IASC Sub-working Group on Gender Annual Meeting 13-14 October - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

IASC Sub-working Group on Gender Annual Meeting 13-14 October 2011

GenCap  IASC Project established in 2007 as a response to evaluations concluding gender keeps falling through the cracks  57 deployments to 29 humanitarian situations by October p y y 2011  Inter-Agency mandate and role: mostly hosted by OCHA and UNFPA  Pragmatic and practical advice on how to mainstream gender in humanitarian action  How to ensure that women girls boys and men access and  How to ensure that women, girls, boys and men access and benefit from humanitarian aid and services? People-centric approach to humanitarian action  Driving force behind getting cross-cutting issues on the agenda

GenCap Appeal 2011 p pp  170 months deployments for gender mainstreaming p y g g  Establishment of GBV window of GenCap Roster  30 months of GBV deployments p y  Support to gender marker initiative  Total appeal: USD 4.3 mill

GenCap Status 3Q 2011 p  Currently, USD 3.25 mill (of USD 4.3 mill) received for 2011 y, ( )  Australia, Canada, Norway, Sweden  Deployment months for 2011 estimated to 135 (of 200)  GenCap Support Unit is part of OCHA Core Budget, merged with ProCap Support Unit

GenCap Status 3Q 2011 (cont’d) p ( )  16 deployments p y 2 completed: Chad, Niger  15 ongoing:   CDI, DRC, Ethiopia, Liberia, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Yemen CDI DRC E hi i Lib i S li S h S d S d Zi b b Y  1 Roaming GenCap  2 Global Clusters: Geneva and Rome  2 regional, preparedness-focused: Pacific and Southern Africa  Gender marker support  Establishment of GBV window and recruitment of Gender and GBV experts completed summer 2011  GBV deployments to commence – in consultation with GBV AoR

External Review in 2011  External, independent review taking place August –  External, independent review taking place August December 2011 (GenCap and ProCap)  Managed by OCHA Evaluation and Guidance  Managed by OCHA Evaluation and Guidance Section in New York  Provide clear recommendations for continuation for  Provide clear recommendations for continuation for projects, and if so, in what shape and form

Status Review  What are we doing well? Since mid-2007: 53 deployments to 30 countries, increased activity level  Deployments longer to most cluster countries (26 of 28 HC countries) Deployments longer, to most cluster countries (26 of 28 HC countries)   Retention of experienced GenCap Advisers on roster  Gender marker as effective tool  Gender E-learning helping the capacity building in field  Cross-cutting issues placed at Global Cluster Leads table - NATF  Cost sharing and country team buy in… Cost-sharing and country team buy-in…  Multi-year funding indications from several donors…   Challenges SADD  Gender capacity in humanitarian action: institutionally and persons  Accountability – who is responsible for gender? Accountability – who is responsible for gender?   Role of UN Women = ?. Who is responsible for coordination of gender? 

GenCap SC mtg 12 October p g  Discussions more than decisions – awaiting results from the external evaluation  More core-staff/ 1-year contracts  Continue longer deployments to selected ongoing,  Continue longer deployments to selected ongoing, humanitarian crisis  Continue support to Gender Marker  Increase focus on rapid response to new emergencies (two I f id t i (t roaming GenCaps?)  Review impact of regional, preparedness focused d deployments in early 2012 l i l 2012  Relationship SWG Gender and GenCap SC, GenCap as SWG operational arm

Questions and comments?

Impact of deployments p p y  Impact on programming p p g g  Impact on p institutionalization Impact on institutionalization Impact on programming 3 3 2 2 2 Average score Average score 1 1 0 0 1 (N=25) 2 (N=22) 3 (N=17) 4 (N=13) 5 (N=9) 6 (N=6) 7 (N=1) 1 (N=18) 2 (N=16) 3 (N=14) 4 (N=9) 5 (N=6) 6 (N=5) 7 (N=1) Scorecard number Scorecard number