Cluster Objectives
1
Enhanced coordination for a more effective humanitarian response, relevant to the operational context and based on humanitarian principles
Contributes to
- check_circleStrategic Objective 1
2
Integrated and credible contextual analysis and evidence-based advocacy
Contributes to
- check_circleStrategic Objective 1
- check_circleStrategic Objective 2
- check_circleStrategic Objective 3
3
Accountability towards affected populations
Contributes to
- check_circleStrategic Objective 1
- check_circleStrategic Objective 2
- check_circleStrategic Objective 3
Indicator overview
17-Sep-2024
Indicator overview
Indicator | Unit | In need | Target | Targeted (%) | Measure |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CO1: Enhanced coordination for a more effective humanitarian response, relevant to the operational context and based on humanitarian principles | |||||
IN1: # Semi-annual reviews of cluster and ICC/HCT performance
|
|
2
|
2
|
100%
|
No data
|
IN2: # dashboards on humanitarian response produced by UNOCHA and shared with the humanitarian community
|
Products
|
4
|
4
|
100%
|
No data
|
IN3: # of people sensitized on humanitarian principles and CMCoord guidance manuals organized
|
People
|
No data
|
2,000
|
0%
|
No data
|
IN4: # of humanitarian partners trained on "do no harm, negotiation and mediation with armed groups"
|
Partners
|
300
|
200
|
66.7%
|
No data
|
IN5: % of projects funded by the humanitarian fund aligned with the HRP's strategic priorities
|
Projects
|
100
|
100
|
100%
|
No data
|
IN6: # of strengthened regional humanitarian coordination bodies at the regional level
|
|
12
|
12
|
100%
|
No data
|
IN7: # of mapping of funding with development donors produced
|
|
2
|
2
|
100%
|
No data
|
CO2: Integrated and credible contextual analysis and evidence-based advocacy | |||||
IN1: # of multisectoral assessments carried out in sub-prefectures with the most severe needs
|
Assessments
|
No data
|
No data
|
0%
|
No data
|
IN2: # of dashboards on humanitarian response produced by UNOCHA and shared with the humanitarian community
|
|
4
|
4
|
100%
|
No data
|
IN3: The overview of humanitarian needs produced from the data of evident assessments
|
|
2
|
2
|
100%
|
No data
|
IN4: Number of public information products produced and published
|
Products
|
No data
|
300
|
0%
|
No data
|
CO3: Accountability towards affected populations | |||||
IN1: Adoption of the accountability framework to the affected population by the HCT
|
|
1
|
1
|
100%
|
No data
|
IN2: Adoption of the HCT protection strategy and action plan
|
|
1
|
1
|
100%
|
No data
|
IN3: # humanitarian partners trained on prevention and response to GBV and cross-cutting protection
|
Partners
|
120
|
80
|
66.7%
|
No data
|
IN4: % of humanitarian fund projects that have integrated the gender marker
|
Percentage
|
100
|
100
|
100%
|
No data
|
IN5: % of funds allocated to low and medium risk partners
|
Percentage
|
No data
|
90
|
0%
|
No data
|
IN6: % of HF-funded organizations that have incorporated the PSEA into the code of conduct signed by staff
|
Percentage
|
100
|
100
|
100%
|
No data
|
IN7: % of projects financed by the HF that integrate accountability to the affected populations and consultation of beneficiaries in all monitoring bodies
|
|
100
|
100
|
100%
|
No data
|