For our fourth discussion, we’d like to hear what are your expectations of the global tools for for future Movement responses in terms of humanitarian service delivery?
Please leave a comment (click on “Leave a reply”) to contribute to the conversation!
Red Cross Red Crescent Global Response Tools Review 
Delivery? I’d say from NS point it is need to be quick and also release funds quicker to NS; in the future is it going to be only food and materials, cash schemes are coming up as possible alternative.
LikeLike
we are focusing on our NDRT and developing that; i think we should see how it could be further supported .
LikeLike
Protection is not covered by the current tools and will be one of the major issues in the future.
PS is currently fostered by many NS, more efforts shlould be donne to cover this in emergencies.
In emergencies are requested other kind of non traditional staff profiles as: gender especilists, livelihoods, etc.
LikeLike
NS staff a must be aware of the tools and how to request their use. There needs to be an easier way to initiate the tools. If situation is declared emergency (by government or UN for example), then we should have access virtually automatic.
LikeLike
A lot of the services delivered in emergencies could not really be defined as services. Our NS teams and our global tools focus a lot on delivering goods (and indeed we even count the goods ie how many shelter kits went out) instead of focusing on delivering services. Members of the global tools teams are not up to any international standards on their implementation of protection, gender, diversity, cash delivery or basic psychological first aid and child protection. We could have a HUGE added value by focusing our global tools on issues like gender based violence, child protection and other protection (integrated livelihoods) returns however we rely heavily on this idea of relief/household and non use of quality data or “value add”. It is a shame as we have some of the best protection, gender, inclusion assets in the humanitarian world, and we have not come together to create an enabling environment (there is active pushback at times against those who have these skills or who advocate for these improvements) and we all need to work much more genuinely with each other about the quality that should be expected from our global tools. Through a small focus on increasing protection-focused deployments, we could achieve a lot, and through a focus on data capture, we could demonstrate a lot. We need to resource these things.
LikeLike
Templates should make it possible to budget for gender/inclusion/protection delegates/local staff, and an activities budget for their work.
LikeLike
External co-ordination should include coordination with GBV response clusters (protection cluster, gender taskforce, gbv sub-cluster) and ensure that this includes women’s organizations and CSO/NGOs that work with marginalized or specific social groups within society.
LikeLike
Humanitarian service delivery must be designed and planned with participation of communities, in order to accurate in meeting needs and appropriate to local contexts. This of course is a challenge in an emergency situation but it is not an excuse not to be done. Lack of consultation and involvement of communities will only lead to programmatic errors, wastage and possibly do more harm than good.
Humanitarian action must also be evaluated from the eyes of those who received humanitarian assistance. Monitoring, reporting and evaluation cannot be done according to our own parameters and definitions of what we want to see, and what we think was successful. How can we say an operations went well if we do not even ask the people who received and used our aid?
LikeLike
* need to further disseminate, and operationalize “Principles & Rules” to help foster stronger humanitarian service delivery.
LikeLike