Global Logistics Cluster Meeting, Brindisi, 3 rd 4 th Oct Overview

Transcription

1 Global Logistics Cluster Meeting, Brindisi, 3 rd 4 th Oct 2008 Overview Day 1 3 rd October 08:30 08:45 Meeting Opening 08:45 09:30 Presentation & Questions: HELPNAT Logistics Needs Assessment 09:30 10:15 Presentation & Questions: IFRC; International Disaster relief & Initial Recovery Assistance Working with National Authorities 10:15 10:30 Coffee break 10:30 11:00 Avian Human Influenza / Humanitarian Logistics Pandemic Preparedness and Response Training 11:00 12:30 Lessons learned Myanmar 12:30 13:30 Lunch 13:30 14:15 Presentation & Questions: Emergency Telecoms Cluster 14:15 15:15 Brief on-going projects update 15:00 15:30 Coffee break 15:30 17:30 Presentation and next step of the Logistics Operations Guide Day 2 4 th October 09:00 09:30 Cluster Approach Evaluation II 09:30 10:30 LRT / training future 10:30 10:45 Coffee break 10:45 12:00 UNJLC / Logistics Cluster Support Cell; Next Steps 12:00 12:30 Closing session and lunch 1

2 Global Logistics Cluster Meeting, Brindisi, 3 rd 4 th Oct 2008 Meeting Summary and Follow-up Actions Day 1 - Friday, 03 rd October 2008 Introduction to HELP / CILT Presentation by Dave Luddington, Michael Whiting from HELP/CILT and Bernard Auton, Chairman HELP/CILT HELP/CILT presented their project to participants, namely a Logistics Needs Assessment Template (HELPNAT) The template is intended to be available to NGOs and other interested organisations. It is a tool that may be shared to support the efficient gathering and dissemination of logistics information needed for responding to emergencies in the first hours / days from the outset of the emergency. HELP/CILT requested closer collaboration with the Global Logistics cluster in order to ensure that the template as well as other resources of CILT International may support the work of the cluster. Presentation by David Fisher, IFRC IFRC Introduction to the IDRL David Fisher introduced the Guidelines for the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance to participants. The use of the Guidelines when negotiating with governments was the key to the presentation, including on how the cluster may utilise them. IDRL seeks to reduce human vulnerability by promoting legal preparedness for disasters through advocacy, technical assistance, training and research. GLCSC to consider using the IDRL in LRT training in the future and to disseminate information to logistics cluster stakeholders 2

3 Avian Human Influenza Humanitarian Logistics Pandemic Preparedness and Response Training. Presentation on Pandemic Logistics Learning Exercise by the Logistics Development Unit, WFP. Presentation by Bernard Chomilier, Head of WFP Logistics Development Unit The training initiative was presented as an inter agency training organised by WFP with the technical support of WHO. The goal of the session was to raise awareness on the matter, to seek interest from agencies/ngos, but also to explain that this pilot will be used to improve and/or develop logistics procedures in pandemic situation. Thus, the necessity to have experienced logisticians from various organisations allowing professional and achievable outputs / outcomes was emphasized Objectives: Prepare participants through a practical logistics field simulation training and exercise, under pandemic conditions. Identify opportunities for improvement of logistics operations in a pandemic environment Coordination: WFP, WHO and Mercy Malaysia Cooperation with Local Authorities Pilot training planned for November 2008 Location: Kuala Lumpur, Kaula Kubu Baru, Subang Target: train 21 participants (UN & Non UN) for pandemic scenario Organisations to provide candidates to the training Lessons learned from Myanmar Facilitator: Jean Claude Cheseaux of ICRC; Presentations by Rachida Abdelli of Oxfam (seconded to the Logs Cluster in Myanmar); and Mahfoud Bouhembel (UNICEF staff Global Cell, deployed to Myanmar) s An outline of the context of the Myanmar response, its unique nature and subsequent shaping of the operation were presented. Following this the framework and methodology of the lessons learnt exercise were presented to participants. Based on working groups, the stakeholders came up with the following recommendations and action points: Mainstreaming (Education, Policy sharing) The Support Cell to provide communications material to Global Participants to help them with communicating to / educating field colleagues on cluster approach/log. Cluster, Including relationship and rules of engagement with the logistics cluster. Develop / Address the issue related to non recommended supplies shipped to emergency theatres (e.g. infant milk, religious items or std relief items that may not be recommended for general distribution in a specific context; e.g. tents in Myanmar). Logistics Cluster internal support systems 3

4 Develop general SOPs clarifying processes, relationship, reporting lines within the cluster and between the cluster and UNHAS, HQ and regional bureau. Although documents such as ConOps and SOPs (related to a specific operation) are published on the Log. Cluster website, it is necessary to disseminate it more actively and more widely to ensure awareness. Through, for instance, Specific education sessions at the start of an operation. Generic docs could be linked to point 1. Similarly, role of and rules of engagement with the private sector should be clearly developed and widely communicated. Information sharing platform Information/Report Manager confirmed necessary from day 1 According to target audience, split information products (through probably a two subscription mailing lists system ) between; Technical (logisticians) and General public. Cluster to inform audience of the existence of the different mailing lists Communicate/train partners more on user documents such as CMRs. Improve customer service related to CMRs Greater involvement of OCHA and HC on the communication of the CLUSTER EXIT strategy to partners Improve information sharing on pipeline and cargo between agencies and NGOs at HQ /GLCS level to support the Cluster in the field. A standardised toolkit should be available for the Cluster staff and the Cluster participants/users (priority) [Obvious link to The LOG. See page 5 and 6] Light website (low connectivity) is needed Improve trainings in IM Engagement with Humanitarian Community (outside of the Logistics Cluster) Strengthen links with national/regional entities especially with regards to preparedness / contingency planning Develop/increase dissemination of information for public on needs Improve overall logistics coordination (inter-cluster) by an active presence in other global cluster cells. Operations / Scope of Services CONOPS + OPS-PLANS should reflect time sensitive / multimodal options, and assumptions. Standardized products should be developed on how to access services; transport, warehousing, etc. To meet the common least denominator Pre-designed TORs and scope of work for secondees. This should allow secondees to focus themselves and help cutting the red tape pertaining to working in a new environment/organisation. LRT team composition should include appropriate mix of skills / competencies (air transport, shipping, etc). Scope of services (within a logistics cluster environment) relates to knowledge and sensitization of the approach. Presentation by the Emergency Telecoms. Cluster s Emergency Telecommunications Cluster at global level consists of OCHA as the process owner and WFP and UNICEF as providers of security and data telecommunications services, respectively. The above model has never been applied in the field though. Field cluster leadership is either taken by WFP or UNICEF or it is shared by both. Emergency Telecommunications Cluster, one of the two being service provision oriented, delivers telcommunications backbone services to UN agencies, NGOs and all other humanitarian partners. WFP ICT in the past two years has built extensive staffing and equipment surge capacity, utilizing the two cluster appeals, which gives it a unique ability to respond to emergencies in a fast and effective way. 4

5 Brief on ongoing projects update: I.A. LCAs UNSDIT CIG MedLog s MedLog: This initiative came from the October 2007 Logistics Cluster meeting held in Copenhagen. The aim is to share where we are, what was done so far and if it was in line with expectations. The Pilot Project launch is scheduled for June A request was put forward to each organisation to internally inform and promote the training and come back to the project focal point (christine.chomilier@wfp.org) with the estimated number of potential candidates. Update on Logistics Information related activities at global level: Websites: The visibility of the Logistics Cluster website got a real increase with the Myanmar operation, showing a transfer of website use vis-a-vis the UNJLC website. JST: Transit tool, knowing that it is not a perfect one despite the regular amendments done based on the past operations. However, the ease of use and the data reporting capability of this tool remains an advantage compared to spreadsheets. Customs / CIG: launched in August 2008, several organisations within the UN, the NGOs and the Red Cross movement contributed with information to allow UNJLC to complete 44 countries with the support of a TNT secondee. The CIG has been largely shared within IFRC, WFP, World Vision, UNICEF with field logisticians over the globe. GIS / UNSDI-T: As mentioned in the presentation, geo-data from this transport geo-spatial standard tool which enables the dissemination of logistics infrastructure information through several media: classic printed or electronic (PDF) maps, on/off line dynamic maps using Google Map and Google Earth. LCAs Among the 27 IA-LCA selected countries listed to be finished by end 2008, we have; 4 published, 3 are done to be cleared/cleaned then published, 7 are currently ongoing, 8 are organised but need confirmation of departure dates of the staff members and, 5 are pending to be organised. LCA: Actions and follow-up One challenge is to internalise the concept within organisations and ensure continuity at lower costs. Organisations such as UNICEF are keen in using the format being piloted to complement the logistics assessment they do. Jump the step between a paper- based-product to a web based and dynamic database (taking into account access and security). Link the LCAs with preparedness activities such as IASC contingency planning exercises. Presentation and next steps of the Logistics Operations Guide Session facilitated by Hetty van Doorn, Adeline Renat and Jakob Agersnap As a follow-up on the Global Logistics Cluster meeting (Copenhagen) endorsed plan to create a common humanitarian logistics guide and the interactive discussion on this topic in the Global Logistics Cluster meeting in Geneva in March, WFPs Logistics Development Unit presented a suggested approach - on behalf of the project team that exists of members the Global Logistics Cluster Support Cell and WFPs Logistics Development Unit (LDU). Highlights It is the intention to have four phases for development: 5

6 a) Definition, templates and tools. This phase focuses on providing humanitarian logisticians with examples and practical tools to reduce time of cooperative adaptation in emergencies and harmonising procedures and processes. b) Development of an interactive tool, to download and upload information. This interactive tool will enable the project team to analyse the needs and gaps of the user and therefore provide direction for phase 3 and 4. c) Best practices d) E-learning The above modular approach was suggested to first focus on most practical elements, to have progressive content management and cost and to learn while developing. It was agreed that a reference group would be formed to support the selection/validation of content received through the interactive tool for the LOG. The following agencies/ngos volunteered to contribute: Mercy, Solidaritas, ACF, Merlin, Care, WVI, IFRC, ICRC (after January), UNICEF, WHO and UNHCR. Action points for the project team include refine project planning & timing; develop a proposal for involvement (topics and roles) of the volunteers in the reference group; Work further on the projcet behind the scenes of the LRT (5 12 October 2008) Saturday, 4 th October 2008 Cluster Approach: Evaluation 2 Presentation and status update; by Rebecca Richards An outline of the progress of the 2007 Evaluation, including key recommendations that affect the work of the logistics cluster was shared with partners. Evolution of recommendations of the 2007 Evaluation, against the evolving policy framework of the cluster approach and humanitarian reform, including treatment of Provider of Last Resort, was analysed and discussed with participants. Modalities of the up-coming Phase II were presented, with the purpose of soliciting greater engagement and involvement of logistics cluster partners in the process. Understanding of the process of the evaluation lead to comments from partners, in particular WFP and UNHCR that the assessment of logistics as a cluster should be dealt differently to that of other clusters. In this vein the continuation of the involvement of partners in the formation of the methodology and planning for Phase II was endorsed. The area of financing of the cluster at the field level arose, in particular the payment of staff whose major contribution was that of coordination. Should it be the Global Cluster? OCHA in country? Or some other source? Upon clarification it was clear that better communication on policy issues to the field is required. Participants were interested in the issue of building national capacity in the field of logistics, especially given that the Evaluation would assess their progress in this regard. Increased information sharing with cluster partners on issues such as the Evaluation is required. Cluster Support Cell to provide regular updates on progress and policy discussions at the IASC Level On-line discussions as per the last contribution to the formation of the Evaluation, to be facilitated by the Cell as appropriate. 6

7 Working session: LRT training in the future Plenary discussion, introduced by Bernard Chomilier, followed the video presentation of the LRT Training. Following the video the purpose of the session, namely the decision on whether to continue the LRT, expand it, or change it, was outlined. Specific issues included whether to increase the number of trainings run per year, and whether to include other clusters into the training, e.g WASH and Shelter. Linkage between training and deployment: How many people were trained that were deployed? In 2007: 2, In 2008: 5 to emergencies & 5 working on LCAs. Merlin informed that many orgs have insufficient resources for deployment so guaranteeing availability is tricky. That said they remain committed and engaged with the cluster. The cost in terms of deploying personnel to the LRT or to the logs cluster is not the issue (as the logs cluster typically reimburses the seconding NGO). The issue is that many NGOs do not have the capacity or redundancy to second. UNICEF stated that regardless of deployment the training is beneficial, especially for mutual education amongst partners and getting to know each other. By attending the training, either as a facilitator or an attendee, respective organisations benefit from the training, especially as it eases engagement with the cluster during operations. UNHCR raised option of a sign off on release-ability of people? For example, after completing the training for a certain period available for deployment. IFRC mentions that in emergencies it is difficult to find coordinators for own operation, but it is vital that the people deployed know how the logistics cluster works. CARE raised the important question what could be done to make it easier to deploy people? WHO states that more commitment from organisations was required. As personnel are trained at no cost for participating humanitarian organisations, this should then lead to a commitment for deployment. For instance, an agreed percentage of staff should always be ready to be deployed. Involvement of other clusters: UNHCR voiced support for this option, although expressed concern as to whether it was actually feasible, also contributing to their trainings. UNICEF asked whether WFP would consider running these trainings for other organisations. WFP informed of the building of a Training Centre of Excellence that would be made available to the humanitarian community. Target Audience: One LRT trained participant suggested the inclusion of private sector, with pay-as-you participate conditions. In addition UNICEF said it would benefit from inviting government Disaster Management Teams to training to improve their understanding how the cluster works, what to expect, how to access support etc. WFP suggested following be included, Standby partners (UNHCR, UNICEF, WHO and WFP have many common SBPs); Private sector (the LET group TNT, Agility and UPS who have signed an agreement with the logs cluster); Emergency Teams from donors (e.g. DFID CHASE OT / USAID DART etc.) IFRC raised a word of warning that with the inclusion of too many actors we could dilute the spirit and purpose of the training, agreeing that there is a need to broaden the target audience and perhaps scope of the LRT Training but not to the detriment of the material or output. UNICEF suggested that LRT trained personnel should become a community of practise, where they would work on issues such as reference groups (Logs Ops Guide, LCA s etc) and keep the engagement/team spirit alive. Cost: CRS raised the questions as to why the Logs Cluster covers the cost for the training in its entirety and suggested that contribution from the training budgets of participating organisation. On the other hand Merlin informed that were the current system to change some NGOs would struggle to justify the costs as training related budgets are very tight. 7

8 The LRT Training should continue. Attendance should broaden to include private sector, national authorities etc. Possible alignment with similar trainings required. UNJLC and the Logistics Cluster Support Cell - Next steps This session followed a presentation by Matthew Hollingworth, Head, GLCSC. The presentation highlighted a number of key issues: The UNJLC and the Logistics Cluster (as one part of the Cluster Approach) were both established / provided with a mandate through a decision of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee, the former dated 2002, the latter in Based on the tasking set at the last GLC Meeting in April, the GLCSC & the UNJLC carried out an inventory of their respective functions and activities. This exercise identified critical areas of synergy and came up with a proposal for a new team integrating the GLCSC and UNJLC core units. The new unit would maintain the same level of service provided by both the GCLSC and the UNJLC. The proposed team includes a minimum of 15 core personnel all deployable as & when required. There are three key pillars within the unit, namely, Operations Support incorporating both preparedness and response activities, Information Management and Normative Guidance Concerning funding, this cell should include 9 personnel funded from WFP internal budget (covering previously WFP and UNJLC functions), 2 loaned personnel to represent other UN agencies and 4 seconded personnel to represent the NGO logistics community. The latter would be funded through an appeal to be made directly to the donor community. Funding: IFRC asked if there was a date set for the merger. WFP informed that depending on practicalities 1 January 2009 is the current working date. IFRC commended the UNJLC on the work they have achieved since 2002 and recognised work that GLCSC & UNJLC personnel had undertaken in order to present a practical and equitable merger. GLCSC & UNJLC informed that it was now impossible, financially, to run two teams and that a merger was the only solution to ensure the maintenance of GLCSC & UNJLC services. GLCSC noted that the advantage of the proposal would be that when appealing to donors the logistics cluster would only request additional funds to retain the NGO posts as WFP senior management have stated strong support to maintain the logistics cluster services through the provision of staff-costs. IASC: OCHA raised the question of the UNJLC as a common service of the IASC, similar to that of Aviation. WFP clarified that the body providing the mandate to the Common Air Services (UNHAS) is not the IASC, but rather the High Level Committee on Management and therefore fell within a different policy framework to that of the UNJLC. WFP noted that a similar context to that of the JLC/Cluster merger was that of Emergency telecoms, where the Inter-Agency Emergency Telecommunications was logically folded into the Cluster. Who would the Cell report to? CRS asked to whom the Global Cell would report. Participants were informed that this would be the Director of WFP Logistics as Global Cluster Lead (as the IASC nominated WFP as cluster lead agency for logistics). 8

9 OCHA questioned this arrangement given that UNJLC was previously reporting to the IASC directly. WFP clarified that according to the latest IASC guidance the Global Cluster Leads also reports to the IASC and to the ERC and field clusters report through an IASC/Humanitarian Country Team and Humanitarian Coordinator to the ERC. Structure: GLCSC informed participants that the presentation was a proposal based on the tasking set at the previous meeting and that the GLCSC and UNJLC would like feedback from cluster participants. Furthermore, it was clarified that the option of retaining both a GLCSC and a UNJLC core unit had been discussed previously with the conclusion that operationally and financially this was not a viable solution. It was also noted that a way forward should be clear prior to the Cluster Lead & Donor meeting on 22nd October in order to solicit resource requirements for 2009 and beyond. Following a question as to whether the organigramme would change in the future, GLCSC informed that it may have to be expanded and reviewed depending on new projects as well as operational exigencies, explaining that the current framework is based on the core number of people needed to follow up on the requirements partners shared with the GLCSC and UNJLC. Care secondee to the cluster informed that internally, within the cell, there was no difference between UN and non UN staff. One LRT trained participant raised concern about current overwhelming duties of M. Hollingworth in terms of ALITE and Logistics Cluster responsibilities. WFP informed that the current Deputy of ALITE, J. Pilgrim, would take over all functional responsibilities of ALITE. GLCSC informed that 9 posts of the cell would be funded by WFP. Moreover it was noted that all staff within the unit would be deployable, not all at one time, but that rotations would be based on the scenario of three large simultaneous emergencies. JLC informed that some staff would cover core projects, ensure that deadlines are met and that continuous support is provided to staff in the field. Representation of NGOs: Merlin raised concern about the balance of NGO staff versus UN staff within the unit and which NGOs would hold positions within the unit. Merlin also raised concern for those NGOs who were not present to voice their opinions. GLCSC stated that it would not be appropriate for WFP or other UN agencies to say who should represent the NGO community within the Unit, but that this should be a collective decision taken by the NGOs themselves. A possible rotation system was offered for consideration. ACF suggested that a discussion take place amongst the NGOs on the periphery of the meeting to discuss representation / secondment to the Unit/Cell. UNJLC proposed that a single NGO may be used to represent more than one NGO, stressing the need for a creative solution. CRS requested information regarding the function of NGO posts and related funding. WFP informed that it is hoped that one key area of the unit would be run by a NGO secondee. World Vision requested that a leadership role for NGOs be considered. Concerning the process for filling the 4 NGO slots, GCLSC informed that the criteria for the positions is currently under development, after which candidates would be considered. GCLSC requested all partners to provide CVs and notify appropriate candidates, informing that the team would be looking to get the right profiles represented in the cell. Merlin questioned that the current balance of 4 NGOs versus more UN, would become further skewed upon augmentation in an emergency, with the NGO representation possible decreasing. GCLSC clarified that additional staff would be taken on board based on requirements and skill set, and not based on organisation. Moreover the GCLSC was clear that it viewed all staff as humanitarian logisticians rather than UN and non UN, focusing on providing quality support to the field. CRS also informed participants that an NGO position in the UNHRD is under consideration, informing that they would approach donors on behalf of four other NGOs. ACF informed participants that their one year secondment to the cluster cell has been very positive, adding value to their own operations. Moreover the organisational chart of the 9

10 merger seems logical and suggested that NGOs get together after the meeting to discuss the expectations and mandate of secondees into the cluster. Planning and Next Steps: UNICEF requested clarification on the next steps. UNJLC informed that two months remaining of the year would be required to get practically organised. UNFPA suggested that the CVs of possible JLC staff who might be made available following the merge should be circulated to enable the community to utilise experienced staff. Opinions/Decisions: UNICEF stated that knowledge of the proposed merger had been shared well in advance of the meeting and confirmed their full support for moving ahead, while commending the work of the UNJLC core cell over the past years. UNHCR stated support for the merger, with the caveat that the Logs Cluster should not overstep its role [which is to augment and supplement organisations logistics capacity]. WHO also stated it s endorsement of the proposal. ACF supported the decision and requested information on the process and next steps to follow. CRS agreed with the proposal, stating that it was now required in order to keep things going. CRS thanks UNJLC and GLCSC for coming up with the plan. CRS also requested the continuing UN & non-un balance in the composition of the GLCSC to avoid impression of UN dominance. Merlin voiced its concern that NGOs should be represented in the GLCSC and informed that as long as there was a balance [between UN and NGOs] and that funding would be found for the NGO positions, then Merlin was in favour of the proposal. Care, supportive of the merger, with only a concern about maintaining the level of service. All in all, participants present at the meeting, found the merger a logical and natural evolution that will avoid a lot of confusion on the side of the cluster stakeholders as long as the level of service is maintained. Summary Outcome and Actions Broad agreement for the merger was reached by all participants, with the following caveats: - The logistics cluster maintains its current parameters of work(tors) - That the current proposed slots for NGOs would be funded and filled. Worthy of note, was that all representatives of NGOs and UN agencies were individually asked whether they were in favour of the proposed merger. Practically, by Jan the integrated UNJLC & GLCSC should work as one team. The GLCSC will disseminate profile descriptions and criteria in order to facilitate the selection of logisticians for the GLCSC. NGO representatives would organise themselves to discuss the methodology required to ensure geographic and programmatic focus is represented in the Cell. The GLCSC will approach donors bilaterally for funding of NGO posts and will keep all partners informed of progress. 10