livelihoods opportunities Disseminate community messages via mass media, social media or mosque speeches Conduct cash for work programmes Replacement of tools by in kind or micro-finance grants 1,700,000 0 92,150 46,07 5 46,075 N/A 0 3 N/A N/A 810,010 0 14,928 7,546 7,382 325,567 0 6,000 3,000 3,000
Cluster Objective 2: Supporting Strategic Objectives: Build the resilience of displaced people and host communities and enable them to become self-reliant during chronic crisis, in their chosen location of Iraq, through support to community assets, increasing access to regular income and opening channels for dialogue. 2 Indicator: Activities: In Need Baseline Target M: F: Result Status # of people reached or reflected in social tension trend analyses and assessments # of people benefitted from support to establish or scaleup businesses (microfinance, small grants, assets, etc.) # of people benefitted from job referral mechanisms (registered, job fairs, job portals, job newsletters, job centres) # of people participated in social cohesion community events (including dialogue sessions) # of people benefitted from participation in action to improve community services Assessment to monitor trends in social cohesion/tensions Conduct analysis and reports of social tension trends Distribution of in-kind or cash grants with technical support to enhance small businesses Provision of job referrals and placements Conduct job fairs Produce job newsletters Conduct social cohesion community events Community, civil society and/ or local authority problem solving mechanisms strengthened Conduct community service improvement projects Groups of mixed socio/ethnic origin rehabilitate or improve public services 340,000 0 160,850 80,425 80,425 441,794 0 8,142 3,095 5,047 122,630 0 2,260 1,495 765 595,000 0 34,540 20,879 13,661 170,000 0 26,570 13,250 13,320
EL & SC Vulnerability Targeting Map 2016
A Principled Approach to Conflict Sensitive Do No Harm Programming in the context of Federal Iraq and the Kurdistan Region Emergency Livelihoods and Social Cohesion & Cluster Contents: Overview of Conflict Sensitive Do No Harm Programming in Iraq Pages 1-7 Annex A - Checklist for Conflict Sensitive Programs. Pages 8 9 Annex B - Resources for Conflict Sensitive Programming. Page 10 Overview of Conflict Sensitive Do No Harm Programming in Iraq. Background As the crisis in Iraq enters its third year, social tensions continue to rise in areas where IDPs are settled. In particular, recent attention has been directed to the finding that humanitarian agencies and government actors themselves may be contributing, inadvertently, to tensions between groups of displaced populations and between IDPs and host communities. This note seeks to enable humanitarian actors working under pressure and time constraints to enhance conflict sensitivity in their projects. This guidance note is supported by analysis of the development of social tensions undertaken in June 2015 by EL & SC cluster and the establishment of a comprehensive information system existed to monitor social tensions and the connection with the dynamics of the socio-political and historical contexts. One of the most important predictors of social tensions was found to be directly linked to the need for social services. In particular, host communities that have a high proportion of residents who rely upon the government for basic needs are shown to be around 30 times more likely to have negative perceptions of and hostile relationships with IDPs. Inequitable access to social services such as food assistance, education, health, and electricity were found to be a significant trigger in 72% of social tension incidents which, in some cases, evolved to violent conflict. Evidence from disputed areas such as Khanaqin and Kirkuk, but also in camps and host communities in uncontested areas in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, demonstrate that inequitable distribution of supplies to IDPs and host communities does in fact increase community tensions. This indicates that the humanitarian community and its government partners are at risk of unknowingly increasing tensions or Doing Harm in communities they seek to serve. To identify and support those most at risk, the Emergency Livelihoods & Social Cohesion Cluster have constructed a Social Tensions Tracking and Mapping system (STTM) that identify geographic areas containing communities vulnerable to social tensions and thus predict where tensions are most likely arise. This system uses an index of the predictors of tensions tested by the social cohesion analysis and used to provide and evidence base in the Humanitarian Needs Overview (HNO) of the 2016 Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP). Objectives This document has been prepared in response to a request from the Inter-Cluster Coordination Group (ICCG) for guidance from the ELSC cluster to produce a set of operationalized guidelines for conflict sensitive programming. The objective is to highlight, for humanitarian organizations and government partners, the importance of planning and implementing emergency programs through a lens of conflict sensitivity. It provides an overview of the basic steps of conflict sensitive programming and concludes with a list of resources for further information. The ultimate goal of this guide is to enable humanitarian actors to effectively contribute to opportunities for social cohesion and reduce incidents of tension during all phases of humanitarian aid programming. It will be particularly relevant in areas where social tensions are already evident, but also any area in Iraq where there are IDPs or refugees now live.
Therefore, this guide will: Define necessary terms and principles for conflict sensitive programming. Provide a basic overview of do no harm principles and guidelines. Provide a brief set of steps for incorporating conflict sensitive principles in all steps of program design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation and integration of these principle in to institutional practices, starting on page 5 and a check list in Annex A. Refer readers to additional resources for detailed steps to conflict analysis, assessment of dividers and connectors via the Do No Harm model. Provide a Checklist for Conflict Sensitive Programs in Annex A page 9-10. Basic Definitions Conflict - The result of parties disagreeing and acting on the basis of perceived incompatibilities. Conflict (violent) - Resorting to psychological or physical force to resolve a disagreement. Conflict Analysis - A structured process of assessment and analysis to better understand a conflict (its background/history, the groups involved, each group s perspective, identifying causes of conflict etc.) This is a dynamic analysis and needs to be updated as conflicts evolve. Conflict sensitivity - refers to the ability of an organization to: o Understand the context in which it is operating, particularly intergroup relations; o Understand the interactions between its interventions and the context/group relations; and o Act upon the understanding of these interactions, in order to avoid negative impacts and maximize positive impacts. Conflict-sensitive programming - involves close scrutiny of the operational context through regularly updating the conflict analysis, in order to avoid negative impacts and maximize positive impacts on the context. Context - The operating environment, which ranges from the micro to the macro level (e.g. community, district / province, region(s), country, neighboring countries). do no harm - The principle of do no harm is taken from medical ethics. It requires humanitarian organisations to strive to minimize the harm they may inadvertently cause through providing aid, as well harm that may be caused by not providing aid (such as adding to tensions with host communities). Do No Harm (DNH) - Originated by CDA Collaborative (http://cdacollaborative.org/programs/do-no-harm/) the practice of DNH is based on 6 important assumptions 1. Whenever an intervention of any sort enters a context it becomes part of the context. 2. All contexts are characterized by Dividers and Connectors. 3. All interventions interact with both, either making them worse or making them better. 4. Actions and Behaviors have Consequences, which create impacts. 5. The details of interventions matter. 6. There are always Options. Peacebuilding - Measures designed to consolidate peaceful relations and strengthen viable political, socioeconomic and cultural institutions capable of mediating conflict, and to strengthen other mechanisms that will either create or support the necessary conditions for sustained peace. (Often confused with conflict sensitive programming recommended reading: http://www.cdacollaborative.org/publications/reflecting-on-peacepractice/rpp-articles%c2%a0and-chapters/a-distinction-with-a-difference-conflict-sensitivity-andpeacebuilding/) Social Cohesion in the current context of Iraq, social cohesion is defined as a general condition of stable coexistence within communities, when IDPs, refugees, and host community members accept socio-ethnic differences, have equitable access to livelihoods and other community resources, and feel safe and secure in their homes. The Basics of Conflict Sensitive Programming and the Do No Harm Approach (See Checklist for Conflict Sensitive Programs in Annex A page 9-10, for the Iraq/Kurdistan context)