An Introduction to the CAP:

1
An Introduction to the CAP

• History, trends and stakeholders

2
A quick re-CAP
3
What emergency in 1991 was the catalyst for the
creation of the Consolidated Appeals Process?

• The Kurdish Refugee Crisis
• WHY
• massive refugee influx
• uncoordinated response
• chaos

4
General Assembly Resolution 46/182, December 1991

• Strengthening the coordination of humanitarian
  emergency assistance of the United Nations by
• Creation of the Emergency Relief Coordinator
  (ERC)
• Inter-agency Standing Committee (IASC)
• Consolidated Appeal

5
IASC Membership
Comprised of the Executive Heads of the following
organisations. It is chaired by the ERC.
FULL MEMBERS UNICEF UNDP FAO WFP WHO UNHCR OCHA
STANDING INVITEES ICRC IFRC IOM NGO Consortia
SCHR, ICVA, InterAction RSG for IDPs OHCRC World
Bank UNFPA
6
GA Resolution 46/182
For emergencies requiring a consolidated
response, the Secretary-General should ensure
that an initial Consolidated Appeal covering all
concerned organisations of the system, prepared
in consultation with the affected State, is
issued within the shortest possible time
7
IASC Definition of the CAP (1994)

• A programming process through which national,
  regional and international relief systems are
  able to mobilize and respond to selective major
  or complex emergencies that require a system-wide
  response to humanitarian crisis.

8
The Consolidated Appeals Process an inclusive,
coordinated programme cycle in emergencies to
Human Rights
9
The Common Humanitarian Action Plan the
foundation of the CAP -- a strategic plan for
humanitarian response
CHAP
Human Rights
10
The CAP Today?
11
Stakeholder Roles in the CAP
12
IASC Review of the CAP 2002 agreed to
Strengthen
Senior level involvement in the CAP CAP as an
advocacy tool CAP as strategic coordination tool
13
How is YOUR organisation helping to strengthen
the CAP?

• In-house agency workshops on CAP (WFP, FAO, UNDP,
  WHO, UNHCR)
• SCHR reviewing role of NGOs in CAP
• ICRC policy to conduct an exchange of views on
  CHAP

14
Roles and responsibilities in CAP

• UN Humanitarian Coordinator triggers any
  inter-agency appeal or strategy document leads
  the process in collaboration with IASC Country
  Team consults ERC on the above.
• ERC consults with IASC to ensure coherence
  between field and headquarters and across
  emergencies.
• IASC Country Team mirrors the IASC structure at
  headquarters. All members of the team are
  encouraged to participate in developing the CHAP,
  although some standing invitees (e.g. the Red
  Cross) appeal for funds outside of this framework.

15
Who said..
The Common Humanitarian Action Plan (CHAP)
should be the main tool of humanitarian
co-ordination.
--Montreux Donors Retreat on the CAP, 2000
16
Donor observations on CAP

• Humanitarian Coordinators should lead the design,
  implementation and reporting on CAPs with all
  IASC actors in field.
• NGO involvement in CAP is welcome, but need
  guidance on modalities of their involvement.
• Baseline information and analysis on needs of
  affected population should be strengthened.
• Move from strategy to results.

17
Donor involvement in CAP

• Donors must continue to pursue coherence on
  transition within their respective
  administrations.
• Donors commit to strengthening coordination among
  themselves and internally.
• Donors to participate in CAP field workshops and
  CHAP.
• Donors sponsoring studies on Global Humanitarian
  Aid Flows, Measuring Humanitarian Need and
  Donor Behavior

18
Role of Recipient Governments
Humanitarian assistance should be provided with
the consent of the affected country and in
principle on the basis of an appeal by the
affected state. Consolidated Appeals to be
prepared in consultation with the affected
state. GA Resolution 46/182, December 1991
19
Role of Recipient Governments
The CA Process will whenever possible be
guided and coordinated by the country or
countries concerned. IASC-endorsed CAP
Guidelines, 1994 GA Resolution 46/182 and IASC
CAP Guidelines are still considered valid
allowing for flexible interpretation on a
country-by-country basis. This helps to ensure
the impartiality of the United Nations and other
IASC partners while at the same time allows for
government input to the process as
appropriate. IASC-WG endorsed Nomenclature
Paper, 2003
20
Four Key CAP issues
How should we respond to the decline in
contributions / inequitable distribution of funds
across emergencies and sectors? How can we make
the process more inclusive but still manageable,
and substantive? How do we prove that
humanitarian aid is making an impact? What is
our criteria for starting or ending a CAP?
21
Nearly 20 billion raised in 10 years
22
Two largest appeals vs remaining CAs
23
2001 Funding to the CAs by Sector
24
Participation in CAP Field Workshops 2002
25
Funds requested by NGOs through CAs 2000-2003 (by
country)
26
Monitoring in the CAP
Monitoring is one area where a study of the CAP
is like holding a mirror up to the humanitarian
system as a whole. Weak monitoring and impact
assessment are not weaknesses in the CAP, but
much wider weaknesses in the humanitarian system
as a whole, which the CAP reflects. --An
External Review of the CAP, 18 April 2002
27
Efforts to improve monitoring and impact analysis
in CAP

• CAP Technical Guidelines include section on
  monitoring
• More then half of 2003 CAPs include a monitoring
  report of 2002, and a plan for 2003 (DPRK,
  Angola, Sierra Leone, North Caucasus)
• Mid-year Review of the CAPs
• IASC-endorsed recommendation to develop standard
  guidelines for monitoring

28
Different Names
Humanitarian Plan of Action for Colombia
Donor Alert Sri Lanka
Humanitarian Strategy FYROM
Humanitarian Action Plan oPt
Humanitarian Situation and Strategy FRY and
Georgia
Different Formats
Consolidated Appeal
CHAP
CHAP Projects
29
Introducing the new IASC Strategy / Appeal
Framework
30
The NEW framework

• Covers Day One of an emergency through
  transition
• Used for both complex emergencies and natural
  disasters
• Ensures greater predictability in the names,
  format and timing of documents
• Standardizes guidelines and will use document
  templates to facilitate workload in the field
  and
• Clarifies roles and responsibilities.

31
Situation Report
Issued from 48 hours - 2 weeks of emergency
Updated regularly
Rough estimate of resources available and needed
Flash Appeal
Issued 2-4 weeks after emergency
Better coordinated
More comprehensive analysis / resource needs
C H A P
Issued w/i 3-6 mos of emergency, and annually as
needed
Consolidated Appeal
Follows current CA guidelines
32
Consolidated Appeal
Year 1
Consolidated Appeal
Consecutive years as needed
Transition Strategy/Appeal (to be agreed
w/UNDG/ECHA WG)
33
If there is a need to change the humanitarian
strategy or funding requirements in a Flash
Appeal, Consolidated Appeal or stand-alone CHAP,
the document is revised.
34
OCHA Financial Tracking System www.reliefweb.int
/fts

• Tracks donor contributions to both natural
  disasters and complex emergencies covered by a
  CAP
• Updated daily
• Can build custom tables
• Based on information reported to OCHA by agencies
  and donors
• A good indicator of funding but be aware of
  limitations of the data.