• Full report

This report is based on a review of four international Appeals of the IFRC in the Horn of Africa, from 2008 to 2010. The review took a food security lens to broadly assess the whole ‘Appeal’ process, from assessment and analysis, project/programme design, resource mobilisation, coordination, implementation and impact. Over fifty interviews were conducted with RCRC staff, in Geneva, Kenya, Djibouti and Ethiopia, as well as by telephone. Branches and beneficiary communities were also visited in Kenya and Ethiopia.

The scope of this review is broad given the number of issues, actors, institutional layers and different contexts within the Movement (different branches, NS’s, PNS’s, IFRC and ICRC). As such, and in order to maximise the potential readership and impact of the report it has been
kept short and with the purpose of attempting to bring out emerging issues of relevance to the wider Movement. It is structured into 4 sections: Key Findings; Emerging Issues and Recommendations; Background to the Region; Analysis of Appeals.

• Full report

UNICEF and FAO conceptualised this seminar for practitioners engaged in the current Horn of Africa crisis response – some of which have only arrivedas part of the humanitarian surge capacity. The seminar was meant to provide the necessary background information on the Horn of Africa including: 1) the latest data on the situation and outlook, and 2) the political economy and pastoralist livelihoods that define the way of life in the region. The seminar included a review of the lessons learned from past humanitarian responses in the region and will concluded with recommendations of ways forward. The various presentations were expected to evoke reflections on what a responsible humanitarian framework for the current Horn of Africa crisis should be and how this could be translated into tangible programming
results.

• Full report
• Terms of reference

Objectives:

1. To review Member Agencies’ response to the crisis in Ethiopia and Kenya using the DEC Accountability Priorities as the basis of the RTE framework. Specific questions for consideration relating to each priority:

Priority 1: We use our resources efficiently and effectively
Priority 2: We achieve intended programme objectives in accordance with agreed humanitarian standards, principles and behaviours
Priority 3: We are accountable to disaster affected populations
Priority 4: We learn from our experience – taking learning from one emergency to the next

2. To review the extent to which agencies correctly identified the key risks to a quality disaster response and implemented suitable mitigating actions.

3. To advise on any programme adjustments or modification and highlight any unmet needs or unnecessary overlap that should be addressed in Phase 2.

Between all 14 DEC agencies there are 30+ programmes across four countries affected by the drought and conflict in East Africa: Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia and South Sudan. DEC member agencies are currently preparing their plans for the 18 months of Phase 2 of the response.

• Full report
• Terms of reference

Objectives:

1. To review Member Agencies’ response to the crisis in Ethiopia and Kenya using the DEC Accountability Priorities as the basis of the RTE framework. Specific questions for consideration relating to each priority:

Priority 1: We use our resources efficiently and effectively
Priority 2: We achieve intended programme objectives in accordance with agreed humanitarian standards, principles and behaviours
Priority 3: We are accountable to disaster affected populations
Priority 4: We learn from our experience – taking learning from one emergency to the next

2. To review the extent to which agencies correctly identified the key risks to a quality disaster response and implemented suitable mitigating actions.

3. To advise on any programme adjustments or modification and highlight any unmet needs or unnecessary overlap that should be addressed in Phase 2.

Between all 14 DEC agencies there are 30+ programmes across four countries affected by the drought and conflict in East Africa: Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia and South Sudan. DEC member agencies are currently preparing their plans for the 18 months of Phase 2 of the response.

• Full report
• Terms of reference

Objectives:

1. To review Member Agencies’ response to the crisis in Ethiopia and Kenya using the DEC Accountability Priorities as the basis of the RTE framework. Specific questions for consideration relating to each priority:

Priority 1: We use our resources efficiently and effectively
Priority 2: We achieve intended programme objectives in accordance with agreed humanitarian standards, principles and behaviours
Priority 3: We are accountable to disaster affected populations
Priority 4: We learn from our experience – taking learning from one emergency to the next

2. To review the extent to which agencies correctly identified the key risks to a quality disaster response and implemented suitable mitigating actions.

3. To advise on any programme adjustments or modification and highlight any unmet needs or unnecessary overlap that should be addressed in Phase 2.

Between all 14 DEC agencies there are 30+ programmes across four countries affected by the drought and conflict in East Africa: Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia and South Sudan. DEC member agencies are currently preparing their plans for the 18 months of Phase 2 of the response.

• Terms of reference

Objectives: 

To assess the deployment/scale up of ACF in response to the needs of the population in Kenya, Somalia and Ethiopia following the Horn of Africa crisis, its implications on ongoing activities and the longer-term impact of the crisis on ACF activities in the countries/region.

• Terms of reference

The main purposes of the evaluation are:

1. Learning to enable AGIRE and its member agencies to learn from the response given in East Africa, in order to identify lessons for the future at the field and HQ level.
2. Accountability ?? to provide an independent assessment of quality and appropriateness of the AGIRE-funded response immediately after its conclusion.

• Terms of reference

Purpose and Objectives

The size of resources that have been generated by previous and the recent Neighbour in Need campaign require to provide evidence that those funds are used according to the foundation’s charter. Therefore the main purpose of this evaluation is to contribute to Neighbour in Need’s accountability towards its beneficiaries, partners and donors. The objective of this evaluation is to assess and document the capacities and structures of NiN partner organisations that received funding from the current Eastern Africa Appeal. Further it will assess the quality of the NiN funded agencies’ response to the Horn of Africa food crisis in Kenya, Somalia and Ethiopia in terms of adherence to international recognised standards (e.g. Sphere standards, Code of Conduct) and their own standards and procedures. It will highlight key lessons learned and provide recommendations for improving the emergency response for the remainder of the project duration (if applicable) and for improving emergency response for future humanitarian disasters.

The evaluation is scheduled at this particular point of time which lies within the implementation period of the majority of funded projects. This will enable the evaluator to get a better insight into local structures and cooperation with local partners and stakeholders as some partnerships might be temporary for this particular project.

The target audiences of the evaluation will be the foundation’s executive board as the decision body in order to assume its responsibility of obligatory supervision. Furthermore the evaluation results will enable the Council (Stiftungsrat) which is the advisory body to the executive board about the granting of funds in its future decision process. Beside this the evaluation will make recommendations about the improvement of processes and standards used by NiN partner organisations.

• Terms of reference

Overall objective:

CARE International’s current policy to conduct an After Action Review (AAR) 3 to 4 months after declaration of all Type 2 emergencies illustrates CARE’s commitment to continually improve its performance. The AAR is usually conducted as a two-day, structured, professional discussion of an emergency response to promote learning and accountability. The review focuses on performance, which enables those involved in the response to reflect on what happened and why; document the best practices, successes, challenges, and recommendations for what needs to change to sustain organizational strengths and improve on weaknesses in CARE Kenya’s emergency response programs. The purpose of an AAR is therefore to capture and learn from lessons identified during these discussions so that improvements can be made in CARE’s operational procedures, structures and policies. These may include recommendations to senior management in the country office, the lead member, CEG and other parts of CARE.

The specific objectives of the AAR are:

1. To assess performance of CARE Kenya’s 2011 emergency response amongst staff and implementing partners so as to identify achievements and issues addressed to date; areas of collaboration and relationship management and the overall effectiveness of our interventions
2. To identify positive and negative lessons learned (for CARE International in Kenya and other parts of CARE).
3. To identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges and to make action-oriented recommendations to enhance CARE Kenya’s future emergency preparedness planning and response and CI approach to future quick onset emergencies.
4. To ensure that lessons learned and specific recommendations inform future planning both in country and internationally.

Also the results of this AAR will be utilized in reviewing CARE Kenya’s Emergency preparedness planning (EPP) strategy and also provide important inputs into Long Range Strategic Plan (LRSP) review.

• Terms of reference

Objectives:

1. To review the response against established criteria and recommend immediate changes that can improve the emergency programme.
2. To promote a learning approach within CAFOD.
3. To identify good practices and successes to use more widely and lessons learned in this response.
4. To identify persistent weaknesses for organizational learning and recommend how they can be addressed.
5. To identify the successes and limitations of CAFOD Ways of Working in Humanitarian Context and PCM in this response

• Terms of reference

Objectives: 

This evaluation serves the dual objectives of accountability and learning. As such, the evaluation will:

• assess and report on the performance and results of the country portfolio in line with the WFP mandate and in response to humanitarian challenges in Somalia (accountability); and
• determine the reasons for observed success/failure and draw lessons from experience to produce evidence-based findings to allow the CO to make informed strategic decisions about positioning itself in Somalia, form strategic partnerships, and improve operations design and implementation whenever possible (learning).

The major emphasis of this evaluation will be upon the learning objectives.In addition, the evaluation design (see section 5) and security access issues are such that the evaluation of results against objectives will likely rely on secondary data and key informant interviews. There is indeed a wealth of data on certain operational indicators (see section 5), which will contribute to evaluating results. The evaluation will particularly add value in its assessment of risk management, due diligence, contribution to governance, stability and institutional development, where there have been limited data.

DRC’s focus in the programme under review is to support and strengthen a regional protection framework for Somalis while in displacement within the region. In reflection of the current situation and the need for protection, the programme has three immediate objectives:

• Protection of the right to life has been strengthened in areas and communities that host Somali refugees/ IDPs in Somalia, Kenya and Ethiopia.
• Protection of right to livelihood has been strengthened in areas and communities that host Somali refugees/ IDPs in Somalia, Kenya and Ethiopia.
• The right to protection has been strengthened in areas and communities that host Somali refugees/ IDPs in Somalia, Kenya and Ethiopia.

• Terms of reference

The objective of the evaluation is to provide an assessment of the relevance, appropriateness, efficiency, impact and coherence of the FSNAU programme with a view to informing future direction. Key questions to be answered by evaluators are:

1. to what extent has food security and nutrition information and analysis produced by FSNAU been used (by decision makers, reserchers, implementing agencies and civil society Somali and no-Somali) and for what purposes?
2. to what extent are FSNAU activities appropriate and tailored to local conditions and needs? Are they carried out taking longer-term development and humanitarian scenarios into account?
3. has FSNAU and FAO created synergies between information system projects of FSNAU and SWALIM?
4. to what extent has FSNAU contributed to improved knowledge on acute and chronic food insecurity and malnutrition and their root causes in Somalia.

The evaluation will also respond to specific questions that other donors might have.

• Terms of reference

The first external review of the CHF-Somalia will be conducted by a third-party organization. It will look at both funding windows of the CHF: standard allocations and the emergency reserve, including emergency allocations. A major aim of the review will be to provide the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC), CHF Advisory Board, donors and recipients with the proper level of assurance around the achievement of planned results and operational effectiveness of the CHF mechanism. The review will also include realistic and actionable recommendations aimed at improving operational aspects of the CHF and will identify relevant policy issues which need to be addressed, either at the country level or the HQ level.

• Terms of reference

A major aim of the review will be to provide the HC, CHF Advisory Board, donors and
recipients with the proper level of assurance around the achievement of planned
results and operational effectiveness of the CHF mechanism.
 

• Terms of reference

The main purpose of the RTA is to assess the extent by which the projects contributed to alleviating suffering and improving the lives of the target populations (both positive/negative outcomes and impact) in relation to objectives set out in the various emergency program proposals. The evaluation is also expected to provide recommendations for improvements and future programming.

• Terms of reference

The purpose of this evaluation is to measure of the effects of the post humanitarian emergency intervention in Northern Kenya within the first 7 months, and to draw clear recommendations for longer term programming.
Specifically, the evaluation will:

(i) measure the extent to which:

a. The projects within SC’s emergency response met their objectives,
b. The technical strength of the projects was ensured;
c. The response has been accountable to the needs of the affected population (specifically looking at children and their care-givers),

and (ii) Recommend improvements for longer-term strategies, focusing on programme quality, management, accountability to beneficiaries, and contribute to learning in a wider sense within the agency/ies.

• Terms of reference

The purpose of the mid-term evaluation is to provide CARE International, the ALP team and ALP donors with an external analysis of ALP strategies, achievements and relevance which can be used to inform planning and decision making for the future of ALP and beyond. In particular, the mid-term evaluation will analyse and make recommendations on the ways and degree to which ALP is achieving learning among its external stakeholders, as demonstrated in:

1. the difference ALP is making to the capacity of ALP communities and local governments to plan for and adapt to climate change,
2. ALP engagement and influence in policy processes and
3. ALP’s contribution to the national, African and global discourse on CBA learning and practice

In line with donor requirements, an external mid-term evaluation of ALP is required to assess ALP progress towards the log frame outputs, purpose and goals as well as key implementation strategies and make recommendations for improvements. Recommendations, with reasons, for the remaining 2.5 years of ALP and beyond, will propose changes to improve: the log frame, ALP relevance and accountability, approaches and methods, sustainability, up-scaling, effectiveness and efficiency.

• View this report on the ALNAP website

The RTE used the standard Oxfam benchmarks to evaluate the response in Somalia. As in all the Horn countries, it was found that the scale-up could have been carried out earlier but once the programme had started, the coverage has been according to organisational standards.

• View this report on the ALNAP website

The Kenya RTE used the standard Oxfam benchmarks to evaluate the drought response in all sites. Recommendations were made and presented during the Day of Reflection. This resulted in an action plan that will address the issues raised.

• View this report on the ALNAP website

The Ethiopia RTE used the standard Oxfam benchmarks to evaluate the response. On timeliness it was found that Oxfam had been slow to respond although this was also the case with other actors as well. The results were fed back during a Day of Reflection and an action plan was drawn up to address the issues raised.

• Full report
• Terms of reference

Objectives: 
The main objectives of IASC RTEs are to provide real-time feedback to the Humanitarian Country Teams, lesson learning for the future and to seek out the views of affected people on the quality of the response.

The IASC RTE aims to be a light and self-sufficient evaluation (i.e., with a footprint that does not unduly burden the country team) but will nonetheless provides a clear understanding of the key issues and challenges of the response through rigorous evidence-based analysis (triangulation, document analysis, key informant interviews etc.). Based on the assessment of the current situation, the IASC RTE will support the three HCTs and regional fora and mechanisms to develop and agree to clear plans of action to address key coordination problems or operational bottlenecks with the overall aim of enabling a more effective response moving forward. Its purpose is not to substitute for other evaluations that IASC members may conduct for their own purposes.

Focus:
The major thrust of the IASC RTE will be its focus on the effectiveness and efficiency of the coordination and management systems, and addressing critical issues related to both the provision of relief and to the transition to recovery.

• Full report
• Terms of reference

This evaluation has been managed by the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) supported by Danish Refugee Council on behalf of the IASC and funded by Danida, DFID, SDC, and SIDA. The Inter Agency Standing Committee (IASC) for Somalia initiated an inter-agency evaluation of the collective international response in South Central Somalia, to identify best practices and lessons learned from the response to date. The evaluation is intended to inform both strategic discussions within the IASC and between the IASC and the donors on the wider humanitarian response and future strategy for aid delivery in Somalia; as well as provide concrete operational input and guidance to Clusters and individual agencies for their future programming. The evaluation has followed a deductive analysis based on a mixed methods approach for data collection.

• Full report

The area around the town of Galkaiyo, southern Puntland, there are (Nov 2010) almost 60.000 displaced people living in very basic and difficult conditions in 21 spontaneous settlements. This SIDA- funded project aimed to work with a target group of 2000 of the most vulnerable households, (12.000 persons) supporting them with temporary shelter and a range of hygiene inputs. In a context beset by security constraints and a continuing influx of newly displaced people, the identification of the most vulnerable, has been challenging, however, critical in order to reach those with the limited resources available. Shelter is needed upon arrival, so timing was critical, but hard to fulfil.