Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
IPC Engaging Stakeholders and
Key Decision MakersFrom Global Perspectives to
Country ImplementationIPC Global Partners:
With the support of:
What IPC is and What it is Not
IPC is: A set of protocols to
classify the severity and causes of food insecurity and provide actionable knowledge by consolidating wide-ranging evidence
A process for building technical consensus among key stakeholders
IPC is not: A methodology to
measure food insecurity – IPC brings together different methodologies
A tool for data collection – but it can inform data collection and identify gaps
An information system – but an input to the system
Response analysis – but it is the starting point and can inform response analysis
ACUTE FOOD INSECURITY
Acute and Chronic IPC Classification
All food insecurity found at a specific point in time of a severity that threatens lives and/or livelihoods regardless of the causes, context or duration.
To inform short term strategic objectives (food/cash aid, asset redistribution, basic needs support, saving lives etc.)
To inform medium and long term strategic objectives (structural development, agricultural and rural development policies, strengthen livelihood strategies and adaptive capacity, etc.)
CHRONIC FOOD INSECURITY
Persistent food insecurity due to structural causes.
Relevance of the IPC Analysis for FSN Decision Making
The IPC Analysis answers to six core key questions on Acute and Chronic Food Insecurity:
1. How severe is the food security situation?2. Where are the areas that are food insecure?3. How many people are food insecure?4. Who are the food insecure?5. When will people be food insecure?6. Why are people food insecure?
4
Situation Analysis(current/
projected)
MonitoringEvaluation
Response Implementati
on
Response Planning
Response Analysis
The Analysis – Response Continuum
IPC within…
IPC Acute and Chronic Situation
Analysis
IPC and the FSN Policy Process
Why? Decision Makers have new information needs
• Need information to inform resilience and programming to break the cycle of food insecurity
• Need both information to inform Short-Term Emergency Programming that is linked to Medium to Longer Programming & Policy
• Need evidence and information to inform integrated food and nutrition security programming
• Multi-Sector and multi-dimensional response is needed to meet the challenges of food insecurity
• Focus on both Acute and Chronic Food Insecurity, including four dimensions of food insecurity (availability, access, utilization, stability)
Successful IPC Analysis: One pilot of IPC Acute Analysis (2012); Two IPC Acute analysis (2013, 2014); Tested IPC Chronic tool (2012) ;
MVAC Presented IPC Analysis (2013) Results: at SADC Annual Dissemination Meeting and with PS of MoFEPD;
NEW Information Needs of Decision Makers
IPC Overall Objective and focus areas
IPC Four Outcomes:1. Institutionalization of IPC within Global, Regional and
National structures, frameworks and strategiess.2. Professionalized IPC food security analysis training &
capacity. 3. High quality IPC Acute and Chronic Food Insecurity products.4. Improved access to IPC analysis for use in emergency and
development policy and programming. 8
Decision maker’s at the global, regional and national level use the IPC for decision making and this is providing the evidence and standards for better decisions that improve emergency and development policy and programming
IPC Global Coverage and Figures
• 40 Countries engaged in IPC Activities: in Africa, Asia, Latin America and Near East
• 20 countries leading IPC analysis in Africa, Asia and Near East
• Support to CH in 16 Countries in West Africa
• More than 1,600 people trained in IPC since 2012 (32% women)
How Does IPC Engage Stakeholders and Decision
Makers?
• Global Partners: Strategic Direction, Support Implement & Use IPCIPC Global Steering Committee Partners:
IPC Engages Partners as Stakeholders & Decision Makersat the Global, Regional and Country Level
• Resource Partners: Strategic Direction, Guide Implementation & Use IPC
• Leading Technical Agencies & Experts guide IPC tool development
• Country Level Partners Own, Implement & Use IPC Example: Philippines Country IPC Partners:
rent Resource Partners:
New partners in technical development:
Benefited from Other Partner Support:
• IPC Global Steering Committee (IPC GSC) with 12 members
• IPC Global Technical Advisory Board (IPC TAG)
– With Global Technical Working Groups (Food Security & Nutrition)
• IPC Global Support Unit (IPC GSU)
Reports to IPC GSC and Supports Implementation of IPC Globally
Linked to Regional and National levels through the IPC Regional Coordinators seconded in each region
• IPC Regional Steering Committee’s /IPC Regional Technical Working Groups supported by IPC Regional Coordinators
• IPC Country Steering Committee’s/ IPCCountry Technical Working Groups Linked and Supported by IPC Regional Working Groups and IPC Regional Coordinators
IPC Global-Regional-Country Governance Structures
Exte
rnal
/Tec
hnic
al S
uppo
rt
IPC Global Support Unit (GSU)
IPC Global Steering CommitteeACF, CARE, CILSS, FAO, FEWS NET, FSC, EC-JRC, Oxfam, Save the Children, SICA, and WFP
IPC Global Programme Manager
IPC Technical Advisory Group (TAG)
(ACF, CARE, CILSS, FAO, FEWS NET, EC-JRC, Oxfam, Save the Children, SICA-PRESANCA, USAID-FANTA and WFP)
Operations & Communications
Operations Officer
Admin. Assistants
Communication Officer
Updated September 2014 Communication Assistant
IPC Chronic Working Group(FAO, FEWS NET, EC-JRC, CARE, Oxfam, Save
the Children, SICA-PRESANCA, USAID-FANTA, WFP and the World Bank)
IPC Nutrition Working Group(CDC, CILSS, EC-JRC, FAO, FEWS NET, FSNAU,
Global Nutrition Cluster, Institute of Child Health/University of London, Save the
Children, SICA-INCAP, SICA-PRESANCA, Standing Committee on Nutrition (WHO),
Unicef, USAID- FANTA, WHO, WFP and the World Bank)
ASIAIPC Regional Coordinator
IPC Food Security Officers Regional IPC Steering
Committee
IPC Quality and Compliance Officer
(WFP)
IPC Nutrition Officer
IPC Impact Evaluation
Officer
ISS Development Officer
IPC Governance Structure and Partner Network
EAST AND CENTRAL AFRICA FSNWG IPC Steering
Committee
LATIN AMERICA & CARIBBEAN IPC Regional Coordinator
IPC Regional Technical Working Group
NORTH AFRICA, NEAR EAST and OTHER COUNTRIES
Emerging IPC countries and interest
IPC Regional Coordinator
IPC Regional and Country Network
COUNTRY IPC Steering
Committee’s/TECHNICAL WORKING GROUPS(TWG)
IPC Global Emergency Review Committee
SOUTHERN AFRICASADC IPC Regional
Coordinator
SADC RVAC IPC Working Group
WEST AFRICA
IPC-CH Regional Advisor
CILSS CH Technical Committee
Senior Nutrition Advisor (UNICEF)
Senior Impact/Evaluation
Advisor (TANGO Inter.)
Direct Supervision
Partner Collaboration
Technical Support
IPC Country Support Officer
Technical Advisors (EC-JRC)
IPC Multi-stakeholder Process at Country Level
1. At country level, IPC aims at being used in decision making processes and thus informing the formulation of FSN-related policies and strategies;
2. Various and relevant stakeholders are engaged in all IPC activities and processes – institutionalization; technical development; implementation of analysis; use of IPC findings.
3. IPC analysis are planned and conducted to support the gov’t and stakeholder policies/strategies formulation;
4. IPC is demand driven by Countries; IPC aims to be government owned and led multi-partner processes.
14
IPC use in FSN Policy and Programming
- Food Planning and Monitoring Unit (FPMU) in Bangladesh uses IPC to inform Country Investment Plan (CIP)
- Ministry of Agriculture in Nepal uses IPC/NeKSAP information to guide Agricultural Development Strategy (ADS)
- National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) in Philippines states its intention to use IPC to inform Philippine Development Plan (PDP)
- IPC used by Kenya Food Security Steering Group (KFSSG) to guide national and district level plans
- South Sudan officially adopted IPC to as the situational analysis tool to inform food security programming and response.
15
Governments
Resource Partners- DFID referred to IPC information in developing 3,
7 and 10 year strategies in Bangladesh
- IPC informed the EU/ECHO Humanitarian Implementation Plan (2014) in Haiti
- Multiple resource partners funding Humanitarian Appeals in Eastern and Central Africa (Somalia, South Sudan, Kenya, DRC)
- USAID is using IPC for early warning and situational analysis to inform strategies, prioritization and resource allocation
IPC use in FSN Policy and Programming
UN Agencies
- In South Sudan, WFP and FAO used IPC to allocate resources for humanitarian response
- FAO used IPC information in funding proposals to EU and DFID for activities in Bangladesh
- WFP used IPC information to target Cash-for-Work activities in Haiti
- WFP used IPC information for targeting PRRO in Mindanao (Philippines) following Typhoon Bopha (2013)
IPC use in FSN Policy and Programming
NGOs
- NGO consortium (SomReP) using IPC as a basis for designing resilience program in Somalia
- IPC informed Joint Needs Assessment (JNA) and guided program targeting by ACF and Oxfam in Bangladesh
- Save the Children, Practical Action use IPC/NeKSAP information to target interventions in Nepal
- Through TWGs NGOs more effectively linked with government counterparts
IPC use in FSN Policy and Programming
FSN Forum & IPC Synergies
1. Support IPC technical development multi-experts/stakeholders discussions
2. Support Lesson Leaning exercises on IPC implementation and/or specific processes
3. Help with the regional/country dissemination of the IPC analysis and thus the use of the IPC findings to inform FSN policy and programming.
19
