gFSC Global Dashboard Update as of April 2016

The gFSC global dashboard provides a quick snapshot of the country-level Food Security Clusters around the world. The most recent dashboard shows that as of April 2016, the country-level Food Security Clusters remain only at 46% percent funded against their yearly requirements.  

El Niño: Impacts and Priorities for Action

At present, the crisis is affecting 60 million people and it is expected that these figures will continue to rise as the consequences of El Niño unfold throughout- particularly in Southern Africa and Asia (Timor-Leste, Indonesia). While the humanitarian community is fully engaged in response actions, it is not enough and the limiting factor is funding. Noting the unprecedented simultaneous emergences in different parts of the world, it is critical that the 60 million affected are not forgotten. Allowing the emergency to continue without adequate attention, could undermine important development gains made over many years. National Governments, NGOs, and the UN are responding across all sectors, particularly within the food security sector which is the largest segment of the humanitarian landscape, accounting for some 80%. The priority now is meeting urgent, humanitarian needs of millions, and at the same time maintain resilience building programmes to the extent possible. It cannot be stressed enough that as affected households deplete their existing resources and ability to cope, the more lasting and costly the response will be in the end- undermining decades of investments already made.

In order to raise resources and awareness, OCHA, WFP, FAO, and IFAD hosted an event in Rome on the 17 March 2016: El Niño: Impacts and Priorities for Action. The event was well attended by representatives of member states, resource partners, UN agencies and NGOs, among others. Outcomes and commitments from the meeting have been found here. Following on one of the commitments made at the event, OCHA hosted a pledging event in Geneva on 26 April, with the hopes of raising much needed resources, with an outstanding shortfall of some US$ 2 billion.

Just Released- IPC/FSC Guidance on Global Standards for Collaboration at Country Level

The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) is a standardized scale that integrates food security, nutrition and livelihood information into a clear statement about the nature and severity of food insecurity and implications for strategic response. It was first developed for Somalia in 2005, but rapidly spread to more than 25 countries in Latin America, Africa and Asia.

The IPC is one of the main tools for the Food Security Cluster (FSC) at country level to inform food security response plans. In many countries where IPC is used, the analysis provided is integrated in the Humanitarian Needs Overview (HNO) and in the Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP). However, collaboration between IPC and FSC has been so far entirely left at the initiative of staff at country level and hence subject to a variety of factors linked to individual understandings of the important links existing between the IPC and FSC activities in the country.

The purpose of this document is to address this challenge by outlining standardized guidance to country FSC and IPC Technical Working Groups (TWG) on collaboration at country level for effective planning of IPC analysis and use of its findings to inform humanitarian plans and response.The document analyses the main issues relating to the interaction of IPC analysis results and the Humanitarian Programme Cycle (HPC), and proposes a number of standards for mutual collaboration at local and global level.

This guidance note is a result of close collaboration between the IPC Global Unit and the global Food Security Cluster. The global Food Security Cluster is also represented in the IPC Steering Committee and regularly participates to the IPC Food Security Technical Working Group.

The guidance note is available on the FSC website and on the IPC website.

Global Cluster Coordinator Mission to Ukraine, 8-14 March

Since the activation of the clusters in December 2014 and the appointment of the Resident Coordinator as Humanitarian Coordinator in January 2015 followed by further fine-tuning the clusters in February 2015, the situation in Ukraine has evolved to the extent that the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) and the Inter-cluster Group (ICG) agreed on the need to revise the coordination architecture to ensure that it is fit for purpose. In January 2016 the HCT established a Task Team to lead the review of the coordination architecture exercise and requested support from the Global Cluster Coordinators (GCCs) to undertake the process. The mission from HQ consisted of the Global Food Security Cluster Coordinator; Global Protection Cluster Coordinator; Global Focal Point for Shelter Coordination; representative of the Global Cluster for Early Recovery; representative of the Gender Based Violence Area of Responsibility Coordination Team; Danish Refugee Council Geneva Representative; OCHA Chief of Section for Planning and Monitoring Section; OCHA ICCS staff member. The mission took place between 8-14 March 2016.

The mission concurred with previous findings and assessments that the situation in Ukraine has evolved since the activation of the clusters and the establishment of the coordination architecture. The clusters made great strides in coordinating the response in the early stages of the emergency and in filling a role which the national and local authorities were unable to play. However, the situation in March 2016 in government controlled areas (GCAs) appears to have now stabilized significantly. Although the mission team could not go into the specifics of each cluster and assess what work was humanitarian and what was recovery and developmental, the team found that in general the response in the GCAs is now focusing largely on recovery, including durable solutions, and development work and that humanitarian work was more focused on the contact line and the non GCAs.  Therefore, the humanitarian coordination architecture needs to evolve and shift its focus to the East.

Based on its findings, the mission proposed a set of 7 recommendations to the enlarged Humanitarian Country Team on March 14, 2016 in Kiev (UN agencies, Cluster coordinators, Donors, NGOs, Private Sector). These recommendations focus on transition plan and durable solutions in Government controlled areas, reinforcement of humanitarian coordination presence in contact lines and non-Government controlled areas, clusters transition plans and de-activation where appropriate and HCT strategic leadership. All of the recommendations include a propose timeline for implementation. 

A consolidated mission report was submitted to the Humanitarian Coordinator on March 29, 2016 for in-country review and endorsement.

gFSC Mission to Pacific Islands, March 2016

Upon the request by the two cluster lead agencies (FAO and WFP), the global Food Security Cluster (gFSC) fielded a mission in March 2016 led by a Senior Programme Advisor, later joined by the regional food security cluster coordinator based in Samoa and the food security programme officer based in Fiji, to review the existing cluster coordination architecture in the Pacific sub-region in consultation with relevant stakeholders, assess the capacity strengthening needs for the cluster and inter-cluster coordination group on food security issues, and offer guidance and suggestions on contextualizing the coordination architecture for the sub-region to better support preparedness, with an emphasis on strengthening the linkages between regional and national coordination mechanisms. The mission consulted with Government authorities, UN agencies, I/NGO partners, Secretariat for Pacific Community (SPC) and the University of South Pacific (USP) in Samoa and Fiji as well as had Skype conferences with Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Cook Islands.

The mission proposed to continue to fund the position of the Regional Food Security Cluster Coordinator for the Pacific region based in Samoa, and to reinforce this person with a food security cluster coordination officer with food assistance background to be based in Suva, Fiji. This regional team will closely collaborate with the Governments in the Island countries and other partners in the region. Further, this team will also maintain the day-to-day liaison and coordination with OCHA/PHT and other regional clusters.

The mission also proposed the regional FSC to build on the ongoing initiatives, specifically FAO-OFDA funded El Nino monitoring project in the four countries in Micronesia (Palau, Republic of Marshall Islands, Federal State of Micronesia) and Melanesia (Solomon Islands), WFP’s ongoing activities in Fiji and the region, including the activities undertaken by Logistics and Emergency Telecommunication Clusters, and the activities currently undertaken by other cluster partners, such as IOM, IFRC, ADRA, OXFAM, USP and SPC, utilizing their technical and logistical resources, and network available in the region. The mission further recommended the regional FSC to also foster closer engagement with UNDP, in particular with the Pacific Risk Resilience Programme (PRRP) to ensure complementarity of actions and increased opportunities for linkages in the four countries where PRRP is currently working (Fiji, Vanuatu, Tonga and Solomon Islands).

gFSC Mission to Whole of Syria, 13 February - 3 March

A recent gFSC technical support mission took Christine Ouellette to Syria, Southern Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon, for the Whole of Syria response (13 February 2016 – 3 March 2016) to review the good practices by partners in integrating gender and age in the project cycle of their food security programs. Building on the evidence, and in consultation with partners, the study identified gaps and proposed measures to address these through various measures, including capacity building and analysis of monitoring data associated to gender, age and vulnerability criteria to inform and refine the response.

Women, men, boys and girls can have profoundly different experiences and face different risks in conflict situations. These experiences are shaped by and have a different effect on their capacity to access food, sustain livelihoods and ensure food security.

Five years into the conflict in Syria, the humanitarian and protection needs have reached a record high and continue to grow at a staggering rate. As per the Humanitarian Needs Overview (2016) 13.5 million people, including 6 million children, are now in need of some form of protection and humanitarian assistance inside Syria. WFP led Food Security Assessment (October 2015) identified female- and child-headed households, some of which are also IDPs, as the most vulnerable groups.

“About 60% more female-headed households are food-insecure and vulnerable than male-headed households, with 8.7 million people in need of food assistance and a disturbing number teeter precariously on the brink of severe food insecurity “

Within the Food Security Sector, a number of steps have been taken to ensure that gender, protection; age, disability and AAP are addressed in partners programme. For instance, following consultations with partners in Jordan, South Turkey and Damascus hubs, checklists were developed to ensure gender, protection, disability, and age considerations were addressed through safe distribution and feedback mechanisms. Targeting criteria were also developed that give importance to gender and age, as well as other dimensions, combined with socio-economic criteria, with a focus on:

1. Internally Displaced People
• All New vulnerable IDPs from cyclical or sudden onsets are targeted on a short-term basis (2 weeks to 3 months).
• Once assisted on a short-term basis, assessments to analyse their needs will determine whether to extend food assistance as per vulnerability criteria).
• Those IDPs who meet the harmonized vulnerability criteria should be targeted for longer term food assistance.

2. Resident/ host population
• For resident/host/non IDP populations, a harmonized vulnerability analysis – that takes into account both household and socio-economic criteria - is recommended to determine those most in need of food assistance.
• These criteria are linked with the outcomes of Food Security Assessments that provided a profile of the most vulnerable groups.
• Gender, age, disabilities and protection are mainstreamed in this process of vulnerability analysis for targeting/selection.

World Humanitarian Summit: gFSC Side Event

The gFSC is organizing a side event at the World Humanitarian Summit jointly with WFP, UN University and Humanitarian OpenStreetMap with the title: “Urban Fragility, Vulnerability and Resilience: Tools for Assessment from Macro to Micro Scale”.
The objective of the event is to help practitioners and policy makers view the city from the macro level of its fragility and resilience down to the micro level. The goal is to find solutions that will improve methods, tools and approaches for identifying the most vulnerable urban areas and populations in need of assistance.

The panel will touch upon different dimensions of urban vulnerability including global measurement tools that enable humanitarian, development and security actors to understand the distribution of fragility and resilience at the city scale; mapping and sampling methodologies that enable us to understand where the most vulnerable urban environments are located; indicators that are best adapted to assess the most vulnerable households and subsequently select households for assistance; and management/coordination of targeting which will help to ensure that those in need are reached most effectively with humanitarian assistance.

An official invitation with details on date and timing will be shared separately.

gFSC/WFP Adapting to an Urban World Project

The joint gFSC/WFP Adapting to an Urban World project is still ongoing. A desk review and five urban assessments (Zimbabwe, Lebanon/Jordan, Haiti; Somalia, Madagascar) have been conducted so far. Please find here a comparative analysis of the results of the conducted assessments, including main lessons learned and priority actions/area of further research to undertake in the next case studies.

Inter-cluster Food Security and Nutrition Working Group

The working group continues to meet on a monthly basis and has finalized its work plan and the work of the group was presented to the Global Nutrition Cluster (GNC) partners meeting which was held in Washington at the end of March.

Feedback from GNC face to face meeting indicated that there was interest in topic by cluster partners with good inputs from WASH and Health clusters.  However no concrete actions/ steps were agreed, furthermore,  it was difficult to solicit engagement from partners to join the working group.

A major gap identified is the lack of evidence of joint cluster work, whereas there is much joint UNICEF/WFP work in operation. It is hoped that the planned joint missions to countries will generate suggestions and learning that can move this issue forward.Both clusters have committed to make sure that Food Securiity and Nutrition WG work-plan will be integral part of GNC (and gFCS) strategy and annual work-plans. 

L-3: Iraq

• Out of 2.4 million food insecure people, the Food Security cluster (FSC) is targeting 1.5 million of the most vulnerable people with assistance.

• Household access to Public Distribution System (PDS) deliveries has showed signs of improvement as more respondents reported receiving a full or partial ration, however the food consumption of internally displaced people (IDPs) has deteriorated; over a quarter of IDPs living in camps reported inadequate consumption and more IDPS are reporting using negative coping strategies.

• In the conflict-affected governorates of Anbar and Ninewa, food markets are highly volatile with soaring food prices. Food stocks are also rapidly depleting in besieged locations such as Falluja and Al Sharqat.

• The FSC met with 30 local and international partners in Erbil and Baghdad to begin contingency planning for displacement around Mosul and Anbar, and to prepare submissions for the Iraq Humanitarian Pool Fund.

L-3: South Sudan

• 2.8 million people are in emergency or crisis level food insecurity (IPC, January to March 2016).  The rate of severe food insecurity has now reached 12 percent of the population, double the rate of one year ago.

• Cereal prices have shot up nearly five-fold since early last year, making it increasingly difficult for people to get enough to eat, according to a new joint Crop and Food Security Assessment Mission report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Food Programme (WFP). South Sudan’s cereal shortfall is mainly the result of unfavourable rains in parts of the Bahr el-Ghazal and Equatoria states and disruptions to cropping activities caused by worsening insecurity.

• The Food Security & Livelihoods Cluster conducted an Initial Rapids Needs Assessment (IRNA) mission to Mundri East, focusing on four locations, including Lakamadi, Kediba, Lozoh and Migna. An Urban Technical Working Group was also recently formed by the cluster, composed of seven organizations implementing urban projects in Juba, and with the aim to select a standard criteria with which to target vulnerable households in urban areas. This working group is in support of the urban response led by WFP, FAO and UNICEF.

L-3: Whole of Syria

• A report by WFP presents findings from the Pre-Assistance Baseline data that was collected from June to December 2015. A total of 1,562 off-camp Syrian refugee households were interviewed in four provinces, Gaziantep, Hatay, Kilis and Sanliurfa. The findings reveal a precarious food security situation of the off-camp Syrian refugee households, with almost one-third of the interviewed households being food insecure, leaving the majority of 66% percent at risk of food insecurity.

• Some 2.5 million people in besieged and hard to access areas are food insecure. Households living in besieged areas such as Deir-ez-Zor, Darayya, Madamiyet Elsham, Kafr Batna, Madaya, Az- Zabdani, Foah and Kafraya have exhausted their food stocks and coping strategies and become highly food insecure.

• During February 2016 the price of a standard food basket increased in most besieged areas and places exposed to conflict. A food basket costing SYP 22,805 in Damascus, was 15 and 7 times higher in the besieged areas of Darayya and Deir-ez-Zor at over SYP 350,000 and SYP 170,000 respectively.

• In March 2016, 5.28 million people were reached by the Food Security Sector with food baskets and cash & voucher food assistance.

L-3: Yemen

• In March 2016 indicators show that high levels of food insecurity persist in Yemen, in line with the trend observed in previous months. Approximately 56% of the population (14.4 million Yemenis) are food insecure, including 7.6 million who are severely food insecure. Almost 70 percent of households are borrowing food or relying on help from a friend or relative, and nearly 60 percent are eating fewer meals a day.

•  IDPs continue to have the worst food security indicators, and food security is perceived to be worsening for IDPs and households living in conflict affected governorates.

• In March 2016, 5.4 million people were reached by the Food Security and Agriculture Cluster with emergency food assistance and 52,367 people were reached with emergency livelihoods assistance.

• The withholding of security clearances by the government authorities in Sana’a is resulting in significant delays to the implementation of the Emergency Food Security and Nutrition Assessment (EFSNA) for Yemen by FAO, UNICEF and WFP. All three agencies are currently in talks with the authorities to secure the necessary clearance. The objective of the EFSNA is to establish the current food security and nutrition status of the Yemeni population.