the rapid assessment of the united nations trust fund … assessment of untfhs... · the rapid...

The Rap id Asse s sment o f

the Uni t ed Nat ions Trus t

Fund fo r Human

Secur i ty

Vo l u m e I - F i n a l R e p o r t M a y 1 1

M a y 2 0 1 3

R a p i d A s s e s s m e n t o f t h e U N T F H S - V o l u m e I - F i n a l R e p o r t

May 2013

i

© UNIVERSALIA

E x e c u t i v e O v e r v i e w

Introduction

This is a global and largely strategic assessment of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security that

was commissioned by the Advisory Board on Human Security in January 2013.

The Objectives of the RAPID ASSESSMENT were:

To assess the added value of the Human Security approach

To assess the impact of the Human Security approach (i.e., people-centered, context-specific,

comprehensive and multi-sectorial solutions that are reinforced through the protection and

empowerment framework)

To present the usefulness of UNTFHS projects in responding to unaddressed areas of human

security

To present lessons learned and to determine the added value of the Human Security approach to

situations where there are threats to Human Security.

These four themes constitute the framework of this Overview Report.

A Rapid Assessment differs from a formal program evaluation. While the two share many common

characteristics, several features are unique.

A rapid assessment is usually much more tightly focussed on a narrow set of policy related issues,

as opposed to the more broad approach which is inherent in formal program evaluation.

This Rapid Assessment has focussed largely on issues related to Relevance. These issues related to

Relevance are the core of the policy and programmatic challenges that face the UNTFHS.

In short, this Rapid Assessment represents a purpose built tool to address specific policy and program

challenges in a very timely and focussed manner.

The Table below highlights the key phases of the Rapid Assessment.

Inception January 2013 Development of an Inception Report

Research January and February 2013 Field missions to Uganda, Colombia, Uzbekistan and Mongolia plus desk top reviews of Congo, Vanuatu, and Madagascar

Reporting March - April 2013 Validation Workshops and drafting

Presentation May 2013 Presentation to this High Level Event

We adopted a set of evaluation-based methodologies to ensure the broadest possible coverage and the

greatest degree of data triangulation. Care had to be taken to ensure that our work was not simply a

compilation of country case studies, and to ensure that the methodologies selected were designed to allow

comparability and also to allow the elaboration of broadly relevant findings at the global level which affect

the Human Security approach as a whole and not highly country-specific findings.


ii

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Value Added


One of the key issues which underpinned the commissioning of this Rapid Assessment relates to the added

value of projects that have been supported by the UNTFHS and by extension, the added value of the

principles that underpin the Human Security approach within the context of individual actions. This notion

of “added value” however, is qualified to largely relate to changes in behaviors and attitudes of UN staff as

they have worked within the Human Security approach in comparison to more traditional approaches.

The elements of value adding, in relation to the design and delivery of UNTFHS-supported projects, largely

concentrate on the synergistic qualities of the project model itself. The most recent set of administrative

guidelines highlight the requirement for a participatory approach involving two or more UN agencies in

addressing an area of unfulfilled challenges to Human Security; in short, a programmatic gap. The evidence

points to the conclusion that supported projects have in fact filled these gaps; but more importantly is how

they have done so.

The requirement to work together, to plan together and to ensure an active voice of the affected peoples,

those whose security is at risk, has resulted in a new way of thinking about the interconnectivity of the

threats to Human Security and how traditional approaches cannot respond to multi-dimensional challenges.

There is clear evidence that the demonstration projects are resulting in a change of thinking among UN staff

at the field and country level about “whole of problem” solutions as opposed to simply “fixing” something.

Another dimension of the added value of the Human Security approach relates to how the people affected

participate. The current project model requires the active participation of potential beneficiaries, individuals

or their communities, in the design and delivery of a project. There is ample evidence to demonstrate the

fulfillment of this requirement and also to show that the affected populations, by being actively engaged as

participants, came to have a higher sense of their own worth and dignity. There was, in a number of

instances, strong evidence of local pride of ownership and local determination to expand from the project

basis into the community at large, for example in relation to micro-financing in Northern Uganda or

democratic outreach in Colombia. We also witnessed the positive value adding benefits of the

comprehensive, multi-sectorial, context-specific and people-centered approach which is the crux of the HS

approach.

The Usefulness

To present the usefulness of UNTFHS projects in addressing unaddressed areas of human security

If the theme of “added value” spoke largely in the context of UN organizations working together and the

benefits of doing so; then the theme of “usefulness” addresses the more programmatic issue of the extent to

which unforeseen needs or threats to Human Security were addressed through the projects supported by the

UNTFHS. It is very important to understand that the unforeseen needs in this context, and thus the

usefulness, transcend normal single-support developmental or humanitarian challenges. In the context of the

Human Security approach, these unforeseen needs must be multi-dimensional, reflecting the philosophical

concept that threats to the well-being of human kind are seldom linear, seldom one dimensional. Rather, the

Human Security approach reflects the recognition of the 360 degree nature of the challenges to the well-

being of humanity, and therefore the necessity to attempt to ameliorate these threats in an integrated

manner, as well as one which embodies the empowerment of individuals to determine their own well-being.

There is ample evidence to show that the projects that have been supported by the UNTFHS were the result

of consultative processes where people themselves articulated the challenges that they faced. Clearly, it is

unreasonable to assume that the citizens in a district in Northern Uganda or a barrio in Colombia, or a soum

in Mongolia reached out to the UN themselves to seek support. Rather, what the Human Security approach


May 2013

iii

© UNIVERSALIA

has fostered, which is different from many other types of developmental or humanitarian action, is the

degree to which the UN partner organizations listen and respect a bottom-up approach. A corollary to this

benefit also is the degree to which the Human Security approach in the projects reviewed encouraged levels

of government to become directly involved, not just being the passive beneficiaries of external support, but

the active partners in the delivery of programming that reflects the needs of their citizens. In Colombia,

Mongolia and Uzbekistan, there is ample evidence to show the degree to which local levels of government

have embraced project elements and are striving to ensure their sustainability and in some instances, the

expansion of elements to other geographic areas.

On balance, the questions of usefulness or value added, in many respects need to be considered outside of

the things that are done or the people who do them. It became evident that the most successful applications

of the Human Security approach within the context of this Rapid Assessment were those where UN

participants came to recognize that Human Security was not a mechanism for delivery. Rather, it embodies

a new way of thinking about the relationships between the UN as a whole, people, and the governments of

peoples as the three confront fundamental threats to the well-being of humankind, to Human Security.

The Impact

To assess the impact of the Human Security approach

Although it is very important to be able to report about the value added and usefulness of UNTFHS-

supported projects, there is a much more important question: Do these projects actually make a difference

and do they do so in ways that relate to the principles that underpin the Human Security approach? There is

ample evidence to show that the projects in question have contributed to improvements to the human

condition and have done so in a multi-disciplinary fashion which is not characteristic of traditional

developmental or humanitarian programming.

For example, in Colombia, individual beneficiaries reported, confirmed by other organizational

stakeholders, that the combination of social programming and support for nutrition combined with health

programming resulted in improved overall livelihoods and a greater sense of community worth.

Respondents there stated that they were continuing to apply the advocacy skills they had learned. In

Uganda, the combination of activities to improve the milling and marketing of cereal grains, combined with

training for local people to establish community-based micro-financing has resulted in improved overall

economic and livelihood security. In Mongolia, the linking of improvement in community health services

combined with infrastructure enhancements in the provision of clean water and sewage facilities has

resulted in lower instances of disease and because of the nature of the involvement of the local government,

a transferal of the support for these initiatives from UN partners to the local government. In Uzbekistan, the

combination of increased outreach to combat TB, combined with the training of local community health

representatives, the provision of enhanced diagnostic equipment and the strengthening of the infrastructure

by solar powered electric generation, is addressing the complex public health challenges in a depressed rural

region. Furthermore, in Uzbekistan, a combination of community outreach programming to women at risk

combined with vocational training has resulted in the establishment of eco-tourism opportunities and

income generation, transforming women at risk to women having dignified employment. In Uganda, the

combination of infrastructure improvements (road building) combined with promotion of community-based

financing is generating the capital needed for local residents to pay school fees and thus, with transport

improvement, increased the rate of access to education.

All these are tangible impacts that have affected the lives and livelihoods of people that are at risk. There is

however, an equally positive intangible impact which was witnessed in virtually all the projects under

review. It is that the participatory Human Security approach, when applied at the project level, seems to

result in a greater sense of individual and collective empowerment, less of a sense of being simply a

beneficiary and more of a sense of being a participant in changing one’s own future.


iv

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Lessons Learned

To present lessons learned and to determine the added value of the Human Security approach to situations

The mandate for this Rapid Assessment included a request for an analysis of the lessons that have been

learned as a result of recent projects that have been supported by UNTFHS. In this context, there are several

lessons which relate to the degree of organizational learning that may have transpired among UN partners,

especially at the field and country level. There are also several lessons which relate more to the degree of

adaptation and change within the Human Security Unit (HSU) which administers the Trust Fund and serves

as a prototype of a secretariat for the overall advocacy of the Human Security approach and the preparation

of required reports to the General Assembly.

In relation to the lessons learned by the HSU, there is evidence to show that the set of recent amendments to

the administrative guidelines has strengthened the ability of the HSU to ensure that the projects selected for

support reflect, to the greatest extent possible, the multi-dimensional and holistic principles which underpin

the Human Security approach. Doing so however, has placed a great strain on the relatively few analytical

resources of the HSU. A second internal lesson for the HSU lies in the extent to which the management and

supervision of supported projects requires a higher degree of hands-on oversight, to ensure that the Human

Security-related commitments made in applications transpire. Finally, it became evident that the current

approaches to project performance reporting do not sufficiently highlight the degree of the uniqueness of

UNTFHS-supported projects in comparison to other kinds of activities.

Turning to the lessons that may have been learned by UN partners and others, three are paramount.

First, there is ample evidence to show that there are clearly organizational and programmatic

benefits to be garnered by UN partners when they work within the context of the Human Security

approach.

Second, the demonstration projects supported by the UNTFHS give life and practical reality to the

Consensus Resolution, and among UN partners, tend to confirm the viability and worth of the

Human Security approach as a whole.

Third, there is an awareness that the Human Security approach is philosophically different and has

intrinsic added value over more mechanistic paradigms of working together.

There is however, a final lesson which was evident throughout the Rapid Assessment. While there has been

considerable support for the benefits of the Human Security approach at the country and especially at the

project level, there remain strong organizational dynamics within the UN system that tend to diffuse the

strengths of the Human Security approach.

Conclusions

In addition to these four themes, the Rapid Assessment also addressed a series of general questions which

complement the themes. For this Overview Report, it is important to highlight our conclusions relative to

these questions.

Are these projects responding to un-addressed areas?

In virtually all of the projects reviewed for the Rapid Assessment, previously un-addressed challenges to

Human Security were identified. In several, most notably Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and Mongolia, the

UNTFHS-supported projects were the sole UN response mechanisms. It was also evident that the UNTFHS

projects, by emphasizing inter-sectorial activity, responded to challenges that had, in a way, fallen through

the cracks. This is a major programmatic benefit of the Human Security approach in itself.


May 2013

v

© UNIVERSALIA

Are they different in their conception and execution?

The evidence related to the conception and execution of UNTFHS projects points very clearly to different

modalities of design and subsequent execution that emphasize the need to actually collaborate as opposed to

simply participate in a joint project. UN country teams indicated that these different methods of planning

and subsequently rolling out combined programming appeared to have resulted in more sensitive responses,

and may have been instrumental in engaging governments at all levels in the design and roll-out as well.

Are the potential beneficiaries involved at all stages?

One of the most unique characteristics of projects supported by the Trust Fund is the degree to which people

themselves are involved in the design of solutions to the multi-dimensional challenges to their security. The

evidence points to a general pattern of the active involvement of beneficiaries in design and to a lesser

extent, in the roll-out.

How do UN field teams react to the challenges involved?

The projects supported by the UNTFHS, while obviously designed to better the human condition as a

whole, are primarily demonstration projects. Therefore, one of the most important questions relates to the

degree to which participation in these projects is impacting on how UN teams work together at the field

level. The evidence is relatively clear, that in relation to projects themselves, UN partners recognize the

intrinsic benefits of the Human Security approach as opposed to other joint delivery concepts. There even

appears to be a sense of pride among field level personnel about the results which they have collaboratively

generated. More strikingly, many indicated that they had never worked on a joint project with other UN

partners and that the UNTFHS demonstration project constituted a completely new way of thinking and

working.

Is the UNTFHS breaking new ground?

It is very clear from the review of projects supported by the UNTFHS that new ground is being broken and

that at the field level at least, there is an acceptance of the positive benefits of these new approaches. More

specifically, the breaking down of traditional isolated mandates by emphasizing inter-sectorial challenges to

Human Security and inter-sectorial solutions may constitute the most significant “new ground”. However, it

is equally important to emphasize that the empowerment mandate inherent in the Human Security approach

has been recognized as somewhat different from other approaches that attempt to animate “the voice of the

people”.

In conclusion therefore, it is apparent that over the last several years, the demonstration projects supported

by the UNTFHS have clearly made a difference. But, it is necessary to place this solidly positive conclusion

in the context of the overall magnitude of the work of the United Nations system.

The UNTFHS-supported projects constitute a miniscule fraction of the overall work of the United Nations.

Yet, even at this very small level of scale, they are demonstrating that there are new more holistic ways of

addressing the challenges that face humanity. They are also demonstrating the extent to which it is possible

for a complex and polycentric institution like the United Nations to develop collaborative responses to

Human Security challenges that are in themselves, multi-dimensional.

The Human Security approach as recently articulated by the General Assembly has proven to

be effective at the project level.

Filled unaddressed areas of Human Security

Empowered stakeholders and governments (especially at the local level)

Added value that is intrinsic to the three pillars of Human Security

Resulted in holistic solutions to complex problems

Are showing beneficiary impact

In short, Human Security works.


vi

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Next Steps

The mandate for this Rapid Assessment asked that we go somewhat beyond merely assessing the intrinsic

value of the projects that have been recently supported by the UNTFHS. The above conclusions decisively

show that there is considerable merit in the Human Security approach as a whole and that it is highly

relevant to the work of the United Nations and all its constituent organizations.

There is a gap however, one which was implied in one of the questions that have guided the Rapid

Assessment.

That question asked whether the Human Security approach was being applied to how UN organizations

generally function, within planning systems and within resource allocation models.

We witnessed that there remains an unfulfilled need to better integrate the concepts which underpin the

Human Security approach into the work of UN agencies as a whole. This may in part be the result of two

inter-related phenomena.

First, the General Assembly Consensus Resolution on the nature of Human Security itself was only

passed in September, 2012. Thus, it is not unreasonable for organizations to require more time to

integrate these approaches.

Second, given the size, scope and complexity of the UN family or organizations as a whole and the

diversity of their planning and resource allocation models, it is not surprising that new and

challenging approaches like that related to Human Security may have yet to be fully embraced.

Time, however, is running short. It is not unreasonable to claim that the principles which underpin the

Human Security approach and which have been proven relevant by this Rapid Assessment could be useful

in articulating whatever may become of the next set of strategic global objectives which will follow on from

the current Millennium Development Goals. The “whole of the challenge” nature which exemplifies the

Human Security approach probably could have a positive contribution to how global goals are to be

articulated and how the resources of the planet harnessed to meet them.

Therefore, this Rapid Assessment recommends that:

The UN as a system affirm its support for the integration of the Human Security approach

as a valuable tool to promote development, human rights, and peace and security - the three

pillars of the United Nations.


May 2013

vii

© UNIVERSALIA

A c r o n y m s

CEB Chief Executives’ Board

CERF Central Emergency Response Fund

HQ Headquarters

HSU Human Security Unit

IDP Internally Displaced Person

MDG Millennium Development Goal

OCHA Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

OECA-DAC Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - Development Assistance

Committee

RC Resident coordinator

SASG Special Advisor to the Secretary General

TORs Terms of Reference

UMG Universalia Management Group

UNDAF UN Development Assistance Framework

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNESCO United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNTFHS United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security


May 2013

ix

© UNIVERSALIA

C o n t e n t s

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Objectives and Key Issues 1

1.2 Team Composition 2

1.3 Timeframe and Scope 2

2. Context 3

2.1 A Clear Understanding 3

2.1.1 What Does Human Security Really Mean? 3

2.1.2 What is the Human Security Approach in the UN Context? 4

2.2 Current UNTFHS Activity – An Overview 5

3. Methodology 6

3.1 The Nature of a Rapid Assessment 6

3.2 Overview of Methodology (See Volume II and III for details) 6

3.2.1 Country Case Studies and Desk Top Reviews 6

3.3 Overview of the Survey 6

4. Specific Findings 8

4.1.1 Gap Filling 8

4.1.2 The Conception and Execution of Projects 11

4.1.3 The Involvement of Beneficiaries 11

4.1.4 Breaking New Ground 12

4.1.5 The Value Added 13

4.1.6 Beneficiary Impact 15

4.1.7 Impact on UN Field Team 16

4.1.8 Impact on UN Country Teams and Governments 19

5. Overall Conclusions 19

5.1 The Achievements of the Human Security Unit (HSU) 20

5.2 The Challenges Facing the HSU 20

5.3 Common Country Level Challenges 20

5.4 One Overarching Common Recommendation 21


x

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

E x h i b i t s

Exhibit ‎2.1 Human Security as a dynamic between three sets of factors 4

Exhibit ‎3.1 Geographic and Gender Distribution of Survey Respondents, in percent of total

respondents. (N=44) 7

Exhibit ‎3.2 Distribution of survey respondents based on type of organization and function, in percent 8

Exhibit ‎4.1 Extent of survey respondent agreement on the complementarity, additionality, quality, and

appropriateness of UNTFHS-supported projects, in percent. (N=44) 14

Exhibit ‎4.2 Survey respondent perception on the value-added of the UNTFHS in regard to UN

programming and partnerships (N=44) 17

Exhibit ‎4.3 Extent of survey respondent agreement on the value-added of the UNTFHS in regard to

enhancing UN programming and partnerships (N=41) 18

A p p e n d i c e s

Appendix I Terms of Reference 23

Appendix II List of Findings 27


May 2013

1 © UNIVERSALIA

Acknowledgements

Before commencing this Report of the Rapid Assessment, we would like to express our sincere thanks to all

stakeholders with whom we have collaborated during this evaluation, giving special recognition to the staff

and management of UN offices worldwide. We wish to specially thank the staff and management of

Human Security Unit and its partners worldwide who gave so generously of their time. It is as a direct result

of this level of cooperation and enthusiasm that the realization of this Rapid Assessment has become

possible.

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed are those of the Rapid Assessment Team, and do not necessarily reflect those of the

HSU or any element of the United Nations. Responsibility for the opinions expressed in this report rests

solely with the authors. Publication of this document does not imply endorsement by the HSU of the

opinions expressed.


May 2013

1 © UNIVERSALIA

1 . I n t r o d u c t i o n

This is the Final Report of the Rapid Assessment of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security

(UNTFHS). The primary focus of this assignment was to assess the relevance of the work of the Trust Fund

over the past several years. However, as the assignment progressed it became increasingly apparent that a

secondary objective had emerged, namely, a review of the overall relevance of the application of the Human

Security approach in various agencies of the UN. As will be described below, this report is not a formal

evaluation. Rather, it is a more compact process that is evidence-based and rooted in the principles which

underlie contemporary evaluation methodology. It is more compact and more timely than a traditional

evaluation and as such, this approach was chosen in order to respond to temporal challenges.

11 .. 11 OO bb jj ee cc tt ii vv ee ss aa nn dd KK ee yy II ss ss uu ee ss

In a fairly rapid process such as this which began in January 2013, there is a clear benefit to beginning the

formal Report of the Rapid Assessment by reprising the heart and soul of the exercise as a whole, namely

the Objectives and Key Areas. Therefore, as per the TORs, the Objectives of the Rapid Assessment are:

“The overall objective of the rapid assessment is to determine the added value of applying the

Human Security approach in addressing multi-dimensional insecurities faced by vulnerable

communities through the activities of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security

(UNTFHS). The principles and the framework in the application of Human Security are

articulated in the Guidelines of the UNTFHS, the General Assembly resolution 66/290 and the

reports of the UN Secretary-General on human security.”

More specifically, the Inception Report laid down the following areas for detailed examination:

To assess the added value of the Human Security approach in addressing the broad range of

insecurities faced by vulnerable communities.



empowerment framework) on the target populations versus regular UN projects.

To present the usefulness of UNTFHS projects in addressing gaps in responses to multi-

dimensional insecurities due to its broad focus and its ability to go beyond Agency mandates.


situations in which the Human Security approach was applied (e.g., post-conflict and fragile

settings, natural disasters and climate vulnerable communities, and urban poverty and violence).

Finally, the Inception Report also began to broaden the nature of the assignment by stipulating that the

Rapid Assessment would go beyond the specific activities of any given project sponsored by the Trust Fund

and explore inter-relationships and by extension, the degree to which the concepts underpinning the Human

Security approach have been taken up across the UN system.

“Particular attention should be paid to joint projects in which the design and implementation of

activities involve several UN agencies and programmes, as well as local partners where

possible. The focus of the assessment should determine the benefits of UNTFHS projects not

only for the participating communities but also for the way the UN works, i.e., the One UN,

where based on the technical expertise and the comparative advantages of each entity, the

Organization responds in the most comprehensive and impactful manner.”


2

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

11 .. 22 TT ee aa mm CC oo mm pp oo ss ii tt ii oo nn

The three person team for this assignment was drawn from the senior staff and core resources of Universalia

Management Group, a Montreal-based and Canadian chartered management consulting entity with over 33

years of experience in evaluation and other forms of organizational performance assessment. The team was

comprised of the following:

Mr. Dale E. Thompson, (Team Leader) a senior associated consultant of Universalia

Management Group for the past 16 years. Previously Mr. Thompson had held senior executive

responsibilities in the Government of Canada. In total, Mr. Thompson’s career has spanned over

35 years of executive and policy related responsibilities.

Mr. John Horekens, (Senior Evaluator) a senior associated consultant of Universalia

Management Group for the past five years. Mr. Horekens enjoyed a lengthy career working in

United Nations agencies culminating in his holding executive level responsibilities in several. In

total, Mr. Horekens’ career has spanned nearly 40 years of policy and managerial related

assignments.

Mr. Rudy Broers, (Evaluator) a senior consultant of Universalia Management Group with some

14 years of experience in programme evaluation and organizational performance assessment.

11 .. 33 TT ii mm ee ff rr aa mm ee aa nn dd SS cc oo pp ee

This Rapid Assessment began on January 14, 2013, with an initial round of preliminary briefings. Work

commenced immediately on the development of inception-related materials and the commencement of

stakeholder outreach. The Table below highlights the key phases of the Rapid Assessment including

anticipated timeframes for its final completion.

Inception January 2013 Receipt of Inception Report on January 25

Research January and February 2013 Field missions to Uganda, Colombia, Uzbekistan and

Mongolia conducted by March 1, 2013

Reporting March - May 2013 Interim Report presented and Validation Workshop

conducted March 12 Draft of Final Report submitted on April 2, 2013

Presentation May 8 - 10, 2013 Presentation at the Advisory Board on Human Security

and High Level Event

In terms of scope, this Rapid Assessment was a worldwide exercise. Five recent projects were examined in

four highly disparate nations by means of a week-long field mission to each. Three projects stemming from

three more different countries were the subject of desk top reviews and follow-on telephone interviews.

In addition, a major electronic survey was mounted which will be described in a subsequent element of this

draft of the Final Report. Global networks of UN and other stakeholders were engaged so as to produce a

360 degree perspective of all the issues affecting the work of the UNTFHS and the Human Security

approach generally.

As part of an iterative and interactive process, a number of face-to-face meetings were held with UN staff in

Geneva and in New York.

To ensure consistency and to provide an opportunity for mid-course corrections, several informal

workshops were conducted in the January-March timeframe in New York.


May 2013

3 © UNIVERSALIA

2 . C o n t e x t

22 .. 11 AA CC ll ee aa rr UU nn dd ee rr ss tt aa nn dd ii nn gg

In September 2012, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted a consensus resolution that

provided a discussion of what constitutes “Human Security”. For a number of years there had been debate

among academics and Member States about the scope of the concepts which underpin this notion. Indeed,

the landmark 2001 Report of the Commission on Human Security, while describing the various activities

elements and concepts which can come together to result in “Human Security”, itself did not provide a

sufficiently precise understanding so as to give clarity in terms of both what the concept meant (and did not

mean) and how it could be applied.

Thus, this unanimous resolution has very much clarified the nature of Human Security and gave assurances

of it being a non-interventionist mechanism. It is therefore appropriate to place the core of this consensus

resolution into this Report for contextual clarity.

(a) The right of people to live in freedom and dignity, free from poverty and despair. All

individuals, in particular vulnerable people, are entitled to freedom from fear and freedom from

want, with an equal opportunity to enjoy all their rights and fully develop their human potential;

(b) Human security calls for people-centred, comprehensive, context-specific and prevention-

oriented responses that strengthen the protection and empowerment of all people and all

communities;

(c) Human security recognizes the interlinkages between peace, development and human rights,

and equally considers civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights;

(d) The notion of human security is distinct from the responsibility to protect and its

implementation;

(e) Human security does not entail the threat or the use of force or coercive measures. Human

security does not replace State security;

(f) Human security is based on national ownership. Since the political, economic, social and

cultural conditions for human security vary significantly across and within countries, and at

different points in time, human security strengthens national solutions which are compatible with

local realities;

(g) Governments retain the primary role and responsibility for ensuring the survival, livelihood

and dignity of their citizens. The role of the international community is to complement and provide

the necessary support to Governments, upon their request, so as to strengthen their capacity to

respond to current and emerging threats. Human security requires greater collaboration and

partnership among Governments, international and regional organizations and civil society;

(h) Human security must be implemented with full respect for the purposes and principles

enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, including full respect for the sovereignty of States,

territorial integrity and non-interference in matters that are essentially within the domestic

jurisdiction of States. Human security does not entail additional legal obligations on the part of

States.

22 .. 11 .. 11 WW hh aa tt DD oo ee ss HH uu mm aa nn SS ee cc uu rr ii tt yy RR ee aa ll ll yy MM ee aa nn ??

While the above extract from the Consensus Resolution may provide formal clarity, there is a need to

present a somewhat less complex understanding of the nature of the concepts that underpin Human Security

so as to provide the audience of this Rapid Assessment with a common understanding. This common


4

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

understanding however should not be interpreted to supplant or replace the official text of the consensus

resolution. Rather, it has been developed as simply a means of ad hoc explanation.

In that context, Human Security is not a “thing” to provide, or a single package of initiatives. It is a primal

way of thinking about the human condition and the challenges to it.

When the Government of Japan among others articulated the concept in the late 1990s (1998/99), the

holistic concepts that underpin the concept came to be called “security”. But “security” generally has a

narrow understanding in English.

What the Human Security concept is about is the sense of the totality of human well-being, dignity and

respect; and that the totality of that individual well-being cannot be dismantled into “economic well-being,

social well-being, physical (health) well-being or even absence of physical threats to life. The totality is

more. There is in a way, a holistic, and to a degree existential, notion of being. The well-being of a

community therefore is based on the collective well-being of its components – individuals.

To put it more in a practical sense, Human Security is the dynamic between three sets of factors: human

rights, security and development, as shown in the Exhibit below.

Exhibit 2.1 Human Security as a dynamic between three sets of factors

Without harmony among all three, there can be no complete sense of the whole, either as an individual or as

a collective/community/nation.

22 .. 11 .. 22 WW hh aa tt ii ss tt hh ee HH uu mm aa nn SS ee cc uu rr ii tt yy AA pp pp rr oo aa cc hh ii nn tt hh ee UU NN

CC oo nn tt ee xx tt ??

The Human Security approach builds on this holistic sense of harmony and translates these concepts into an

operational way of helping people and their communities achieve this harmony and well-being. This is in

essence a way of thinking – a paradigm for action.

It contains five key elements:

The work we do must be people-centered reflecting their needs and not what we want to do for

them, the more traditional and interventionist approach to development


May 2013

5 © UNIVERSALIA

It must be multi-sectorial. The human condition cannot and should not be artificially divided into

slices. You cannot simply “fix” an economic problem and expect real change in the overall

condition of a community if there remain social challenges to their well-being, etc.

It must be comprehensive. Partial approaches will leave gaps

It must be context specific – related to real needs and tailored to meet them – as opposed to the

notion of replicating actions here, there and everywhere with little reference to the subtleties of

varying situations.

It must be prevention-oriented – not just fixing a problem for today, but building a lasting

foundation to promote this overall sense of well-being.

Beyond these five there is an implicit understanding that to meet these people-centered and prevention-

oriented principles, communities and governments need to work together to ensure the flourishing of a

situation where freedom from fear, freedom from all manners of want and freedom to live in dignity can

come to pass. In the sense of the social contract that shapes all collectives of humanity, Governments (a

tribal leader 5,000 year ago or a modern representative and plural democracy) all have had and have an

obligation their people – a “top down” obligation. And people have to be given the means to articulate their

needs and aspirations as well as be the agents of change for themselves and their communities

(empowerment).

22 .. 22 CC uu rr rr ee nn tt UU NN TT FF HH SS AA cc tt ii vv ii tt yy –– AA nn OO vv ee rr vv ii ee ww

The United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security (UNTFHS) was established in March 1999. Drawing

input from more than thirteen years of experience and over 200 projects funded globally, the Guidelines for

the UNTFHS have been revised to better reflect the principles of the Human Security approach and its

application.

Since the causes and manifestations of human insecurities vary considerably across countries and

communities, UNTFHS projects have covered a wide range of cross-cutting issues worldwide. While not

exhaustive, the following are some of the areas covered by the UNTFHS:

Transition to peace and sustainable development in fragile and conflict-affected communities;

Protecting and empowering refugees, IDPs, economic migrants and others on the move;

Responding to the multidimensional consequences of climate-related threats;

Urban violence and its impact on health, education, economic, personal and community security;

Poverty reduction, social inclusion and community-based development in isolated areas;

Economic, environmental and social components of health-related insecurities.

UNTFHS-funded projects have:

Underscored the practical approach of Human Security for addressing multifaceted insecurities in a

contextually relevant and targeted manner;

Provided new perspectives for the development of actions, particularly where existing responses

have proved insufficient;

Resulted in a deeper analysis on the causes and manifestations of complex and interconnected

threats and their impact on the survival, livelihood and dignity of local communities;

Highlighted the lack of protection and empowerment conditions that can perpetuate insecurities;

Supported the development of mitigation and resilience-building measures that have resulted in

notable increases in the Human Security of the most vulnerable;


6

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Provided examples of successful multi-stakeholder collaborations that have fortified existing

partnerships and promoted avenues for new collaborations among UN organizations, Governments

and local communities.

Based on the 2011 UNTFHS Annual Report, since the inception of the Fund in March 1999, 202 projects

have been approved with a total cumulative budget of $368,536,023. By 31 December 2011, 171 of these

projects had been completed and 31 were on-going.

3 . M e t h o d o l o g y

33 .. 11 TT hh ee NN aa tt uu rr ee oo ff aa RR aa pp ii dd AA ss ss ee ss ss mm ee nn tt

As noted in the opening remarks of this report, this is a rapid assessment as opposed to a formal programme

evaluation. While the two share many common characteristics, there are several features that differentiate

them.

First, a rapid assessment is usually much more tightly focussed on a narrow set of policy-related issues, as

opposed to the more broad approach which is inherent in the application of the OECD-DAC guidelines for

programme evaluation. The OECD approach, by being more broadly focussed, results in a more

comprehensive albeit more time-consuming process.

Second, this Rapid Assessment has focussed largely on issues related to Relevance (within the OECD-DAC

context). These issues related to Relevance are the core of the policy and programmatic challenges which

face the UNTFHS and its implementation arm, the Human Security Unit (HSU). Issues related to Efficiency

or Effectiveness and to some extent, Sustainability, have not been addressed through this Rapid Assessment.

In short, this Rapid Assessment represents a purpose-built tool to address specific policy and programme

challenges in a very timely and focussed manner. It does not presume to present a complete picture of the

overall worth of the Trust Fund or the projects it supports as a whole or the work of the HSU.

33 .. 22 OO vv ee rr vv ii ee ww oo ff MM ee tt hh oo dd oo ll oo gg yy (( SS ee ee VV oo ll uu mm ee II II aa nn dd II II II ff oo rr dd ee tt aa ii ll ss ))

We adopted an extensive set of methodologies to ensure the broadest possible coverage and the greatest

degree of data triangulation for this Rapid Assessment. Care had to be taken to ensure that this Report was

not simply a compilation of country case studies (see Volume II), as well as to ensure that the

methodologies selected were designed to allow comparability and also to allow the elaboration of broadly

relevant findings at the global level which affect the Human Security approach as a whole and not highly

country-specific findings.

33 .. 22 .. 11 CC oo uu nn tt rr yy CC aa ss ee SS tt uu dd ii ee ss aa nn dd DD ee ss kk TT oo pp RR ee vv ii ee ww ss

The general approach for the four country case studies (field missions) was one where data collection

occurred throughout one entire week with the debrief occurring at the end of the mission. The ratified

Inception Report (Volume III) contains a detailed description of the methodology used to select the five

missions - Colombia, Uganda, Uzbekistan and Mongolia (2 projects). As well, the methodologies used to

animate the field missions are contained therein.

Three additional projects were selected for a desk-top review, a process which in effect is a “virtual” field

mission. The locales for these projects are: Vanuatu, Democratic Republic of Congo and Madagascar.

33 .. 33 OO vv ee rr vv ii ee ww oo ff tt hh ee SS uu rr vv ee yy

As noted above in the overall discussion of the methodologies used for this Rapid Assessment, early on it

was decided to develop an electronic Survey which would reach out to project stakeholders (last four years)

and HQ contacts. The Survey is contained in the Inception Report that was finalized on January 30, 2013.


May 2013

7 © UNIVERSALIA

The Surveys were sent out to both populations in the first week of February coinciding with the launch of

the first country case studies. Two reminders were circulated over the successive six weeks.

The overall response rates to both surveys were as follows: 283 respondents received the electronic survey.

62 responses were captured for an overall 22% response rate.

This rate of response may seem to be below average. However, a careful examination of the geographic

distribution of responses points to the strong possibility that at the country level many respondents placed

the responsibility to respond upon one staff member. In certain instances, the staff from various agencies,

and/or multiple staff members from one agency, may have combined their responses into one. Thus, it is not

unreasonable to assume a somewhat higher rate of response, probably in excess of 25% but less than 33%.

The size of the survey population combined with even this more generous consideration of response rates

resulted in the inability to break down the survey responses into discrete subcategories. The only possibility

to do so lay in the division between managers and staff, as identified in a specific question. However, the

rate of response was not sufficient to permit such disaggregation. In short, there would have been very little

statistical confidence in breaking down the responses into these two categories. As well, and without

prejudicing the confidentiality of the survey, quality control analysis tended to show a very high correlation

in responses between the managerial subgrouping and the other.

The following tables provide some basic information of the respondent population. It should be noted that

the Europe and Americas regions include populations at respective New York and Geneva headquarters.

Exhibit 3.1 Geographic and Gender Distribution of Survey Respondents, in percent of total respondents. (N=44)

Africa, 16%

Asia and the Pacific, 31%

Europe, 24%

Americas, 22%

Middle East, 7%

Male, 51%Female, 49%


8

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Exhibit 3.2 Distribution of survey respondents based on type of organization and function, in percent

4 . S p e c i f i c F i n d i n g s

The most important element of any report is the articulation of specific Findings. It is very important to

emphasize that all the elements of the matrix contained in the Inception Report (see Volume II) and the

subsequent instruments and surveys are designed to answer the following set of core questions which are at

the heart of the four key issues noted above. These core questions are:

Are these projects addressing gaps (unfulfilled or unanticipated needs)?





Is there any added value when compared to more traditional UN projects?

What is the impact on the way they do their business at the country team level?

Has there been evidence of beneficiary impact?

We recognize that these themes, as laid out in the TORs, may not precisely match those suggested by the

DAC. However, on closer inspection, it is apparent that the phraseology selected reflects the needs and

concerns of stakeholders in relation to Rapid Assessment of the UNTFHS.

44 .. 11 .. 11 GG aa pp FF ii ll ll ii nn gg

From an operational standpoint, and in line with the current set of Guidelines for the administration of

projects supported by the Trust Fund, there must be clear evidence of gap filling; namely addressing

unfulfilled needs or newly emerging situations not addressed by others. In this context, the notion of a gap

involves more than simply providing a service or an activity in an area which has not been addressed by

other forms of assistance programming or by a level of government either directly or indirectly.

As well, as part of the electronic survey that was conducted for this Rapid Assessment, several questions

addressed gap filling and the attendant benefits of doing so. The following exhibit demonstrates the degree

of agreement with these statements. This approach, the use of a Lichter scale, enabled us to potentially

differentiate between not only degree of concurrence but type of respondent. However, as noted above,

while the response rate to this survey was sufficient to allow for rolled up analysis, it was insufficient with

respect to the ability to differentiate among types of respondents.

Other, 9%Human Security

Advisory Board/advisory

body, 5%

Non-Governmental Organization, 4%

National / Regional or Local

Government, 4%

Country/Regional UN Staff, 62%

UN Agency HQ Staff , 16% Other, 14%

Administrative / financial

management specialist, 7%

Technical analyst / subject matter specialist, 23%

Manager/ supervisor, 55%


May 2013

9 © UNIVERSALIA

UNTFHS Projects have improved the UN’s response coverage.

UNTFHS Projects address multiple challenges.

UNTFHS Projects contribute to UN programming mechanisms including UNDAF, etc.

UNTFHS Projects enable a comprehensive and coordinated response to current and emerging challenges.

UNTFHS funding has been directed to the highest priority areas.

UNTFHS Projects address evolving priority needs.

UNTFHS Projects build resilience of communities in view of current and emerging challenges.

UNTFHS Projects do not overlap with other existing UN programmes.

UNTFHS funding contributed to filling gaps in the overall UN response to threats to Human Security.

UNTFHS Projects resulted in outcomes that could not have been achieved other than by using the Human

Security approach. (The Human Security approach is people-centred, context-specific, comprehensive and

multi-sectorial solutions that are reinforced through the protection and empowerment framework.)

Survey Results


10

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Insecurity reduced by mere presence of the

UN agencies.

Interventions across sectors have brought

individuals and families together in

Soacha, reducing tensions.

Project instrumental in reaching children,

adolescents and adults in holistic ways.

Project has led to new activities and new

jobs/opportunities and new entrants –

private sector, funding through TSI which

will continue UN presence.

“The extension of programs to other

districts beyond the original two districts

specified in the UNTFHS proposal

indicates flexibility and responsiveness to a

changing ground situation and UNTFHS

has helped bridge a gap, since these are

regions of high need and areas where IDPs

are currently being re-settled”.

Linking health to the community, as

opposed to earlier practice of treating

individuals.

Linking with other sectors has provided

holistic approach for education work.

Project instrumental in bringing

technology to villages in key sectors of

water and sewage.

Project has led to new activity and new

jobs in soums.

Integrated approach by UN appears to be

appreciated by government departments at

all levels

Government in Colombia encourages joint

programming.

Municipality has better comprehension of

the UN’s work.

Both levels of government have been very

supportive.

Finding 1: Gap filling (addressing unfulfilled or new needs) was present in virtually all the projects

that were reviewed for this Rapid Assessment.

This Finding confirms one of the assumptions made with respect

to the operation of the Trust Fund and the projects that it has

supported. The extent of gap filling differed in nature and scope

between the various projects. In several instances, most notably

in relation to the projects in Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and the two in

Mongolia, the projects supported by the Trust Fund were the

primary UN system response mechanism. As such, they did not

duplicate prior work; nor did they duplicate the efforts of the

national or regional government in question. In these instances,

the Trust Fund-supported projects filled completely unaddressed

needs. The text box at the side highlights several.

In several other instances, most notably in Colombia and

Uganda, the projects supported by the Trust Fund were follow-

on activities to prior work by other donors or by national

governments. Both these instances were in response to long-

standing periods of conflict. However, the Human Security

approach promoted by the UNTFHS funded projects involved

going beyond the traditional by promoting a multisectorial

response, a clear value adding characteristic.

Finding 2: Several projects demonstrated the inter-connection between various types of gaps and

thus demonstrated the cross-sectorial nature of projects supported by the Trust Fund.

This Finding highlights an important characteristic of more recent Trust Fund-supported projects. There

appears to be a growing tendency to see interrelationships

between various types of challenges to Human Security. For

example, the interrelationship between economic security

(improved production or new techniques to supplement

livelihood) was seen to be combined with other mechanisms

such as improvements in food security, transportation or public

health. As well, multi-dimensional projects operating in the

same geographic locale also underscored the recognition that

the challenges to Human Security as a whole are in themselves

multi-dimensional and require more than unconnected single

sectorial responses.

Finding 3: Projects supported by the Trust Fund have

filled an intellectual gap in the thinking of both government officials and UN

administrators about the nature of inter-sectorial activity.

This Finding identifies a gap which exists in the minds of

many government administrators and development cooperation

partners alike. It is the traditional linear and single-subject

based approach to the amelioration of the human condition

versus the more transverse and multi-sectorial approach

inherent in Human Security. In short, these administrators who

were involved in the projects appeared to see that their work

was more than just a sequence of somewhat related activities

tied together by a project design. There was recognition that


May 2013

11 © UNIVERSALIA

the combination of multi-sectorial activities generated a better coordinated and more effective response to

the challenges in question.

44 .. 11 .. 22 TT hh ee CC oo nn cc ee pp tt ii oo nn aa nn dd EE xx ee cc uu tt ii oo nn oo ff PP rr oo jj ee cc tt ss

This set of Findings addresses many of the issues related to how projects supported by the Trust Fund are

designed and delivered, the most mechanistic of all the issues addressed by this Rapid Assessment.

Finding 4: There is some concern that the mechanisms to approve Trust Fund projects are time

consuming and cumbersome involving the provision of information not normally

required by UN agencies in relation to an individual project.

This Finding was echoed in a number of instances in the responses to the survey when asked to identify one

or two key irritants. It reflects the views of country level staff who may not fully appreciate the need to

ensure that a Trust Fund-supported project is more than merely a humanitarian or developmental initiative,

and equally more than simply combining two potential subprojects in one geographic area. There is a

standard, now set out in the Guidelines, that fairly accurately articulates what is expected in an application

in relation to crucial elements such as empowerment of beneficiaries and the active engagement of

government.

Finding 5: The key commitment to engage governments throughout the design and delivery is more

apparent at the early stages of project design and appears to fall off during delivery and

especially during project reporting.

For the Human Security approach, this kind of a gap can have considerable consequences especially in

relation to the longer term ownership of the initiatives and the degree to which a government may or may

not be fully aware that the projects in themselves are designed to demonstrate a new approach to planning

and management and not merely to be another humanitarian or developmental initiative. It is important to

note however that levels of government closer to the people were more engaged in the entire process, while

national levels tended to be somewhat less directly involved. This was so especially so in Uganda,

Colombia and Uzbekistan.

This variance is not uncommon and is likely to be one of the major impediments to the longer term goal of

integrating the principles that underpin Human Security. It is also probably an unforeseen consequence of

the absence until recently of a clear understanding of the nature of Human Security.

44 .. 11 .. 33 TT hh ee II nn vv oo ll vv ee mm ee nn tt oo ff BB ee nn ee ff ii cc ii aa rr ii ee ss

Another of the key characteristics of the Human Security approach in general and in particular with respect

to the design and delivery of Trust Fund-supported demonstrated projects is the degree to which the

beneficiaries (the individuals or communities who will be impacted by the project) have been involved in

the design of the activities and continue to be involved in their delivery. Inferentially, this notion of

involvement also relates to governments at all levels and the degree to which they have participated as full

partners and not simply as recipients.

Finding 6: Among the projects reviewed for this Rapid Assessment, there is a general pattern of

beneficiary involvement in the project design and to a lesser extent, participation in

implementation. There however, does not

appear to be an active degree of participation

in reporting or follow-up.

This Finding highlights the degree to which the projects

supported by the Trust Fund have been impacted by potential

beneficiaries, in essence transforming the activity from one

Training of trainers in peace rings AND

VSLP.

Local replication of both into other locales.

Farmers start their own tree nurseries and

begin to expand production.


12

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

being “done” for a group to one being reflective of their own articulation of their needs. A degree of caution

should be taken in interpreting this Finding. For example, in one environment reviewed, it was fairly

evident that the individuals and their communities were engaged at arm’s length through intermediaries

supported by the government. In another instance, the rapidity of turnover of government officials led to

gaps in outreach.

It should be emphasised however, that whatever the degree of

participation in the design of projects, the fact that participation

is occurring to some extent is an achievement in itself. As well,

it should be noted that the Human Security approach is not the

only modality through which beneficiaries are engaged by UN

agencies or by donors in the design of humanitarian or

developmental programming. It is however important to

underscore that the characteristic of beneficiary involvement, when combined with other factors, results in

the holistic approach which has come to be called Human Security.

Finding 7: Beneficiaries themselves do not seem to be aware of the fact that they have participated

in a Human Security project. Rather to the extent viable, they do appear to be aware that

the project design was somewhat different from their prior experiences with either

development partners or their own governments.

This Finding takes the Human Security approach to its most

basic level – the degree to which it impacts individuals and the

extent to which concepts such as empowerment have been able

to be integrated at the project level. The projects selected for

this Rapid Assessment, for the most part, clearly showed

degrees of empowerment of individuals and the recognition of

individuals of the worth of that empowerment.

Did these beneficiaries in eight different projects have any

awareness that Human Security was the underlying paradigm

driving the project in question? Of course not, nor would that

have been even vaguely possible or viable. What is more

important is the degree to which these beneficiaries felt a

degree of empowerment (relevant to their conditions).

44 .. 11 .. 44 BB rr ee aa kk ii nn gg NN ee ww GG rr oo uu nn dd

One of the objectives of the Trust Fund as a whole is to demonstrate the degree to which the demonstration

projects it supports are breaking new ground for the UN, especially at the field level and by inference, at the

country level.

Finding 8: To some extent, the projects supported by the Trust Fund are breaking new ground and

introducing to the UN new ways of working together at the field level.

This Finding addresses the question of the degree to which, in

a purely programmatic sense, the work of the Trust Fund has

encouraged the UN to work differently. Put another way, this

question could be phrased “has the Human Security approach

resulted in new ways of design and delivery that are distinctive

from those which might be employed through other somewhat

similar mechanisms such as joint programmes or “UN

Delivering As One”. The answer to this parallel question is

yes, albeit with some limitations.

Agricultural/forestry markets developed

that did not exist = increased income=

better quality of life.

New agricultural techniques increase local

productivity.

Savings and loans provide basic micro

capital for people to give them fiscal

flexibility.

Peace rings improve climate of trust and

self-respect.

Farmers and their families develop their

own local plans.

Local replication of some ideas.

Outreach workers beginning to replicate

themselves.

“UNTFHS supports joint programming

and there are clear benefits to beneficiaries

and value added results from the inter-

agency collaboration in the districts.

Improved coordination for human security

is also evident at the level of the

beneficiary or family resulting in

improvements in the lives and livelihoods

of beneficiaries.”


May 2013

13 © UNIVERSALIA

Finding 9: The application process, which some stakeholders characterized as time consuming and

cumbersome, is designed to promote lateral thinking and to also demonstrate that lateral

concepts are actually being translated into concrete measures.

In essence, it is evident that the Human Security approach in relation to projects has demonstrated the

benefits of combined planning and integrated delivery. It has promoted a more iterative and sensitive

approach to the roll out of initiatives by requiring a degree of joint project planning and coordination that is

absent in other mechanisms. In short, while some alternative mechanisms may promote joint planning but

leave delivery very much to individual bodies, the collective approach inherent to Human Security requires

UN agencies to become much more open and willing to collaborate. It requires of them to become not just

partners in name but partners in deed.

Finding 10: These benefits have been variably translated into the way governments engage in the

project and especially in implementation.

Requiring active government involvement in project design has been a mainstay in the Human Security

projects reviewed. On the other hand, the UN agencies have not always required an active participation by

government in the ongoing management of the project. Therefore, there may be a gap within the UN at the

country level relative to the need to ensure that governments fully understand that the projects in question

are not just developmental or humanitarian initiatives and that they reflect potential demonstrations of a

different approach to planning and delivery that involve the UN, governments and recipients as equal

partners in a joint process of learning. Again it is important to highlight that the level of engagement and to

some degree the understanding of the holistic nature of the Human Security approach varies with the level

of government. As noted earlier, local and regional governments appear to have been more influenced than

national ones.

44 .. 11 .. 55 TT hh ee VV aa ll uu ee AA dd dd ee dd

One of the primary assumptions that underpin the Human

Security approach in relation to the projects that the Trust

Fund has supported rests in a belief that there is an overall

value added to these initiatives, which could not be attained

through other types of programming or through individual

projects addressing the same activity areas but which were not

connected. This, in essence, speaks to the concept that the

holistic and 360 degree nature of the Human Security approach

results in achievements and benefits that constitute more than

the sum of the simple parts - a gestalt.

The survey conducted as part of this Rapid Assessment

addressed this question of gestalt or value added by asking a

series of questions about related characteristics of projects.

Exhibit 4.1 below elucidates the degree of support for the

statements that in essence characterize some aspects of value

adding.

The extent of the transverse nature of Trust Fund-supported projects is evident in these survey responses

with a very high level of agreement around the benefits for vulnerable groups and cross-cutting issues. As

well, the level of support for the benefits related to the participation of affected groups shows a degree of

understanding of the centrality of this concept to the Human Security approach as a whole.

“Whilst UNFPA, UNICEF and WHO

coordinated their program efforts both at

the central and field level, the UNTFHS

offered a unique opportunity to implement

a fully integrated health, education,

protection and livelihoods program with

joint planning, implementation and

monitoring from both the UN agencies,

NGOs and government counterparts. It also

provided opportunities to holistically

address both the immediate and longer

term needs of the health sector and the

community, and provided a working model

for the UN agencies of how to better

improve service delivery.”


14

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Focus on real needs as expressed by people

ensures genuine ownership and leads to

strong commitment for future (e.g. budget

allocation for continuation).

Exhibit 4.1 Extent of survey respondent agreement on the complementarity, additionality, quality, and appropriateness of UNTFHS-supported projects, in percent. (N=44)

Finding 11: The projects reviewed for this Rapid Assessment all demonstrated a degree of value

adding over and above what might be expected had the activities been delivered through

traditional and narrower approaches to project design.

This Finding reflects the degree to

which there is a concurrence between

the responses to the survey above

and the evidence gathered through

data collection. Both point to the fact

that the projects supported by the

Trust Fund have produced synergies

between different kinds of activities

that would not have been possible

otherwise. The accompanying text

box illustrates several kinds of examples where one kind of activity combined with another apparently

produced benefits that might not have been possible in a more narrow project environment.

Finding 12: One of the chief value adding elements of the Human Security approach at the project

level is the degree to which individuals are involved in designing solutions to the human

security threats that confront them or their communities.

In the Human Security Approach, individuals and their

communities are not simply involved as an end in itself.

Rather, their involvement, combined with the multi-

disciplinary nature of the Human Security approach, has

2%

2%

0%

0%

2%

2%

7%

2%

16%

14%

9%

12%

18%

21%

21%

30%

35%

33%

20%

21%

26%

26%

23%

26%

52%

50%

26%

19%

19%

14%

0%

2%

12%

12%

12%

14%

UNTFHS-funded projects take into consideration needs of vulnerable groups.

UNTFHS-funded projects take into consideration cross-cutting issues such as

gender, social, economic and public safety;

WASH, health, and disadvantaged persons …

UNTFHS Projects increase the participation

of affected groups in the design and delivery of projects.

UNTFHS-supported projects contributed to enhancing national capacities regarding

Human Security.

UNTFHS-supported projects contributed to

enhancing national capacities regarding empowerment.

UNTFHS-supported projects contributed to enhancing national capacities regarding

resilience.

1-Strongly Disagree 2-Somewhat Disagree 3-Neutral 4-Somewhat Agree 5-Strongly Agree Do Not Know

Very positive sense of local ownership, leading to engagement in

continued future action as evidenced by continued funding,

engagements from TSI – new agencies coming on board.

Project has triggered important developments in legislation,

standardization of practice and terminology.

Project has reached out to minorities and brought communities closer

together through community radio.


May 2013

15 © UNIVERSALIA

Positive impact in terms of deliveries e.g.

food security and nutrition, schooling,

youth activities, entrepreneurship strategy,

support services for women affected by

violence, water and sanitation.

Links to upstream work – advocacy,

legalization, human rights, government

election commitments.

allowed them to better express and balance their needs. For example, in northern Uganda, the combination

of people articulating their need for capital (as evidenced through microfinance projects) combined with

their need to improve agricultural production (new milling facilities) has resulted in a much broader

strengthening of the agricultural community as a whole. In Colombia, the need for community engagement

and social capital was expressed in the design stage to combat health and economic deficiencies as well as

community insecurity.

44 .. 11 .. 66 BB ee nn ee ff ii cc ii aa rr yy II mm pp aa cc tt

The initial set of issues laid out in the TORs for this Rapid Assessment did not include consideration of

beneficiary impact due to the perception of methodological challenges of doing so within the framework of

a traditional programme evaluation. The ability to either demonstrate through attribution or contribution an

impact on beneficiaries in either the collective or individual

sense is one of the greatest challenges facing the evaluation

discipline as a whole. This Rapid Assessment was in some

respects designed to sidestep the lengthy processes which are

needed to do so. However, as the data collection ensued, it

became apparent that some efforts to address the issue of

beneficiary impact would be required, even at an episodic or

anecdotal level so as to further demonstrate the overall worth

of the Human Security approach.

This Rapid Assessment only examined a selection of more

recently supported projects. However, they reflected a variety of situations and concerns ranging from the

amelioration of a community following a global environmental disaster to supporting the medium-term

recovery of communities that had been afflicted by decades of conflict and disruption.

Finding 13: There were clear signs that the work of the projects being supported by the Trust Fund

were contributing to improvements in livelihood, strengthening of communities and

overall strengthening of community values and sense of worth.

In terms of physical or economic impacts, projects offered

increased means of production of agricultural products that

led or are leading to overall enhanced economic welfare.

Support for microfinance initiatives had led to increased

savings rates among families thus enabling them to better

plan for their economic future, to provide support for the

education of their children and to improve food security at the

local level. Job training programmes supported by the Trust

Fund have enabled both men and women at risk to develop

new work-related skills, leading to an increase in their income

and leading indirectly to the strengthening of their independence and self-reliance as members of their

community.

The list of these kinds of short to medium-term outcomes points to the degree to which these locally-based

projects are contributing to the overall improvement of the conditions of beneficiaries.

Finding 14: The extent to which some of the above outcomes, especially those related to capital-

intensive activities, can be sustained is challenged due to the project-based mindset which

affects design and delivery.

The above Finding clearly points to the worth of the Human Security approach in relation to beneficiary

impact. Earlier Findings have demonstrated that working and planning together resulted in a more dynamic

project design and delivery. However, these intrinsic benefits are placed at risk by the continuation of a

Agricultural techniques that did not exist =

increased income = better quality of life.

Contributing to improved health outcomes.

Empowering communities at the local

level.

Improved quality of early life education.

Overall – Greater Human Dignity.


16

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

mindset among UN staff that sees these projects, especially

those that involve capital expenditure, as developmental or

humanitarian initiatives in their own right and not as a

demonstration of the benefits of Human Security. This is

evidenced by the degree to which project managers either

were seeking follow-on support from the Trust Fund or were

not contemplating how to continue the initiative in its own

right so as to further contribute to beneficiary impact.

At the level of individuals and in relation to low cost activities

there appeared to be a different story. In Colombia, Uganda

and Uzbekistan there was clear evidence that individuals were not only sustaining projects, they were

replicating them - new villages joining micro-finance initiatives, health workers training additional local

people, farmers launching new tree nurseries or municipalities assisting in the support for community

empowerment initiatives.

44 .. 11 .. 77 II mm pp aa cc tt oo nn UU NN FF ii ee ll dd TT ee aa mm

Three key questions concentrated on the extent to which the application of the Human Security approach

had impacted on the UN system at three levels: field level, the country level and at Headquarters. Three sets

of Findings address these three dimensions.

This first set relates to the extent to which participation in the design and delivery of projects supported by

the Trust Fund has influenced thinking and behaviour at the field level, in this context meaning the

managers and staff of the UN agencies that planned the initiative and subsequently managed it, and the

personnel of UN partner agencies involved in implementation.

The electronic survey for this Rapid Assessment asked respondents several questions about the extent to

which the work of the Trust Fund had made positive contributions at the field level. While there is a

relatively small set of responses to these questions, there are enough to show that there are generally

positive views about working with the Trust Fund.

The degree of positive support for issues such as promoting working together and the strengthening of the

overall in-country response points to the degree to which some key elements of the Human Security

approach are seen as positive factors for the UN as a whole at the field level.

“The delivered interventions for both

material (direct inputs) and non-material

(trainings, skills upgrade, capacity

building) have definitely impacted a lot as

articulated by the beneficiaries. I think the

challenge is how to come up with a

sustaining mechanisms to be able to

continue the economic activities after the

project life-cycle.”


May 2013

17 © UNIVERSALIA

Exhibit 4.2 Survey respondent perception on the value-added of the UNTFHS in regard to UN programming and partnerships (N=44)

Finding 15: There appear to be changes in mindset at the field level over the benefits of working

within the Human Security paradigm.

It was very interesting to note the degree to which staff and managers of participating UN agencies

indicated that the project supported by the Trust Fund had been the first time that they had ever worked

together in a truly practical sense.

There was a great deal of support for the understanding that the active

degree of participation involved in Trust Fund-supported projects

improved the quality of the project. There was general recognition among

UN partners that the collective approach to managing and delivering

allowed for more sensitive correction when circumstances changed.

In addition, as the electronic survey shows, at the field level there was

general acceptance of the notion that the application of the Human

Security approach strengthened partnerships.

14%

12%

0%

2%

2%

5%

12%

12%

17%

16%

12%

19%

35%

31%

24%

21%

26%

33%

19%

19%

31%

33%

28%

17%

7%

2%

26%

21%

28%

5%

14%

24%

2%

7%

5%

21%

Overall UN in-country architecture

Strengthening Resident Coordinator’s Office

Development of effective partnerships between UN agencies

Development of effective partnerships between UN and non-UN actors

including governments

Development of new ways of UN agencies working together

Size of UNTFHS funded projects

1-Very Low 2-Low 3-Medium 4-High 5-Very High Do Not Know

New networks and synergies

among UNTFHS project

beneficiaries, partners, local

government service

providers, NGOs, and CSOs

had generated and created

new spaces for information

and knowledge sharing. This

aids beneficiary, family and

social empowerment, trust

building and helps create a

sense of security which is

visible where inter-agency

coordination and partnership

with government is strong as

expressed by state officials

and partners.


18

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

“The policy of funding joint projects

through the UN partner Agencies enables

synergies in project implementation. As a

result, there is holistic response to the

human security issues being addressed.”

“In Madagascar, the joint project

contributes to put together four UN

Agencies. This partnership has been used

for other purposes as Humanitarian Day

Celebration or other disaster preparedness

activities with the NDMA.”

Exhibit 4.3 Extent of survey respondent agreement on the value-added of the UNTFHS in regard to enhancing UN programming and partnerships (N=41)

Finding 16: There appears to be a partially formed understanding of the overall holistic nature of the

Human Security approach at the field level.

This finding reflects comments and observations witnessed

during data collection that tended to show that a number of

project managers sensed that Human Security as a concept was

more than “working together”. There was awareness to some

degree that these projects were responding to complex and multi-

dimensional risks to the human security of the potential

beneficiaries and that as such, these complex risks required a

more coordinated and holistic approach. For example, in several

instances, project managers indicated that improvements in

public health could not have been made possible without

infrastructure improvements (access to electricity) or, that

improvements in agricultural production required strengthening

of local systems of marketing and transportation.

As well, at the field level, there was a great sense of pride apparent in the degree to which the projects had

been the result of collaborative and open consultation with potential recipients.

Notwithstanding the positive considerations noted immediately above, there remained a misunderstanding

that projects like those supported by the Trust Fund required external support, either from the Trust Fund or

from some other donor. These types of projects were not seen as integral to the ongoing business.

2%

2%

15%

12%

27%

24%

24%

29%

27%

27%

5%

5%

Partnerships with UN agencies have increased as a result of the UNTFHS

mechanism.

UNTFHS projects demonstrate an effective commitment to engaging in and promoting

good partnerships.

1-Strongly Disagree 2-Somewhat Disagree 3-Neutral 4-Somewhat Agree 5-Strongly Agree Do Not Know


May 2013

19 © UNIVERSALIA

“More substantively, there is a need for

UNTFHS to position itself more obviously

on the development intersection point

between war and peace, between the

humanitarian and the developmental.

Currently it is not obvious that this is the

strategic position where the TF is located.

As a result, the tools and approaches do not

yet, to my view, adequately cater for the

unique place Human Security challenges

are faced.”

44 .. 11 .. 88 II mm pp aa cc tt oo nn UU NN CC oo uu nn tt rr yy TT ee aa mm ss aa nn dd GG oo vv ee rr nn mm ee nn tt ss

Finding 17: The Human Security approach generally has not been well taken up at the country level

by Country Teams in country level planning (UNDAF, etc.) thus limiting the degree to

which the Human Security approach has been integrated.

This Finding highlights one of the most significant gaps that

face the integration of Human Security into the whole of the

UN system and the adoption of the principles that underpin it

into planning and management.

This gap limits the extent to which Human Security can be

expected to be integrated in the work of the United Nations,

given the degree to which the UN as a whole is attempting to

decentralize decision-making to the regional or country level,

especially with respect to individual project selection and

delivery.

In a number of instances, there appeared to be a blurring

among managers at the country level of the difference between the Human Security approach on the one

hand and other UN considerations such as “One UN” or “Deliver As One” on the other hand. There was

only a limited understanding of the existential dynamics that differentiate the Human Security approach

from others whose primary modality is improving operational effectiveness through collaborative work

efforts.

Most telling however, were the views of managers about whether they could or would integrate the concepts

into their work at the country level. There was a general view among these individuals that in the absence of

strong direction “from the top” the Human Security approach would remain at the stage of being a type of

demonstration activity.

However, in some respects this gap may not be so difficult to understand. The evolution of the Human

Security approach has been complex, culminating in the Consensus Resolution only in the later months of

2012. Therefore, it is only reasonable to assume that the message has yet to fully resonate.

5 . O v e r a l l C o n c l u s i o n s

There are a number of common threads which flow through the Findings of this Rapid Assessment and thus,

which constitute cross-cutting Conclusions. The articulation of these Conclusions enables us to see the

totality of the work of the Human Security approach and also the opportunities and challenges that it faces.

It is very important to stress that, notwithstanding some of the issues raised with respect to specific

shortfalls, the range of projects supported by the UNTFHS has, and is proving itself to make valuable, albeit

presently limited contributions to the attainment of the goal of integrating the Human Security approach into

the work of the United Nations as a whole.

Therefore:

The Human Security approach as recently articulated by the General Assembly has proven to be effective

at the project level.

UNTFHS supported demonstration projects have:

Filled unaddressed areas of Human Security.

Empowered stakeholders and governments (especially at the local level).

Added value that is intrinsic to the three pillars of Human Security.

Resulted in holistic solutions to complex problems.

Shown beneficiary impact.

In short, the Human Security approach works albeit with some limitations.


20

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

55 .. 11 TT hh ee AA cc hh ii ee vv ee mm ee nn tt ss oo ff tt hh ee HH uu mm aa nn SS ee cc uu rr ii tt yy UU nn ii tt (( HH SS UU ))

Over the past four to five years, the HSU has promulgated a number of highly important steps which have

served to bolster the level of understanding of the concepts that underpin Human Security and the nature of

the Human Security approach as translated into country level individual projects.

The current approach requires applicants to more seriously consider factors related to Human Security as

opposed to simply proposing joint programming. In this way, at the project level, the HSU can acquire a

greater sense of the degree to which any given application reflects Human Security considerations.

Moreover, the relatively recent change from an on-demand application process to one where there are now

two calls per year for proposals, allows the HSU to better weigh and balance the relative worth and value of

each application as a potential demonstration project for the application of Human Security.

In addition to the work that the HSU has undertaken with respect to the administration of the Trust Fund, it

should be emphasized that it also has made significant contributions to the broadening of the acceptance of

the principles which underpin the Human Security approach.

The HSU has served as the secretariat for the Secretary General with respect to his duties to report on

Human Security to the General Assembly and most importantly in the recent past, to assist the Secretary

General in efforts to shape the recently approved Consensus Resolution. The magnitude of these

coordination tasks should not be underestimated, especially in light of the paucity of resources available to

the HSU.

Regional workshops have proven to be effective mechanisms to raise awareness among some

representatives of UN agencies at the country level. Testimony from UN staff who attended these

workshops shows that the HSU programming was instrumental in raising awareness at this particular level.

Finally, the HSU is in the process of establishing a comprehensive database for the repertoire of projects

that have been supported by the Trust Fund. This new tool, which is likely to be available in 2013, will give

the HSU the first consolidated approach for better demonstrating the breadth and scope of the work of the

Trust Fund.

55 .. 22 TT hh ee CC hh aa ll ll ee nn gg ee ss FF aa cc ii nn gg tt hh ee HH SS UU

The HSU however, faces a series of challenges that impede its ability to more sensitively manage the Trust

Fund while more conclusively advocating for the integration of the Human Security principles which

underpin the Human Security approach among UN agencies as a whole.

Although it is apparent that the Trust Fund itself has evolved over the past several years, as have the Human

Security concepts and principles which underpin the Human Security approach, as witnessed by both new

Guidelines and the Consensus Resolution, the resources of the HSU have not kept up either quantitatively or

qualitatively. For example, the ability to conduct field missions to provide mid-course advice to projects is

uneven in large part due to competing pressures on the few senior professionals currently in the HSU.

55 .. 33 CC oo mm mm oo nn CC oo uu nn tt rr yy LL ee vv ee ll CC hh aa ll ll ee nn gg ee ss

Cumulatively, there are a number of common Conclusions or factors that emerge from the sets of primarily

country-based Findings.

The most significant of the common challenges is the persistent continuation of the belief at the Country

Team level that Human Security is a kind of “thing” that is supported by the Trust Fund alone.

Notwithstanding the more rigorous selection processes which have been introduced over the past several

years, there remains a traditional project model which has not resulted in the projects being seen as what

they are, demonstrations of Human Security in action.


May 2013

21 © UNIVERSALIA

For the most part, based on discussions with Country Teams, there remains a conceptual challenge related to

the tug and pull between Trust Fund-supported projects as ends in themselves versus their being

demonstration projects related to the application of Human Security. Much more emphasis appears to be

placed on the operational benefits of supporting “working together”, and not enough on the conceptual

benefits of Human Security itself.

55 .. 44 OO nn ee OO vv ee rr aa rr cc hh ii nn gg CC oo mm mm oo nn RR ee cc oo mm mm ee nn dd aa tt ii oo nn

With the exception of one question related to the take-up by UN agencies, this Rapid Assessment has

confirmed the positive value and value added of the Human Security approach at its most primal and

potentially important level – the actual day to day work of United Nations agencies. The challenge now is to

reach beyond project level support to broaden awareness, increase commitment for and resources for the

further integration of the Human Security approach across the United Nations.

This leads to the overarching Recommendation of this Rapid Assessment.

The UN as a system affirm its support for the integration of the Human Security approach as

a valuable tool to promote development, human rights, and peace and security - the three

pillars of the United Nations.


May 2013

23

© UNIVERSALIA

A p p e n d i x I T e r m s o f R e f e r e n c e

Draft TERMS OF REFERENCE Rapid Assessment of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security

January 14/13

1. Overall Objective

The overall objective of the rapid assessment is to determine the added value of applying the human

security approach in addressing multi-dimensional insecurities faced by vulnerable communities through the

activities of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security (UNTFHS). The principles and the

framework in the application of human security are articulated in the Guidelines of the UNTFHS, the

General Assembly resolution 66/290 and the reports of the UN Secretary- General on human security.

2. Background

The UNTFHS was established in March 1999. Through its support to over 205 projects in 85 countries,

including regional projects, the UNTFHS has played an important role in translating the human security

approach into practical actions that have helped strengthen the human security of the most vulnerable

communities and people around the world.

Projects funded through the UNTFHS have brought together the combined expertise of the United Nations

system and have allowed United Nations implementing organizations to tackle widespread and crosscutting

threats affecting people in all regions. In particular, projects funded from the Trust Fund have provided

examples of successful multi-stakeholder collaborations that address the needs and vulnerabilities of local

communities; highlight the institutional gaps that hinder appropriate responses to multidimensional

insecurities; and support empowerment and capacity-building measures that result in notable increases in

the human security of the most vulnerable communities and people

The selection of projects depends on whether they can provide concrete and sustainable benefits to people

and communities threatened in terms of their survival, livelihood and dignity. Other criteria include the

ability of the projects to advance an appropriately multisectoral response that is contextually relevant,

people-centred and prevention-oriented; to promote partnerships with national authorities and local

counterparts in the design and implementation of projects; and to combine the necessary protection and

empowerment measures that can ensure local ownership and sustainability.

3. What are the key principles and framework for advancing human security?

Through the protection and empowerment framework, human security promotes people-centred,

comprehensive, context-specific and prevention-oriented measures that seek to reduce the likelihood of

conflicts, help overcome the obstacles to development and promote human rights for all.

People-centred

Human security considers the broad range of conditions under which the survival, livelihood and dignity of

people, particularly those most vulnerable, are seriously threatened. Essential to human security is the

advancement of political, social, economic, environmental, military and cultural systems that together give

people the building blocks for achieving peace, development and human progress.


24

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Comprehensive

By understanding how a particular threat can negatively affect freedoms that are universal and

interdependent (freedom from fear, freedom from want and freedom to live in dignity), human security calls

for responses that are comprehensive, multi-sectorial and collaborative. This ensures coherence, eliminates

duplication and advances integrated solutions that give rise to more effective and tangible improvements in

the daily lives of people.

Context-specific

Recognizing that the causes and manifestations of threats vary considerably within and across countries, and

at different points in time, human security advances solutions that are embedded in local realities and are

based on the actual needs, vulnerabilities and capacities of Governments and people.

Prevention-oriented

Looking at the root causes of a particular threat, human security identifies the structural (external or

internal), as well as the behavioural changes that are needed to help mitigate the impact, and, where

possible, prevent the occurrence of current and future threats.

Protection (top-down) and empowerment (bottom-up)

The protection and empowerment framework further guarantees the development of appropriate responses

to a particular threat. By combining top-down norms, processes and institutions, including the establishment

of early-warning mechanisms, good governance and social protection instruments, with a bottom-up focus

in which participatory processes highlight individuals’ roles in defining and implementing their essential

freedoms and responsibilities, human security improves local capacities, strengthens social networks, and

ensures coherence in the allocation of resources and policies.

4. Objectives

The following highlights the key issues on which the rapid assessment should focus.

To assess the added value of the human security approach in addressing the broad range of


To assess the impact of the human security approach (i.e., people-centered, context-specific,





To present lessons learned and to determine the added value of the human security approach to

situations in which the human security approach was applied (for e.g., post-conflict and fragile


Particular attention should be paid to joint projects in which the design and implementation of activities

involve several UN agencies and programmes, as well as local partners where possible. The focus of the

assessment should determine the benefits of UNTFHS projects not only for the participating communities

but also for the way the UN works, i.e., the One UN, where based on the technical expertise and the

comparative advantages of each entity, the Organization responds in the most comprehensive and impactful

manner.


May 2013

25

© UNIVERSALIA

5. Scope

The scope of the rapid assessment will be limited to a select group of projects that have been implemented

in vulnerable communities. The assessment will consist of

Four field visits : Uganda, Uzbekistan, Colombia and Mongolia

Three desk top reviews : Vanuatu, DRC, Madagascar

An electronic survey of all project stakeholders post 2009

Interviews and small group meetings with key UN system stakeholders including the UNTFHS

Advisory Board members.

The purpose of the assessment should not be to evaluate the UNTFHS as a whole but to assess the added

value and the relevance of the application of the human security approach to these cases. The assessment

should highlight what makes the selected projects distinct from other activities by the UN and underline the

reasons for their success in line with the key issues outlined in section 3.1. The timeframe for the

assessment should be from 18 January to May 30, with presentation of the Final Report on 8 May 2013

(tbc).

6. Methodology

The assessment should be based on field visits, desk top reviews, interviews, surveys and documents review

to the identified projects in line with the principles and the framework of the human security approach, as

well as the UNTFHS Guidelines. The Assessment Team can also utilize the tools already developed by the

HSU for the application of the human security approach.

7. Stakeholders

Direct stakeholders include the donors of the UNTFHS, the Advisory Board on Human Security and the UN

Secretariat for whom the assessment should provide a strong basis to promote the added value of the human

security approach to addressing multidimensional insecurities both for vulnerable communities as well as

the United Nations system.

9. Management Arrangements

The HSU will manage the contractual arrangements and will provide logistical support to the Rapid

Assessment team; assist in gathering all the relevant background information; set up the relevant

appointments and coordinate/organize the field visits of the team; stay in regular contact with the Rapid

Assessment team for the duration of the Rapid Assessment exercise; and review, disseminate, collate

comments on the draft Rapid Assessment report.

10. Duration of the Rapid Assessment and the Indicative Timeframe

The rapid assessment is expected to take place from 18 January to 30 May 2013, with presentation of the

Final Report on 8 May 2013 (tbc).

Timeline

Work plan 21 January

Desk Review 21 January - 1 February

Field visits (travel included) February 11 - 22

Draft Final Report to be submitted to the HSU 22 March


26

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Final report incorporating comments from the HSU 19 April

Presentation of the Final Report to key stakeholders: New York 8 May 2013

Follow up ( if needed) 9- 30 May

11. Competencies and qualifications

This rapid assessment will require the services of three consultants who combine the following

experiences:

Full familiarization with the reports of the Secretary-General on human security, as well as the

UNTFHS.

Knowledge of multi-sectoral approaches in addressing multidimensional insecurities.

Understanding of protection and empowerment mechanisms that lead to the enhancement of human

security and its sustainability.

In-depth knowledge of inter-agency mechanisms, particularly within the UN context.

Strong analytical skills and ability to prepare well-written reports in a timely manner.

Proven track record in managing and conducting project assessments.

A minimum of 7-10 years of experience in project assessment and programme evaluation.

Fluency in English (one consultant with working knowledge of French and Spanish).

12. Deliverables

The team will produce the following deliverables:

Work plan

Consultation/Workshop

A draft final report for comments from the HSU

Final report reflecting comments received from the HSU

Presentation to key stakeholders on the Final report

13. Audience and Use of the Report

The findings of the report will be shared with the ABHS; UN Member States; UN Agencies, Funds and

Programmes; as well as the general public. Lessons learned from the rapid assessment will be reflected in

the future application of human security through the activities of the HSU, where appropriate.

14 January 2013

Human Security Unit

OCHA


May 2013

27

© UNIVERSALIA

A p p e n d i x I I L i s t o f F i n d i n g s

Finding 1: Gap filling (addressing unfulfilled or new needs) was present in virtually all the projects that

were reviewed for this Rapid Assessment.

Finding 2: Several projects demonstrated the inter-connection between various types of gaps and thus

demonstrated the cross-sectorial nature of projects supported by the Trust Fund.

Finding 3: Projects supported by the Trust Fund have filled an intellectual gap in the thinking of both

government officials and UN administrators about the nature of inter-sectorial activity.

Finding 4: There is some concern that the mechanisms to approve Trust Fund projects are time consuming

and cumbersome involving the provision of information not normally required by UN agencies

in relation to an individual project.

Finding 5: The key commitment to engage governments throughout the design and delivery is more

apparent at the early stages of project design and appears to fall off during delivery and

especially during project reporting.

Finding 6: Among the projects reviewed for this Rapid Assessment, there is a general pattern of

beneficiary involvement in the project design and to a lesser extent, participation in

implementation. There however, does not appear to be an active degree of participation in

reporting or follow-up.

Finding 7: Beneficiaries themselves do not seem to be aware of the fact that they have participated in a

Human Security project. Rather to the extent viable, they do appear to be aware that the project

design was somewhat different from their prior experiences with either development partners

or their own governments.

Finding 8: To some extent, the projects supported by the Trust Fund are breaking new ground and

introducing to the UN new ways of working together at the field level.

Finding 9: The application process, which some stakeholders characterized as time consuming and

cumbersome, is designed to promote lateral thinking and to also demonstrate that lateral

concepts are actually being translated into concrete measures.

Finding 10: These benefits have been variably translated into the way governments engage in the project

and especially in implementation.

Finding 11: The projects reviewed for this Rapid Assessment all demonstrated a degree of value adding

over and above what might be expected had the activities been delivered through traditional

and narrower approaches to project design.

Finding 12: One of the chief value adding elements of the Human Security approach at the project level is

the degree to which individuals are involved in designing solutions to the human security

threats that confront them or their communities.

Finding 13: There were clear signs that the work of the projects being supported by the Trust Fund were

contributing to improvements in livelihood, strengthening of communities and overall

strengthening of community values and sense of worth.


28

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Finding 14: The extent to which some of the above outcomes, especially those related to capital- intensive

activities, can be sustained is challenged due to the project-based mindset which affects design

and delivery.

Finding 15: There appear to be changes in mindset at the field level over the benefits of working within the

Human Security paradigm.

Finding 16: There appears to be a partially formed understanding of the overall holistic nature of the

Human Security approach at the field level.

Finding 17: The Human Security approach generally has not been well taken up at the country level by

Country Teams in country level planning (UNDAF, etc.) thus limiting the degree to which the

Human Security approach has been integrated.

The Rap id Asse s sment

o f the Uni t ed Nat ions

Trus t Fund f or Huma n

Secur i ty

Vo l u m e I I - C o u n t r y S t u d i e s

F i n a l R e p o r t J u n e 1 1

J u n e 2 0 1 3

R a p i d A s s e s s m e n t o f t h e U N T F H S - V o l u m e I I - F i n a l R e p o r t

June 2013

1 © UNIVERSALIA

Colombi a :

Towards a more

H um an Soacha .

T r u s t F u n d f o r H u m a n

S e c u r i t y – F e b 2 5 -

M a r c h 1

J u n e 2 0 1 3


June 2013

3 © UNIVERSALIA


Universalia is pleased to present this report on the assessment of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human

Security (UNTFHS) in Colombia. This report is part of a wider assessment that also examined UNTFHS

collaboration in three other locations: Uganda, Uzbekistan and Mongolia, as well as desk reviews for

Madagascar, Vanuatu and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Purpose of the Rapid Assessment

The purpose of the rapid assessment is to bring depth and field-level perspective to the Human Security

Approach across different regions and contexts. As per the TOR, the Objectives of the Rapid Assessment

are:






reports of the UN Secretary-General on Human Security.”

The following highlights the key issues on which the rapid assessment will focus.





empowerment framework) on the target populations versus regular UN programmes.



To present lessons learned and to determine the added value of the Human Security approach

to situations in which the Human Security approach was applied (e.g., post-conflict and fragile


“Particular attention should be paid to joint projects in which the design and implementation

of activities involve several UN agencies and programmes, as well as local partners where





Field Visit to Colombia

The field visit to Colombia was carried out from February 25- March 1, 2013. The rapid assessment was

carried out by Rudy Broers from the Universalia Management Group. Following two days of meetings in

Bogota with UN and Government officials, the subsequent two days took place in Soacha, and included

meetings with beneficiaries and local officials. The final morning was dedicated to a debrief with the heads

of the UN agencies in Colombia. All meetings were arranged and supported by the OCHA Colombia

office, as well as the Human Security Unit in New York.


4

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

2 . B a c k g r o u n d

The United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security was established in March 1999. Drawing input from

more than twelve years of experience and over 200 projects funded globally, the Guidelines for the

UNTFHS have been revised to better reflect the principles of the Human Security approach and its

application.


communities, UNTFHS projects have covered a wide range of cross-cutting issues worldwide. The

following are some of the areas covered by the UNTFHS:


Protecting and empowering refugees, internally displaced persons (IDPs), economic migrants

and others on the move;


Urban violence and its impact on health, education, economic, personal and community

security;



Soacha’s Joint Programme, which started in July 2010, was a two-year Programme implemented by eight

of the 23 UN Agencies present in the country (FAO, OCHA, PAHO, UNICEF, UNHCR, UNODC, UN

WOMEN and WFP). The main goal of the Programme is to contribute to the improvement of Human

Security of the inhabitants of Soacha, especially IDPs and host communities in the “Altos de la Florida”

sector, located in the 6th Commune (approximately 5,000 direct beneficiaries).

The situation in Soacha reflects several of the cross-cutting challenges which are highlighted above,

including a fragile community, IDPs and economic migrants, social exclusions and other insecurities. In

fact, the situation of Soacha is characteristic of the structural problems and urgent needs that face the

country as a whole in terms of human development. As said by the UN Secretary General during his visit to

Colombia: “Soacha represents all the problems Colombia has – poverty, (lack of) education and basic

sanitation, violence, and inequality."

The Programme is recognized as one of the most ambitious joint programmes in Colombia, due to the large

number of participating UN Agencies. During the first year, conditions for the local authorities were

created to involve communities in the formulation, implementation and monitoring of different public

policies. In addition, the Programme developed advocacy strategies aimed at positioning women, youth,

IDP interests and health and food security and nutrition concerns high on the political and social agendas.

In the framework of the community empowerment component, UN agencies promoted and facilitated the

participation and demands of women, children, young people and IDPs in policy making and quality

service delivery. Significant achievements were made in promoting active involvement of the community

of Altos de la Florida.

During the second year of the Programme, local and regional elections held in Colombia represented a

challenge to ensure the sustainability of the process of the Joint Programme with the authorities. This

required a series of additional efforts with the elected Mayor and his team, and with the Governor’s Office

of Cundinamarca as well as the APC (Presidential Agency for International Cooperation) to ensure

ownership and alignment with partners. The arrival of new local authorities also meant the construction of a

new Development Plan. UN Agencies shared with the elected Mayor the public policy proposals (women

and gender rights, forced displacement, food security and nutrition and youth public policy), which had

been elaborated in close cooperation with the previous government. Those governance tools created


June 2013

5 © UNIVERSALIA

synergies to enhance social safety networks at the municipal level and increase the level of protection of

most vulnerable people through the local authorities.

Exhibit 1 Funding from UNTFHS for Soacha programme

In 2012, a mid-term evaluation1 of the Soacha joint programme was carried out. It concluded that the

results achieved reflected a more empowered community of Soacha due to the active participation of the

community, as well as to the creation of multiple synergies with actors in civil society, government and

NGOS. It suggested that the process needed further continuity and sustainability to have a greater impact

on the lives of community members. Recommendations strongly favoured a greater focus on sustainability

as well as improved monitoring and evaluation systems.

In October 2012, a one-year extension for additional activities was requested and approved in response to

the need to create a more conducive environment for sustainability of on-going programmes, particularly at

the upstream level. This extension focuses on upstream activities such as the support of public policies in

Soacha, support of advocacy groups and measures to improve land tenure. It also includes an objective at

the commune level through the support of existing community groups to support and monitor on-going

activities. The Presidential Agency for International Cooperation (APC), the National Department for

Social Prosperity (DPS), the Mayor’s Office of Soacha and the private sector in Colombia have pledged

additional resources worth (approximately US$200,000). This includes funds from the Transition Solution

Initiatives managed through UNHCR and UNDP. This new Joint Programme will focus its activities

(when possible) on the basis of the UNTFHS Program achieved outputs.

3 . F i n d i n g s

The Human Security Concept in Soacha

Finding 1: The value-added of the Human Security concept in Soacha is the multi-sectoral

approach encompassing a range of development and community building interventions

which has created a space in the community for participation and engagement of

citizens.

The Human Security concept among the UN agencies in Soacha has helped to develop a number of

horizontal “spaces” for youth, adolescents and adults in the community. Working horizontally rather than

in silos has had a broader impact on quality of life of the community than would “siloed” programmes.

1 Fondo Fiduciario de Naciones Unidas para la seguridad humana (UNTFHS) Programa Conjunto por una Soacha más humana –

Evaluación Intermedia.

Agency Funded Amount

FAO 356.310,00

OCHA 185.200,00

PAHO 726.851,00

UN WOMEN 103.897,00

UNODC 314.924,54

UNICEF 238.586,46

UNHCR 298.744,00

WFP 246.100,00

TOTAL 2.470.613,00


6

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

This has been an important unique attribute of the Human Security concept where a large percentage of

families (81%) are involved in several interventions in the community, reflecting a cross-fertilization of

innovations which reinforces the benefits to overall community involvement and engagement.

Three examples highlight the multiplier effects of the Human Security concept in Soacha: the first is that

the concept creates linkages and incentives for families to engage in activities that benefit more than their

own interests. The program of school gardens is linked to household gardens supported by the UNTFHS.

Children in the pre-school benefit from the produce grown in the school’s garden; at the same time, parents

must volunteer their time to support the garden, thereby learning useful skills on food production that they

may use in their own household gardens.

The second example is that Human Security creates incentives for small businesses to develop profitable

enterprises with social benefits. Small skills in entrepreneurship learned through “Emprende y Aprende”

help young people to create opportunities in small businesses. Some of these, simultaneously, help to

expand the safe spaces in the community for young people or provide jobs for youth.

A third example is how involvement in community groups creates engagement with others in the

community and brings benefits beyond that of the group itself. Community agents, committees for

displaced persons and round tables for women carry out important advocacy work. But more than this,

they help to bridge divides between people in various communities and reduce the risks associated between

movements in these communities.

These examples, each of which has a multiplier effect in the community, are the essence of the human-

centered, integrated and multi-sectorial Human Security concept.

Finding 2: The selection of Soacha as a UNTFHS intervention benefits from a limited geographic

scope and a longstanding engagement of the UN in the community. Some feel that this

differentiates this programme from other “joint interventions”

The programme in Soacha was developed following an inter-agency assessment of needs (diagnostico

participativo) driven by a coordination mechanism with local authorities and potential beneficiaries. The

choice of target beneficiary groups was based on vulnerability and needs, focusing on the Altos de la

Florida, one of six communes in Soacha. However, an important aspect to highlight is that there had

already been a presence of UN agencies in Soacha previously (since 2004) which was a strong benefit for

the project and seen as a key reason for success of the Human Security concept.

The limited geographic scope of the work in Soacha is another perceived difference from traditionally

funded UN programmes. In this case, a large number of UN agencies are working within a small

geographic distance in Soacha. Visibility the UN is significant and the outcomes of the Human Security

interventions resonate directly with the population. In discussions with UN staff, they agree that this

limited geographic scope is quite different than working under other trust funds, such as the MDF fund,

which may also otherwise also have a multi-sectoral nature. Involvement of beneficiaries and local actors

at both upstream and downstream levels is an additional added value in that it has helped to affect change at

both levels and has given visibility to all parties.

The joint programme is engaged at both a protection component and empowerment components at roughly

a 3:1 ratio in terms of funding. The former is primarily about ensuring that upstream public policies and

structures allow for a focus on vulnerable populations and that participatory groups can have a voice in

those policies. The latter complements the protection component by focusing on basic services at the

downstream level. This downstream support reaches household nutrition and health, women’s

empowerment and protection, youth employment and children’s education and protection.

The upstream engagement has allowed the United Nations agencies involved in the UNTFHS to interact on

a regular basis with both national, district and municipal government authorities, particularly in the context

of Soacha’s Local Development Plan. As a result, the local authorities in Colombia have come away with


June 2013

7 © UNIVERSALIA

some understanding of the Human Security concept, particularly in terms of the multi-sectoral and gap-

filling nature of the interventions. Moreover, following elections in 2011, the UN team had the experience

and knowledge to ensure that the public policy elements were integrated with the new government in the

context of developing a new Local Development Plan.

Moreover, the engagement of various community groups in Soacha, such as the women’s group and the

displaced person’s group has helped to bring a participatory process to public policy and brought the voice

of the people to local government. For example, the programme works with nine existing NGOs involved

in the women’s roundtable, and provides training in human rights and legal norms for women leaders,

which has contributed to the development of relevant public policies. This example personifies the

“empowerment” component of the programme.

At the downstream level, the added-value is the multiplier effect brought about at the community level,

where community members could see, feel and participate in interventions that visibly improved their

development and security. Instead of seeing the UN only works with government authorities, the UNTFHS

gives the UN visibility in the community through the joint programme.

The downstream activities has created a cadre of leaders in the community – those that work towards

improving household health, nutrition, protection and those community agents that engage youth. These

leaders, some of whom are active in local NGOs are building a very positive sense of local ownership, and

are bringing down the barriers between communes that have impeded access and created insecurities.

Finding 3: The government in Colombia sees the UNTFHS as a relevant intervention with potential

for engaging in other areas of the country as part of its peace plan.

The Agencia Presidencial de Cooperacion (APC) International de Colombia has been strongly engaged in

the Human Security concept. More than cooperating as passive participants in this initiative, they have

been collaborating with the joint programme to the extent that they are now investing their own resources

in the programme. Firstly, the government of Colombia has strongly encouraged joint programming by the

UN, so this has given the UN a great point of leverage with the government of Colombia. Secondly, the

APC is trying to systematize joint programmes, and is trying to learn from such initiatives. Finally, the

APC, by bringing financing to the table for the extension of the programme, is showing that this is a

concept worthy of investment.

It has been noted that Soacha is not a government priority, as indicators for the department of

Cundinamarca as a whole are relatively good. However, as is often the case, indicators for the department

as a whole can hide pockets of depravity, such as those found in locations such as Altos de la Florida. Data

demonstrates that Soacha remains at risk for violence against women, HIV/AIDS adolescent pregnancy.2

For example, a baseline study3 completed by UN Women suggests that in Soacha, women are more at risk

than the average in Colombia:

“La violencia en contra de las mujeres en sus diferentes manifestaciones y en especial la

violencia intrafamiliar por parte de la pareja, que ubica al municipio por encima del promedio

nacional y departamental con el 53,6 por cada 10.000 mujeres, poniendo en riesgo su vida e

integridad personal.”

Soacha is therefore seen as a strategic issue for Colombia: as highlighted elsewhere, it deals with

displaced, housing in illegal territory and urbanisation. This is a strategic issue for the government which

confronted by other communities in Colombia. A number of interviewees suggested three reasons which

underline the engagement of government: 1) As mentioned above, there are many other communities like

2 Separata: Soacha, Retos y propuestas para la construcción colectiva de un programa de gobierno 3 Soacha Corporación Centro de Apoyo Popular (Centrap). Las demandas de las mujeres en el desarrollo local: Una estrategia

para la paz. En Soacha. Línea de base para la formulación de la política pública de mujer y géneros. Soacha, Cundinamarca. 2010.


8

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Altos de la Florida around Colombia, particularly in sites that are far worse off Soacha. 2) There is an

opportunity to link such cross-sectoral programming with the broader peace plan, for which donors are still

engaged in Colombia. 3) There is an opportunity to take best practices from Colombia and apply them to

other contexts in a South-South cooperation, thus furthering Colombia’s leadership as a middle-income

country.

Finding 4: The UNCT knowledge on the UNTFHS and the Human Security concept is mixed, and

some feel that there is little to differentiate it from other analogous funds.

A review of the UNDAF for Colombia demonstrates that some of the same issues facing the UNTFHS

programme are highlighted in the UNDAF. This at the same time reinforces the relevance and coherence

with the UN development planning in Colombia, but also shows that some of the priorities are similar.

According to the UNDAF 2008-2012, marginal populations and vulnerable groups are key beneficiaries of

UNDAF Support:

“son los grupos marginales y excluidos los que se convierten en destinatarios privilegiados de

la cooperación: indígenas, afrocolombianos, población afectada por el desplazamiento

forzado, mujeres y en especial las mujeres cabeza de familia, niños/niñas y adolescentes. Por

idénticas razones de equidad y por la diversidad regional que caracteriza el país, cada uno de

los distintos objetivos y resultados se plantean con especificidades de tipo regional y local.”

Discussions with Representatives of the UNCT suggest that overall knowledge about the Human Security

concept is mixed; some heads of agencies involved in the programming are very familiar, while others have

more of a cursory understanding. Some discussions on Human Security have occurred at the UNCT level.

Engagement of staff from the HSU in Colombia through field missions and an initial week-long training

helped to bring agency staff on board with the Human Security concept. A mission to Costa Rica to visit

an existing programme helped to build understanding on the concept for UN and government staff.

Finding 5: The UNTFHS has created a cooperative relationship between UN agencies, due to

significant collaboration in Soacha and a common basis for their understanding of the

concept.

Good coordination by OCHA throughout this programme has been a hallmark of the UNTFHS in

Colombia. It has been highlighted by a strong understanding of holistic nature of Human Security

approach, thanks to some early training as well as support from HSU and a visit to Costa Rica.

The UN team also sees a clear recognition of value of multi-sector work and of complementarity of

agencies’ areas of expertise. The programme in Soacha has been notable for cohesive team work at

management as well as at working level, good integration of implementing partners and NGOs, who have

worked closely with the UN staff. As mentioned previously, UNTFHS funding is an incentive for

cohesion, and much success on the ground level is given to the long experience that the UN already had in

Soacha – particularly UNHCR, which brought legitimacy and credibility of the UN there.

Overall Impact of the UNTFHS

Although the assessment of beneficiary impact was not included in the initial Terms of Reference for this

assignment, very early on it became apparent that it would be necessary to secure some information about

the extent of the impact of the projects that the Trust Fund had supported so as to be able to answer a very

primal question: what difference did these projects make in the lives of individual beneficiaries and their

communities. However, the assessment of beneficiary impact traditionally has been one of the most

problematic challenges that have faced the evaluation or review of humanitarian or developmental

activities. Traditional approaches to the attribution of how a humanitarian or developmental program

produced results tended to be fairly linear in nature and in many cases far too narrow in focus to be able to

provide managers and donors alike a satisfactory response to this primal question. In more recent times


June 2013

9 © UNIVERSALIA

however, more existential methodologies have been developed that recognize that the benefits accrued

through humanitarian or developmental programming seldom can be directly attributed to one single

activity. Rather, it has become apparent that positive change in most instances is the result of a series of

factors and activities collectively contributing to the process of change. About a dozen years ago, Dr. John

Mayne, then a senior official in the Office of the Auditor General of Canada, developed a new evaluative

technique which was called Contribution Analysis as a means to conceptualize how various factors work

together to generate change. In the ensuring years, this methodology has been refined, and in many

instances, merged with the more sophisticated approach to the portrayal of cause and effect, Theory of

Change models. Universalia has used the principles which underpin Contribution Analysis along with those

that sustain Theory of Change models to address the challenge of demonstrating beneficiary impact. We

did so for this Rapid Assessment.

Finding 6: Beneficiaries have expressed significant Human Security benefits within their

communities.

There has been an overall expression of satisfaction and appreciation with the programme in Soacha. It has

been viewed as beneficial to Commune 6, Altos de la Florida, in a number of ways. It has had a positive

impact in terms of deliverables such as food security and nutrition, schooling, youth activities,

entrepreneurship strategy, support services for women affected by violence, and water and sanitation. This

has led to an overall improvement in the empowerment and human development in the community.

Outcome level changes highlighted by beneficiaries4 include issues covering food, community, health,

environment, economic and political security:

Women’s groups have been able to participate and contribute to policies that affect them and their

communities. They have learned about the meaning of human rights, and have been empowered to

voice their views in their community through public policies.

Families have knowledge and actually practice many of the key factors for improved health in the

household.

Families are using rain water collection methods and treatment systems in their households.

Improvement in youth behavior in public parks, creating a space for recreational activities and

increased security. As mentioned by one community leader: “in the past, this community felt like 4

different sectors, but now it is more of a community”.

30 new socio-economic and income generating business are active in Soacha, with many

businesses generating revenues and employing staff, and also beginning to engaged in some social

benefits for the community. One construction business hired 9 people to help in a house

construction project.

Families are practicing new food preparation techniques employing produce grown in household

gardens. “Before, families were eating rice and potatoes, but there is now more variety in the

meals”.

Flexible school programs for pre-school aged children are functional; school latrines are

constructed and used; community sanitation facilities are constructed and close to final.

The community has a space for community meetings and discussion, bringing members together

and improving the overall security in the community. The programme has reached out to minorities

and brought communities closer together – among displaced people, 39 out of every 100 are

indigenous and 9 are Afro Caribbean in origin.

4 Discussion group meetings and visits with community leaders and community members in Altos de la Florida,

February 28, 2013.


10

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Finding 7: By working with the municipality at the upstream level, the joint programme has given

the municipal actors a way to engage and advance key issues related to Human Security

in Soacha. This has helped to ensure programme sustainability

In addition to downstream benefits, the UNTFHS has also brought outcome level change to some of the

upstream policies and development plans for the municipality of Soacha, through advocacy from UN staff

as well as reinforcing the voice of community groups and NGOs. These upstream elements have been

fundamental in developing some sustainable processes to help step away from Soacha while allowing local

actors to continue in the development of Human Security.

Engagement of politicians in rights issues in the municipality of Soacha through the “Pacto de los

Candidatos.” This programme was led by UNDP and while not part of the UNTFHS, it was seen as

complementary to the work of the joint programme.

Engagement of the municipality in considering new initiatives to support land ownership rights,

and land tenure issues as well as water distribution.

Engagement of the municipality in organizing and thinking about how legislation (such as those

dealing with violence) is implemented on the ground, including highlighting continued gaps of

legislation.

Ownership of programme activities is such that some elements of funding are now coming from

Municipality as well APC and even private donors. It should be noted however, that there are clear limits

to the emergence of a fully sustainable programme in such an environment where land rights are tenuous.

Also, some displaced persons may indeed wish to return to the communities from which they came.

Finding 8: While some efforts have been made on monitoring and evaluation, the lack of qualitative

data collection and monitoring to measure outcomes of the joint programme in Soacha

has hampered greater reporting and documentation on the UNTFHS.

Reporting carried out as part of the UNTFHS has included good follow-up to the logical framework of the

programme. The reporting highlights constraints and challenges as well as recommendations for action.

Similarly, the 2012 Evaluation provided a number of lessons learned and recommendations. It appears that

these recommendations were considered in part through the design and development of the one-year

programme extension, as well as activities undertaken and funded through individual agencies.

The absence of clear quantitative indicators to measure improved social capital through such factors as

better security, improved community engagement, or heightened understanding of human rights hinder a

stronger ability to develop the theory of change of Human Security in Soacha. This was noted by a number

of UN actors over the course of the assessment. It was also highlighted in the 2012 evaluation. It is also

notable that the government officials interviewed struggled with similar challenges in their day-to-day

programmes, suggesting an opportunity to work jointly with the government on improving such systems.

4 . C o n c l u s i o n s a n d L e s s o n s L e a r n e d

Conclusions

The Human Security concept represents an innovative way of joint programming for the UN agencies in

that it reinforces a multiplier effect in the community in which the programmes takes place. It is a new way

of doing business in at-risk zones with tenuous land ownership issues that could be good example of future

programmes under the mantra of peacebuilding in Colombia

The Human Security model of programming benefits from a longstanding engagement of the UN in

Soacha. Replicating the Human Security model is incumbent upon a strong engagement of the UN, both

before and after the joint intervention. Even so, developing sustainable systems that will persist beyond the


June 2013

11 © UNIVERSALIA

two-year span of programming has been a challenge, with some questions as to how sustainable we can

expect the interventions to be in the context of Soacha.

The UNTFHS has fomented, and benefitted from strong leadership and excellent collaboration of the UN

partners, and a good engagement with local and national governments and NGOs. This is evidenced by a

continued engagement of UN, government and private sector actors in the joint interventions in Soacha.

The dual objectives of the joint programming in Soacha covered both empowerment elements as well as

protection interventions at a 3:1 ratio. Both objectives provided a number of notable outcomes over the

two-year lifespan of the programme, particularly in regard to community empowerment and policy and

advocacy at the upstream level. Improved monitoring and evaluation systems for qualitative data and the

results of capacity development, as was noted in 2012, can help to improve reporting and documentation of

the value-added of Human Security.

Knowledge of the Human Security concept has expanded in Colombia, but has not been strongly

appropriated by all UN agencies in the UNCT. Questions remain regarding the UNTFHS’s links with

protection or early recovery cluster, and how it “fits”?

Lessons Learned

The UN team working in Colombia would not have achieved the same level of results had they not already

developed a strong relationship with the municipal government in Soacha and with the community in Altos

de la Florida. Nevertheless, two years to carry out the joint programming and develop sustainability

systems is challenging.

The HSU’s engagement with the government of Colombia during its visit had an important validation

effect for the government of Colombia and demonstrated the UN’s commitment in the UNTFHS and an

illustration of the value of the Human Security approach.

Working at both an upstream and downstream level in a community is seen as far preferable as working

alone at the upstream policy level. If these upstream engagements are prioritized at the expense of

downstream activities, there is an impression that the programme has no tangible benefit in the community.

The focus on “real needs” and not only laws/public policies as expressed by people ensures genuine

ownership and leads to strong commitment for future (e.g. budget allocation for continuation).


June 2013

13 © UNIVERSALIA

Mongo l ia :

Promot i ng S oc ia l

E qua l i ty in t he

Gob i -areas o f

Sout h Mongo l ia by

Fos ter ing Huma n

Secur i ty w i th

I n tegra ted and

Prevent ion

A pproaches

J u n e 2 0 1 3


June 2013

15 © UNIVERSALIA


The UN Human Security Trust Fund


including regional projects, the UNTFHS has played an important role in translating the Human Security

approach into practical actions that have helped strengthen the Human Security of the most vulnerable






communities; highlight the institutional gaps that hinder appropriate responses to multi-dimensional


the Human Security of the most vulnerable communities and people



ability of the projects to advance an appropriately multi-sectorial response that is contextually relevant,




The Fund is overseen by an Advisory Board that meets yearly to provide guidance and direction to the

Human Security Unit (HSU) at UN HQ in New York.

This “Rapid Assessment”

In May 2013, there will be a High Level Event in New York City. In preparation for that meeting, the

HSU has commissioned this assessment of the Fund’s activities in the past five years. This assessment is

“rapid” because of the tight timeframe; it will explore the relevance and value of the Human Security

approach and of the UNTFHS concept and mechanism. Its focus, rather than on projects per se, is on how

projects contribute to the attainment of Human Security and to the advancement of the concept, both in

relation to beneficiaries and to UN integration efforts. It will:

Assess the added value of the Human Security approach in addressing the broad range of


Assess the impact of the Human Security approach (i.e., people-centered, context-specific,



Present the usefulness of UNTFHS projects in addressing gaps in responses to multi-


Present lessons learned and to determine the added value of the Human Security approach to



The scope of the rapid assessment is limited to a select group of countries/projects that have been

implemented in vulnerable communities. It will consist of:

Four field visits: Colombia, Mongolia, Uganda and Uzbekistan;

Three desk top reviews: DRC, Madagascar, Vanuatu ;


16

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

An electronic survey of all project stakeholders post 2009; and

Interviews and small group meetings with key UN system stakeholders including the members of

the Advisory Board on Human Security.

The purpose of the assessment is to determine the added value and relevance of the application of the

Human Security approach to these cases. The assessment will highlight what makes the selected projects

distinct from other activities by the UN and underline the reasons for their success.

The UNTFHS project: Promoting social equality in the Gobi-areas of south Mongolia by fostering Human

Security with integrated and prevention approaches

Executing agencies: UNDP, UNICEF, WHO, UNFPA

Counterpart organizations: Ministries of Environment & Green Development; Construction & Urban

Development; Health; Education & Science; Local Government

The project was conceived by the UN country team in 2010 as a natural follow-up to an earlier project:

Comprehensive community services to improve Human Security for the rural disadvantaged populations in

Mongolia (2009-2012; UNESCO, UNICEF, WHO, UNDP) that had been successful both in its impact and

in the way agencies worked together. It started as a UNDP project in 2010, because of delays in getting the

other agencies ready for involvement, and is planned for three years (2010-13) with a budget of US$ 2.7

million. It covers areas of poverty, climate change and socio-economic development, with five objectives

for the population of vulnerable communities in the Gobi:

Access to safe drinking water (UNDP);

Quality improvement of education (UNICEF);

Access to health care (WHO and UNFPA);

Income generating activities (UNDP); and

Promotion of the Human Security approach (all four).

Water is a hugely important part of life sustenance in this desert area, with chronic problems of water

scarcity. Economic insecurity is a common feature of life in these rural areas, as is the lack of quality health

and education services. The geographical area is threatened by the consequences of climate change.

2 . F i n d i n g s

Through a series of meetings with all stakeholders in Ulaanbaatar, mainly government and UN including

the National Project Director and National Project Manager, as well as useful interface with local

authorities, the assessment resulted in the following findings, categorized according to areas of interest for

the purpose of this assessment:

Project Design, Conception and Execution

The project was drawn from an inter-agency assessment of needs driven by the government in

consultation with local authorities and potential beneficiaries.

The choice of target beneficiary groups was based on vulnerability and needs, focusing on the

community.

The project fits the country’s development strategy and objectives.

The formulation of the work plan and project activities was carried out in an integrated approach.

Overall, the project is implemented smooth, with regular joint monitoring by participating agencies

(Government and UN), including joint missions to the field.


June 2013

17 © UNIVERSALIA

However, it was noted that the approval process for a funding decision is unnecessarily lengthy and

complex; this transactional cost is too high.

Involvement of Beneficiaries and Local Actors

The local authorities (at soum5 level) were consulted from the very beginning of the project design.

The project is needs-based, with appropriate integration of multiple sectors and a broad range of

beneficiaries.

There is regular interaction of central government authorities and UN agencies with local

authorities and beneficiaries.

The very positive sense of ownership has led the beneficiaries to engage in continued future action

through their own budgetary resources.

The assurance of sustainability was provided by the new Mongolian decentralized budget

regulations.

Involvement and Cohesion of the UN Team

There is a clear understanding of the holistic nature of the Human Security approach.

There is a clear recognition of the value of multi-sector work and of the complementarity of

agencies’ areas of expertise.

A cohesive team work can be observed at management as well as at working level.

There is good integration of implementing partners.

There is a true commitment to pursue the integrated effort.

However, this integration won’t happen naturally. The UNTFHS funding is an incentive for

cohesion, but it is not enough; there is recognition that a change of mindset is needed, which will

take time.

Perceived Impact on Beneficiaries

Overall, there is an expression of satisfaction and appreciation with project, as it is recognised as

being beneficial to the soum in its entirety.

There is positive impact in terms of deliveries e.g. dormitories, equipment for health centres, waste

management, creation of small businesses, running water in hospitals, training handbooks.

Management arrangements are inclusive and satisfactory.

The ownership of project activities is such that soum authorities will continue with funding from

their own budget.

Impact on UN and Government in Mongolia






5 Township


18

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA
















While the Trust Fund’s additional funding is clearly an incentive, there is recognition of the value

and wider scope of working in an integrated fashion.

The integrated approach by UN appears to have rubbed off onto government departments who

express content in working more closely together.

There is recognition that UNTFHS cannot address all issues. The TF is an incentive to demonstrate

the value of Human Security: a good concept, but the question is asked about why it is not

mainstreamed and what is the agencies’ HQ’s position.

Agencies, both UN and government, are keen to pursue development work in that direction – but

the time has come to move from modelling to mainstreaming.

For Mongolia, continued external funding is needed for such projects. Even though Mongolia is

now a middle-income country, the vulnerability of large segments of population remains high and

the change of status of the country should not prompt external aid agencies to leave.

Filling Gaps

Remote areas are covered that might not be otherwise.

By connecting sectors, the project covers broader areas of development assistance: horizontal

coverage rather than silo approach.

Linking health to the community, as opposed to the earlier practice of treating individuals.

Linking with other sectors has provided a holistic approach for education work.

The project is instrumental in bringing technology to villages in the key sectors of water and

sewage.

The project has led to new activity and the creation of new jobs in soums.

Breaking New Ground

Working in an integrated manner and adopting a multi-sectorial approach has been a new and

positive experience, for government services as well as for UN agencies.

The project has triggered important developments in legislation, standardization of practice and

terminology.


June 2013

19 © UNIVERSALIA

The project has reached out to minorities and brought communities closer together through

community radio (in the earlier phase of the UNTFHS funded activity).

The project focuses on real needs as expressed by people; this ensures genuine ownership and leads

to strong commitment for the future (e.g. budget allocation for continuation).

This new way of doing business is now being exported by WHO Mongolia to WHO China.

Overall Value Added

Working horizontally rather than in silos has had an impact on the quality of life in broad

communities.

Greater focus on the community as a whole.

Broad solutions as opposed to itemized sector approach.

The project has led to greater cohesion of the UN team, and higher credibility of international

development action.

It has also lead to more integrated linkages to government departments as active partners.

The project has created a potential for outreach to broad development system (for example with

development projects financed by the ADB).

3 . C h a l l e n g e s a n d C o n c l u s i o n s

At the outcome of the mission and beyond the clear recognition of the value added of the Human Security

approach, a series of important questions remain to be addressed and answered:

How can the Human Security model become part of a regular way of the way the UN Country

Team works?

– There is a clear need for broad recognition by agencies at HQ level that this approach and

integrated working mechanism is the way the UN should do business in the field. In parallel,

funding issues have to be addressed, as Human Security cannot be boiled down to a mere

funding mechanism, and the approach will require greater financial backing than this relatively

modest Trust Fund.

How can the Human Security approach be systematized beyond “demonstration” projects funded

by the UNTFHS?

– Mongolia is a good example to illustrate the involvement and ownership of beneficiary

communities, and in a remarkable way, their commitment to continue operating in the same

manner after UNFTHS funding stops. But in a broader context, there has to be assurances from

participating agencies that they will encourage the approach, and fund it through similar

activities that become part of their regular programme.

The UN agencies will need to enlist full government backing of the concept and in that respect give

assurances of continued appropriate funding of requirements identified through traditional country

programming mechanisms without upsetting funding patterns.

The one negative aspect of the UNTFHS’s operations that was mentioned relates to the

administrative processes for project approval. They are cumbersome and lengthy, and need to be

simplified for the Fund to operate smoothly.

The conclusions of the mission to Mongolia can be summarized in the following points:


20

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

The Mongolia UNTFHS-funded projects have successfully illustrated the value of the Human

Security approach, in terms of impact on beneficiary communities, of horizontal collaboration with

the Government and local authorities, and of enhancing UN integration efforts.

The approach deserves being promoted, but this cannot be done only through a relatively modest

Trust Fund.

The UNCT needs to work with all partners to promote the approach and ensure funding availability

through its traditional country programming.


June 2013

21 © UNIVERSALIA

Uganda :

Rap id Asse s sment

Repor t for

Uganda: The

Nor thern Uganda

Ear ly Recovery

Pro jec t

U n i t e d N a t i o n s T r u s t

F u n d f o r H u m a n

S e c u r i t y

F e b 1 1 - 1 5 , 2 0 1 3

J u n e 2 0 1 3


June 2013

23 © UNIVERSALIA



Security (UNTFHS) in Uganda. This report is part of a wider assessment that also examined UNTFHS

collaboration in three other locations: Colombia, Uzbekistan and Mongolia, as well as desk reviews for



The purpose of the rapid assessment bring depth and field-level perspective to the Human Security

Approach across different regions and contexts. As per the TOR, the Objectives of the Rapid Assessment

are:
























Field Visit to Uganda

The field visit to Uganda was carried out from February 11 to 15. The Rapid Assessment was carried out

by Dale Thompson, the Team Leader from Universalia Management Group and the Head of the HSU.

Following two days of meetings in Kampala with UN and government officials, the subsequent two days

took place in Northern Uganda, basing at Lira, and included meetings with beneficiaries and local officials.

The final morning was dedicated to a debrief with the heads of the UN agencies in Uganda. All meetings

were arranged and supported by the UNDP Uganda office, as well as the Human Security Unit in New

York.


24

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA





application.





Protecting and empowering refugees, internally displaced persons (IDPs), economic migrants and

others on the move;


Urban violence and its impact on health, education, economic, personal and community security;



The Northern Uganda Early Recovery Project (NUERP) was designed and implemented within the

framework of the National Development Plan (NDP) and the project outputs directly contributed to the

Government of Uganda’s Peace Recovery and Development Plan (PRDP), whose over-arching framework

and affirmative action was to address the post-conflict and recovery challenges in Northern Uganda.

The project was funded by the UNTFHS and implemented jointly by three UN Agencies: the United

Nations Development Programme (UNDP/Lead Agency), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the

World Food Programme (WFP) and their partner delivery agencies. The main goal of the project was to

support the rapid and self-sustainable recovery of the conflict-affected returning population in the Lango

sub-region through an integrated service delivery and community-based approach. It was implemented in

the districts of Lira, Otuke, Alebtong and Oyam, over the period of 2009-2011, with a no-cost extension

until 30 November, 2012, when the project was concluded.

The objectives of NUERP were as follows:

Objective 1: To facilitate resettlement and recovery among the target population through

enhancing the physical and organizational assets in 16 sub-counties and areas of return by the end

of the project period (UNDP & WFP)

Objective 2: To improve the production capacity and income of 10,000 households (60,000

individuals) through agricultural and non- agricultural activities and access to markets, credit and

savings in two years (UNDP & WFP)

Objective 3: To improve the health, nutritional, and HIV/AIDS status of at least 30% of the

228,190 persons in 16 sub-counties and uphold their right to health through improved access to

quality health, nutrition and HIV/AIDS services within two years (WHO)

Objective 4: To allow 16 sub-counties where people have returned to engage in peace building and

conflict prevention processes involving women, youth, religious, and cultural /local leaders within

the project period (UNDP).

The Northern Uganda Early Recovery Project (NUERP) had a budget of US$ 3,807,443.

It should be noted that NUERP was the subject of a midterm evaluation, as was required. This evaluation

was conducted in 2010 and for the most part, confirms the Findings below. It is important however to


June 2013

25 © UNIVERSALIA

underscore that the midterm evaluation addressed issues related to efficiency and effectiveness that were

not the subjects of this Rapid Assessment. Moreover, in articulating its findings, the midterm evaluation

tended to utilize a traditional approach to assessing value added or the degree of programmatic impact

accrued. This does not say that these findings themselves are not valid. Rather, it is to emphasize that this

Rapid Assessment was designed to address factors that are at the core of the Human Security approach as a

whole.

3 . F i n d i n g s

Filling Unforeseen Challenges (Gap Filling)

Finding 1: Unanticipated risks to Human Security have been addressed by the NUERP

One of the most important issues for this Rapid Assessment was the determination of whether Human

Security demonstration projects were addressing needs that others had not. Traditionally understood in

terms of gap filling in the context of UNTFHS-supported projects, the “gaps” should be articulated in terms

of threats to Human Security in its broadest understanding. As well, in the context of a Human Security

demonstration project, these threats to Human Security also should be articulated within a paradigm of

interconnections, a recognition of the multiplicity of threats which can exist in any given environment.

In that context, NUERP clearly addressed issues and threats which other programming had not done,

ranging from the very locales (see Finding below) to much more subtle considerations of how the response

to a variety of threats to Human Security could cut across diverse sectors such as health, livelihood support,

environmental protection and education.

Some of these gaps were self-evident, an absence of roads to link communities with schools or health

centers, or the need to diversify agricultural production so as to improve food safety and economic

opportunities. Some however, were much more subtle and reflected innovative understanding of the true

nature of Human Security.

For example, promoting micro-finance activities along with peace rings (community-based conflict

resolution mechanisms) and as well, introducing improved agricultural production and marketing,

addressed a complex set of threats that were the product of over 20 years of dislocation.

One psychological gap figured largely in the design and delivery of NUERP. Unlike most other

programming in response to the 20 year crisis in Northern Uganda and subsequent reconstruction, NUERP

was based at the field level on the philosophy of bottom-up empowerment of people and their communities.

This has led to people themselves taking responsibility for the transmission of the skills they acquired

through NUERP to others who may face some of the same threats to their Human Security. In this instance

therefore, people themselves are identifying other gaps in their environment and are working with other

people outside the development paradigm to respond to these challenges to their well-being. Again, in this

context, these activities are related to the low cost person-to-person focus of NUERP, and specifically to

activities such as the expansion of peace rings into other communities along with the similar expansion of

micro-finance activities.

Finding 2: The districts that were the focus of the NUERP had been somewhat overlooked by other

response mechanisms.

The over 20 year human disaster in Northern Uganda swept across the entire width of the nation. That said,

some areas were “hotter” than others and attracted a higher degree of global and national attention. It also

must be recalled that the displacement of populations in Northern Uganda was widespread, with IDP camps

in virtually all districts.


26

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

The locales selected for NUERP were those which had not received as high a degree of reconstruction

support as others. These districts are largely “in the middle” between two of the hot spots. Therefore, the

Human Security challenges faced by these people were probably just about the same as those encountered

in the “hot spots”.

This in itself is an example of how the Human Security approach, in the context of demonstration projects

such as NUERP, filled needs which others had been unable to address, in this context, gap filling in relation

to geography. The importance of this Finding should be underscored. NUERP represents probably the only

comprehensive approach to addressing the decades’ long destruction in these districts, as the national plan

tends to focus on the more recognized “hot spots”.

The Value Added

Finding 3: There has been considerable value added in terms of mechanisms of delivery

The question of value added in the context of this Rapid Assessment relates to a comparison between a

holistic UNTFHS-supported demonstration project and more traditional means of program delivery by UN

agencies, for the most part within the context of what some commentators have referred to as “agency

silos”. At the outset, it is also important to underscore that the selection of demonstration projects for this

Rapid Assessment had to be made from more recent project activity which reflects the more contemporary

approach to Human Security as articulated in the last two versions of the Trust Fund Guidelines.

The criteria to assess the value added of these more contemporary UNTFHS-supported projects focussed

on the perceptions of staff and managers as to the overall worth of two models of delivery. Issues of

Efficiency or Effectiveness which figured largely in the midterm evaluation of NUERP were not part of the

mandate of the Rapid Assessment.

Within these parameters there was considerable evidence that NUERP represented a new approach to

addressing the challenges to the well-being of the people of Northern Uganda.

Staff, especially at the field level, recognized that NUERP was synergistic and that the way it combined

activities resulted in a gestalt, a combination of mutually enforcing results. The recognition of the

empowerment of people in helping determine what they needed was seen as fundamentally different from

projects even currently underway which were largely top-down and which had determined from the center

what the people needed. Likewise, the emphasis within the Human Security approach on the recognition of

the centrality of promoting a sense of dignity, as opposed to just “fixing” something, was seen as a

fundamentally different characteristic.

Finding 4: The “whole of problem” approach inherent in UNTFHS programming is superior in its

sensitivity and responsiveness to traditional models

This Finding is echoed across all the case studies for this Rapid Assessment and as such needs to be given

specific pride of place. While it may seem self-evident the very fact that the Human Security approach in

relation to its demonstration projects requires UN agencies to work together is in itself fundamentally new

for many. As was echoed in other environments, many of the UNCT staff reported that they had simply

never worked with their operational counterparts in other agencies on a specific initiative. Most certainly

they had all participated in joint meetings but there was a fundamental “newness” in actually having to

work together.

But what it is most important is that there was evidence that what was new was more than working

together. The “whole of the problem” approach was identified by stakeholders at all levels as something

very different for them and something that transcended simply “working together”. The recognition that to


June 2013

27 © UNIVERSALIA

address a complex series of challenges to the well-being of people required more than just fixing individual

problems constitutes a validation to some degree of the principles which underpin Human Security as a

whole.

Breaking New Ground

Finding 5: The UNTFHS-supported project is breaking new ground by introducing new themes and

expanded approaches to partnership

The UNTFHS project is breaking new ground in several ways. At its most basic level, the fact that NUERP

involved working together as opposed to traditional isolated delivery modalities is in itself breaking new

ground.

At a more complex level, regional level personnel as well as field personnel recognized that the bottom-up

nature of the Human Security approach had resulted in project elements that more closely met what people

themselves saw as their principle needs. Again, staff indicated that this constituted a new kind of thinking

for programming in Northern Uganda.

NUERP also broke new ground with the combination of the activities that it supported. The range of

project activities is largely people-centered and people-to-people in nature, philosophically different from

the government’s overall reconstruction plans which are ministerially driven and which tend to focus on the

“big ticket” items.

Impact on the Project Team and UN Country Team

Finding 6: The UNTFHS-supported project has created a more cooperative relationship between

UN agencies, due to significant collaboration and a common basis for their

understanding of the concept in relation to this project

At the project level, there is considerable evidence of an awareness of the nature of the Human Security

approach as a whole and the inherent benefits of multi-disciplinary solutions to complex challenges.

Examples of the degree to which, at the field level, elements of the Human Security approach have been

integrated are numerous.

The degree to which field level staff, many times in the context of NUERP, and NGOs have accepted the

empowerment model and the “whole of the problem” approach exemplifies their understanding of the

complexity of the challenges. It is important to underscore the acceptance of empowerment. The

acceptance of empowerment implies that these field level personnel recognize the benefits of the maxim

“people support what they helped design”.

The corollary to this positive Finding however, is that these same personnel indicated that NUERP was the

first time they had ever encountered this kind of project design philosophy, clear evidence that, at least in

the context of Northern Uganda, the principles of Human Security remain a sort of “demonstration

activity”.

Finding 7: The UNCT knowledge of the UNTFHS and the Human Security concept is uneven, and

some feel that there is little to differentiate it from other analogous funds

In Uganda, there was some degree of resistance to the Human Security approach on the part of a few mid-

level staff who either were unaware of the fundamental characteristics of the Human Security approach or

who had set them aside. These personnel, not as close to the field as others, held the view that Human

Security was probably very little more than “Deliver As One”.

This misperception may in large part lie in the degree to which the sponsoring UN agency, UNDP

conducted briefings for sister agencies to highlight what makes Human Security special. We found little


28

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

evidence of a concerted campaign to do so. We also found evidence, common to many UNCTs, of the

turnover of personnel resulting in knowledge gaps, and the all too natural tendency to “just do it”.

At the concluding briefing held in Kampala, it was interesting to note the degree to which UNCT members

were seeking “more” from the Trust Fund, a confirmation of the widespread belief that Human Security

remains a demonstration activity and has yet to be fully embraced by the UN system as a whole.

Finding 8: The overall level of acceptance of the whole of the Human Security approach remains

problematic at the country level

The above Findings mirror many others that were developed during this Rapid Assessment vis a vis the

take-up of the Human Security approach. There appears to be a general paradigm that local level UN

partners along with public sector employees have the highest awareness of the holistic benefits inherent in

the Human Security approach, with regional level personnel also having adequacy in their understanding of

the nature of Human Security. At the country level, in Uganda as well as elsewhere it is evident that the

nature of Human Security and its fundamental differences from traditional program delivery models are

scarcely known let alone understood.

This is large part due to the demonstration project nature of present UNTFHS activities which are designed

to narrowly focus on a few communities as opposed to the national level; in large because of funding

considerations. It is also however, a result of UNCTs, including Uganda, not fully and forcefully promoting

the project in question as more than an example of “working together”. In relation to NUERP, it was

evident that the national level officials did not understand that the project was “something else”. At best,

they indicated their support for the UN working together in this fashion more often. While this is in itself

some sort of a benefit, it clearly is not an acceptance of the totality of the Human Security model.

Likewise, some UNCT members in Uganda tended to view NUERP as simply a joint program.

In discussions at the UNCT level in Kampala, it became apparent that both the programmatic and

philosophical benefits of the Human Security approach were facing challenges with respect to possible

replication. Although it was evident that the approach was widely seen as positive in relation to this one

demonstration project, there did not appear at the Country Team level to be any strong commitment to

replicate it.

While Country Team members seemed to recognize that the project in question was a demonstration

project and likely not to be subject to replenishment from the UNTFHS, there did not appear to be a

realization of the need to reach out to other donors.

Finding 9: Efforts have been taken to provide on-going funding

While above Findings point to gaps in relation to the UNCT in Uganda, it is essential to emphasize that

UNDP, as the project lead, has made a $1 Million earmark of its own funding to attempt to either continue

in the current locales or to branch out into other locales with part of the range of activities of NUERP. This

is a major achievement. However, it is somewhat hampered by the fact that UNDP needs additional

partners, either other UN agencies or bilateral donors, or the government itself in order to undertake this

new initiative.

Overall Impact of the UNTFHS-Supported Project








June 2013

29 © UNIVERSALIA















Finding 10: Beneficiary impacts are evident in virtually all of the project’s areas of activity

The NUERP probably represents the most complex and widespread set of evidence of beneficiary impact

that was encountered during the whole of the Rapid Assessment. This is in large part due to the diversity of

the sub-projects, their very “hands on” nature and the fact that the review of NUERP was conducted at the

end of the project thus enabling the most significant degree of beneficiary impact to be observed.

The beneficiary impacts involved were cross-sectorial in nature, namely, the result of the combination of a

number of sub-projects and also likely external factors. On this point, it should be emphasized that while

the United Nations generally has not been active in the districts which were the subject of the NUERP,

others have been, including the Government of Japan. Thus, at the outset it is reasonable to conclude that

the beneficiary impacts to be described below are again examples of the principles which underpin

Contribution Analysis.

Benefits in the Northern Uganda districts cut across cross-sectorial lines. Improvements in agricultural

production, primary product refinement, local marketing and the introduction of community based micro-

finance programming has resulted in increased incomes, increased food security and increased access to

education (having the money to pay school fees). Relatively simple reconstruction projects such as the

introduction of more efficient heating sources, combined with improvements in roads have led to increased

food security as well as increases in livelihood.

Somewhat more intangible programming such as the development of peace rings, combined with micro-

financing initiatives have resulted in what participants themselves testified as an increase in their individual

sense of worth and a collective sense of improvement in the Human Security of their communities.

Participants also testified that improvements in the road network allowed for greater access to community

health posts and thus are reducing the instance of some communicable diseases.

One of the most important characteristics of these beneficiary impacts is the degree to which some of them

are now being replicated by participants themselves in other communities that were not part of the project.

For example, the very community-based peace ring process, combined with the micro-finance initiatives is

being transmitted to other environments in Northern Uganda because people themselves have recognized

the worth of these initiatives. Likewise, some farmers have begun to establish their own very small tree

farms, using the profits accrued from sub-projects that NUERP supported. Again, this is an example of a

relatively low cost and low technology replication.


30

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Finding 11: Governments and civil society groups have been strengthened in their capacity to

respond to the breadth of risks to Human Security that are evident in Northern Uganda

There is solid evidence to show the extent to which the design and delivery phases of NUERP included

active participation of potential beneficiaries themselves and by the local government authorities. The mid-

term evaluation of NUERP noted above, highlights some of these considerations.

While we were unable to identify any specific strengthening of capacity at the local level, by inference, the

degree to which NUERP has met its objectives infers skills transfers.

However, the nature of the public sector in Northern Uganda during this time of reconstruction mitigates

against sustainability of intangible factors such as skills transfers. Rapid turnover combined with low on-

going budgets results in an environment where the possibility of the loss of technical skills exists.

Notwithstanding this concern however, it was evident that, at the community level, groups of farmers,

members of peace rings, the organization representing foresters and individual members of micro-financing

groups all had benefited not only from the technical transfer of skills but also the more existential transfer

of the sense of their own empowerment, a hallmark of the Human Security approach and one of its clear

differentiations of being simply a type of joint programming.

Finding 12: The sustainability of the outcomes of some of the more capital-intensive activities may be

at risk

As noted above, some of the elements of NUERP involved capital-intensive activity, the most notable

being road construction. While other capital-intensive activities such as the building of agricultural

processing centers and marketplaces were part of NUERP, they were handed over to local community

groups. It is in the interest of these groups to maintain these facilities themselves so as to ensure the

continuation of the income sources. This is not the case however, with respect to capital-intensive activities

undertaken for the government and especially road building.

While government officials reassured us that they never accepted the construction of a new road by a

development partner without planning for its maintenance, the reality on the ground was very different.

NGO partners who had worked for extensive periods of time in the area contradicted these seemingly

responsible statements and showed us actual locales where a road had virtually disintegrated within a

period of two years.

The challenge in this instance relates to a disconnect in the design of the NUERP vis-à-vis the national

development planning for the overall reconstruction of Northern Uganda. Put briefly, NUERP in terms of

sustainability considerations, simply was not part of the national plan and as such the on-going funds

needed to sustain some capital-intensive activities were absent. This however is not so much a weakness of

the Human Security approach itself as it is an endemic characteristic of the gap between national budget

authorities and development or humanitarian partners, who remain largely committed to an individual

project mentality.


Conclusions

Overall, the UNTFHS-supported project to address the Human Security risks in Northern Uganda has

demonstrated its worth in terms of breaking new ground, providing value added over more traditional

means of planning and delivery, integrating new partners and most importantly, has contributed to the

generation of positive beneficiary impact in the districts of its implementation.

This project therefore demonstrates the overall worth of the Human Security model at the project level.

However, it also demonstrates the challenges that face the wider application of the Human Security


June 2013

31 © UNIVERSALIA

approach. Challenges such as the willingness of UN Country Teams to set aside their traditional individual

agency-based approaches to planning and delivery were evident in the Uganda demonstration project.

These challenges in large part remain the consequences of the UN system as a whole not signaling the

importance of the Human Security approach as a major driving factor.

The sustainability of some aspects of this project may be at risk, again due to the residual effects of the

traditional “project model” which in so many instances has resulted in short-term benefits but long-term

sustainability challenges. The sustainability challenges may be most acute in relation to infrastructure

enhancements (roads in particular) where the track record of the local government for maintenance is

problematic at best.

Lessons Learned

The principle lessons learned from the UNTFHS-supported project in Northern Uganda are a mix of the

positive and negative.

On the positive side, the principle lesson relates to the applicability of the Human Security approach as a

mechanism to address complex and interconnected challenges to the well-being of people and their

communities. It appears that there is a direct correlation between the extent to which field level personnel

promote the empowerment of peoples and their communities and the degree to which a UNTFHS-

supported demonstration project is able to generate discernible positive consequences that would probably

not be otherwise attainable.

A second positive lesson lies in the extent to which low cost, low tech and people-to-people project

activities appear to have a greater possibility for replication and sustainability versus ones which have more

capital investment and which require a commitment by some existing body, most likely government, to

ensure sustainability. NUERP demonstrates that, notwithstanding the goodwill of governments, there are

systemic sustainability challenges for higher level of investment activities. NUERP also demonstrates the

risks inherent in any disconnect between national or regional development strategies and individual Human

Security demonstration projects.

On the Janus side, the most significant lesson from this particular UNTFHS demonstration project is that

UN Country Teams remain reticent in systematizing the Human Security approach in their work, largely

due to the lack of direction from the center of the UN system as a whole relative to the worth and value

added of the Human Security approach. In Uganda, the successes that have been achieved to date and

which will likely be achieved are being attributed to “working together” as opposed to the entirety of the

Human Security approach.

However, on balance, it is clear that the UNTFHS-supported project in Northern Uganda has all the

hallmarks for a high degree of success and can offer some very positive lessons for others to emulate.


June 2013

33 © UNIVERSALIA

Uzbek i s tan:

Rap id Asse s sment

Repor t for

Uzbek i s tan:

Sus t a in i ng

L ive l iho ods

Af fec ted b y t he

Ara l Sea D i sas ter

U n i t e d N a t i o n s T r u s t

F u n d f o r H u m a n

S e c u r i t y

June 2013


June 2013

35 © UNIVERSALIA



Security (UNTFHS) in Uzbekistan. This report is part of a wider assessment that also examined UNTFHS

collaboration in three other locations: Colombia, Uganda and Mongolia, as well as desk reviews for



The purpose of the rapid assessment bring depth and field-level perspective to the Human Security

Approach across different regions and contexts. As per the TOR, the objectives of the Rapid Assessment

are:







The following highlights the key issues on which the rapid assessment will focus:









situations in which the Human Security approach was applied (e.g., post-conflict and fragile settings,

natural disasters and climate vulnerable communities, and urban poverty and violence).







Field Visit to Uzbekistan

The field visit to Uzbekistan was carried out from February 18-22, 2013. The rapid assessment was carried

out by Dale Thompson, Team Leader from the Universalia Management Group. Following two days of

meetings in Tashkent with UN and government officials, the subsequent two days took place in

Karakalpakstan, basing out of Nukus and included meetings with beneficiaries and local officials. The

final day was dedicated to a debrief with the heads of the UN agencies in Uzbekistan. All meetings were

arranged and supported by the UNDP Uzbekistan, as well as the Human Security Unit in New York.

The project commenced in mid- 2012. Thus at the timed of the field mission, programming activities were

beginning to take hold.


36

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA





application.





Protecting and empowering refugees, internally displaced persons (IDPs), economic migrants

and others on the move;


Urban violence and its impact on health, education, economic, personal and community

security;

Poverty reduction, social inclusion and community-based development in isolated areas; and


The visit of the UN Secretary General to the Aral Sea in Karakalpakstan in April 2010 highlighted the

impact that this environmental disaster has had on the people of the region. Traditionally the Aral Sea

provided both irrigation and fishing opportunities, whereas nowadays, due to the drying up of this body of

water, these are both limited and even drinking water is scarce in many locations. Furthermore the desert

that has now formed where the sea once was is frequently the source of dust storms with the heavily

polluted dust having a very negative impact upon the health of the region’s population. The impact on the

livelihoods and health status of the population of the region has been severe, forcing many to relocate.

Those who stay find themselves under rather difficult living conditions. It is this group that this

programme targets.

The Human Security goal of the programme is

“Improved economic, food, health and environmental security for the population of

Karakalpakstan affected by the Aral Sea environmental disaster”.

The programme has three objectives and incorporates both “Top Down Protection’ and “Bottom Up

Empowerment’ components. The specific objectives are as follows:

Objective One: Income generation opportunities and economic security for vulnerable groups in

the three target districts increased.

Objective Two: Capacity of primary health care workers to address the health consequences of the

environmental disaster and economic insecurity enhanced in ten target districts with a specific

focus on addressing the needs of women and young people.

Objective Three: Capacity of regional and three district authorities enhanced to develop and

implement economic, environmental security and social policies aimed at welfare improvement of

vulnerable groups.

The main target group of the programme will be poor rural communities in Karakalpakstan that are faced

with unfavorable living circumstances.

The programme’s goal is in line with the central government’s policy that highlights addressing the impact

of the Aral Sea environmental disaster as a priority issue. The programme will also serve as a means for


June 2013

37 © UNIVERSALIA

broader advocacy around the issue of Human Security through capacity-building of local authorities and

raising awareness on the issues of sustainable development.

Furthermore the programme directly addresses the following UNDAF outcomes:

UNDAF Outcome One: Economic well-being of Vulnerable groups is improved;

UNDAF Outcome Two: Enhanced access to and utilization of relevant, quality essential social

services;

UNDAF Outcome Four: Effectiveness, inclusiveness and accountability of governance at the

central and local levels enhanced.

The Aral Sea environmental disaster has severely impacted upon the ability of the population in this region

to maintain basic living standards. Moreover, there are few funding sources that would support this

programme due to the limited donor activity in this part of the country.

The programme is being implemented by five UN agencies: UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA, WHO and UNV,

with UNDP being the lead agency. A project team is implementing the programme with support and

strategic oversight provided by the respective UN country offices in Tashkent.

Individual Objective Responsible Agency

Objective One (Livelihoods)

Income generation opportunities and economic security for vulnerable groups in the three target districts increased

UNDP/UNESCO/UNFPA

Objective Two (Primary

Health Care)

Capacity of primary health care workers to address the health consequences of the environmental disaster and economic insecurity enhanced in ten target districts with a specific focus on addressing the needs of young people

UNV/WHO/UNFPA

Objective

Three (Access to services & Governance)

Capacity of regional and 3 district authorities enhanced to develop and implement economic, environmental security and social policies aimed at welfare improvement of vulnerable groups

UNDP

The budget is as follows:

Implementing/executing organisation Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total

Organisation 1 (UNESCO) Project cost (A) 63,000.00 198,100.00 63,500.00 324,600.00

PSC (7 %*A) 4,410.00 13,867.00 4,445.00 22,722.00

Organisation 2 (UNFPA) Project cost (B) 86,000.00 254,000.00 89,000.00 429,000.00

PSC (7%*B) 6,020.00 17,780.00 6,230.00 30,030.00

Organization 3 (UNV) Project cost (C) 0.00 148,000.00 145,000.00 293,000.00

PSC (7%*C) 0.00 10,360.00 10,150.00 20,510.00

Organization 4 (WHO) Project cost (D) 60,500.00 54,500.00 83,000.00 198,000.00

PSC (7%*D) 4,235.00 3,815.00 5,810.00 13,860.00

Organization 5 (UNDP, including Project Core Staff, Operations, M&E, PR and Outreach)

Project cost (E) 902,199.83 739,033.31 703,372.31 2,344,605.44

PSC (7%*E) 63,153.99 51,732.33 49,236.06 164,122.38

Total project cost (A+B+C+D+E) 1,111,699.83 1,393,633.31 1,083,872.31 3,589,205.44

Total budget including administration fee (Total cost + Overall project administration) 3,840,449.82


38

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

3 . F i n d i n g s

Filling Unforeseen Challenges (Gap Filling)

Finding 1: Unanticipated risks to Human Security have been addressed by the UNTFHS-supported

project

One of the fundamental assumptions for project selection by the UNTFHS is that activities to be supported

do not overlap, duplicate or in any way parallel the work of other UN agencies or development/

humanitarian partners. Generally, this is called “gap filling”; however, for the purposes of the UNTFHS, it

also implies addressing unforeseen challenges to Human Security. The project in the Aral Sea region does

so in numerous dimensions.

Health services are being improved. Infrastructure is being strengthened to increase access to and reliability

of water and electricity. Agricultural production is being strengthened by the development of new land use

techniques and the introduction of new agricultural products. Environmental protection and eco-tourism are

being addressed. Local planning capacity and the engagement of civil society in the development of local

plans is being strengthened. Primary and early childhood education challenges both involving infrastructure

and teaching capacity are being addressed.

What is essential to stress is the degree to which these sectorial initiatives are being delivered in a

collaborative fashion where, at the regional and local levels, governments and civil society are working

together hand in hand. By extension therefore, another characteristic of the Human Security approach, the

involvement of local residents and their communities in the design and delivery of programming, is being

fulfilled.

Finding 2: National Level Development Planning has been sporadic in Karalpakstan over the last

decade.

While the environmental disaster in Karalpakstan has evolved over decades, national level development

planning has been relatively silent about issues such as environmental hazards, land reclamation and the

promotion of new means for livelihood generation. It must be remembered that Uzbekistan was only

founded in 1991 and that for a majority of its short life span, has faced a plethora of country-wide

challenges. It also should be recalled that even at present, a considerable portion of Uzbekistan’s

agricultural production for export relies on the unsustainable use of the water resources of the river

networks that drain into the Aral Sea. Simply “turning off the tap” would not be a viable solution to the

environmental disaster which has taken nearly a century to ensue, the length of time where water resources

were unsustainably used. Finally, Karalpakstan is one of the most remote regions of Uzbekistan with a

relatively small population in relation to its land mass.

National planning capacity which, based on a document review, remains strongly top-down and industrial

in its focus, does not appear to have been able to address the inter-relationships which have ensued as a

result of the Aral Sea environmental disaster. It appears that national planning remains focussed on the

traditional ministerial model which hampers the development of multi-disciplinary solutions which cross

ministerial lines.

It is for this reason that the UNTFHS approach clearly has filled a planning and conceptualization gap

especially at the level of the regional government, where it appears that traditional ministerial lines have

been somewhat broken down by the centralization of the regional government response in the office of the

local elected leader.


June 2013

39 © UNIVERSALIA

The Value Added

Finding 3: There has been considerable value added in terms of mechanisms of delivery

The UNTFHS-supported project in response to the Aral Sea disaster is demonstrating very clearly value

added elements over that which might be expected from a traditional UN response mechanism. At the

outset however, it should be emphasized that the benefits accrued in relation to economy or effectiveness

are largely in part due to the unique delivery mechanism which concentrates “rowing” in the hands of the

UNDP, with “steering” being a shared responsibility of all UN partners.

Key aspects of the overall Human Security approach are evident in this particular project. Synergies

between the health-related and infrastructure-related activities have resulted in the better targeting of very

limited resources. The support given through community facilitators to agricultural communities has

resulted in a mix of infrastructure improvements combined with the planned introduction of new forms of

agricultural production. Programming to support handicraft development has addressed both economic and

social threats to Human Security and in particular, threats related to women and girls at risk.

Finding 4: The “whole of problem” approach inherent in UNTFHS programming is superior in its

sensitivity and responsiveness to traditional models

Based on the above, this Finding may seem somewhat superfluous. However, it bears repeating that in the

context of Karalpakstan and the deeply inter-related challenges to Human Security, the “whole of the

problem” characteristics of the Human Security approach very much fills gaps caused by traditional “stove

pipe” planning and delivery by either UN partners or various elements of government. It is important

however to balance this positive conclusion with the recognition that the UNTFHS-supported project is

only a demonstration project, and, as will be described in subsequent Findings, may not be fully

sustainable. Moreover, the degree to which UNCT and national government authorities have accepted the

overall benefits of the Human Security approach to respond to multi-sectorial challenges remains

problematic.

Breaking New Ground

Finding 5: The UNTFHS-supported project is breaking new ground by introducing new themes and

expanded approaches to partnership

The UNTFHS project is breaking new ground in several ways. First however, it is crucially important to

emphasize that it has been able to attract additional support from some of the remaining bilateral donors in

Uzbekistan to complement the activities supported by the UNTFHS itself.

Israel, the USA, and Federal Republic of Germany all have joined the Aral Sea project in informal and non-

cash ways by either integrating existing programming with that of the UNDP project or more importantly,

adding new initiatives to complement those of the project itself. It is important to underscore that these

added commitments also involve a willingness by these donor states to participate in the planning and roll-

out of the project; but delivering independently of the UNDP-focused implementation mechanisms.

This kind of collaboration and integration points the way for others to recognize that UNTFHS-supported

projects can be built upon in cash and non-cash fashions. There however is a corollary to this very positive

finding. These new partners saw themselves participating not so much in a “Human Security approach” as

in a kind of Deliver As One prototype.

In the context of Uzbekistan, which has had a long history of top-down planning for humanitarian and

development programming, the very fact of a project based largely at the regional level and which has fully

involved community empowerment constitutes a new form of behavior for both UN partners and the public


40

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

sector. However, as will be subsequently discussed, the majority of the benefits of the application of the

Human Security approach in terms of breaking new ground have occurred at the regional and local levels.

Impact on the Project Team and UN Country Team

Finding 6: The UNTFHS-supported project has created a cooperative relationship between UN

agencies, due to significant collaboration and a common basis for their understanding of

the concept in relation to this project

At the project level, there is considerable evidence of an awareness of the nature of the Human Security

approach as a whole and the inherent benefits of multi-disciplinary solutions to complex challenges. The

project in Uzbekistan is somewhat unique in the fact that while funding is earmarked for various UN

agencies, overall financial control rests with the UNDP in Tashkent and delegated downward to a UNDP

project office in Nukus. Participating UN agencies meet at the Tashkent level to manage the project, with

UNDP staff retaining specialist sub-contractors. This is not so much a model of “UN Deliver As One” as it

is a more innovative approach to internal management that recognizes that there are considerable

operational savings to be obtained by consolidating delivery at the field level with one entity. Therefore, in

this instance, this particular project has demonstrated a new approach.

Finding 7: The UNCT knowledge of the UNTFHS and the Human Security concept is mixed, and

some feel that there is little to differentiate it from other analogous funds

In Uzbekistan, while there was an awareness of the difference between the Human Security approach and

other prior delivery mechanisms, the extent of the differences was not well understood. The awareness of

the benefits of “working together” were widespread; with other elements of the Human Security approach

especially that in relation to local empowerment were not so well understood beyond the staff of UNDP,

the sponsoring agency. This gap in awareness may in part be due to the program delivery modality

described above which while efficient, tends to reduce internal capacity building and awareness of the

Human Security approach among other UN partners.

An additional challenge arises with respect to perceptions related to sustainability. While many of the

elements of the project are designed to be sustainable (on-going training of community outreach workers,

village councils, etc.) a number which are more infrastructure oriented will require on-going maintenance.

There does not appear at present to have been any consideration of how to sustain the operations of

irrigation systems or electrical generation facilities beyond the lifespan of the project. Given that

sustainability is considered to be one of the hallmarks of the Human Security approach, this gap poses a

challenge for the future.

Finding 8: The overall level of acceptance of the whole of the Human Security approach remains

problematic at the country level

In discussions at the UNCT level in Tashkent, it became apparent that both the programmatic and

philosophical benefits of the Human Security approach were facing challenges with respect to possible

replication. Although it was evident that the approach was widely seen as positive in relation to this one

demonstration project, there did not appear at the Country Team level to be any strong commitment to

replicate it.

While Country Team members seemed to recognize that the project in question was a demonstration

project and likely not to be subject to replenishment from the UNTFHS, there did not appear to be a

realization of the need to reach out to other donors. Moreover, at the management level, it was quite

apparent that the then lack of strong commitment at the Headquarters level for the implementation of the

Human Security approach had produced a perception that Human Security remained a “demonstration” and

was not as yet part of the priorities of the United Nations as a whole.


June 2013

41 © UNIVERSALIA

Overall Impact of the UNTFHS-Supported Project





















Finding 9: Beneficiary impacts are beginning to become visible

As noted earlier, the UNTFHS-supported project in Uzbekistan is in the early days of a planned three year

implementation. As such, the degree of direct beneficiary impact is at present not large, due to the fact that

individual activities are only commencing. There are however, some very encouraging initial signs.

Sub-projects involved with the promotion of handicrafts have already begun to generate programmatic

results. In Nukus on the campus of the local university, a handicraft workshop employing a number of

women at risk has been opened. Thus, a group of women whose Human Security was at risk have acquired

for the first time in their lives, gainful employment and have been able to transition from a highly

threatening environment. Second, an environmental and eco-tourism project located astride the main

carriage way from Nukus is generating local benefits in the form of moderate increases in eco-tourism

revenues. At the same time, this project has also improved the quality of ecological protection for several

species at risk.

In other instances, where project activity is in its earliest phases, we used the principles which underpin

Contribution Analysis along with a rudimentary approach to Theory of Change modeling to ascertain the

degree to which the necessary preconditions for substantial future beneficiary impact might be present.

For example, the combination, in relation to improved health services, of the training of community

outreach workers, infrastructure support for local clinics in the form of solar powered generation and the

acquisition of contemporary testing equipment, points to the likely conclusion that rates of TB in the

subject districts may fall as a result of the contribution to improve public health made by this UNTFHS-

supported project. In relation to agricultural production, the development of local community action plans,

combined with improved infrastructure in the form of irrigation technology, and the introduction of new

agricultural products is likely to lead to improved land use and by extension, increase the economic security

of the participating communities.

The benefits which can accrue in instances such as these clearly reflect how a UNTFHS project can

contribute to overall enhancements in human security. In these two instances, as well as others with respect


42

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

to early childhood education, the UNTFHS activities augment or complement work of others, thus very

clearly being a practical demonstration of the principles which underpin Contribution Analysis.

Finding 10: Governments and civil society groups have been strengthened in their capacity to

respond to the breadth of risks to Human Security that are posed by the Aral Sea

disaster

One of the objectives of UNTFHS-supported programming is to strengthen the ability of governments and

civil society groups to work together to respond to challenges to Human Security. The Aral Sea project

demonstrates the degree to which local and regional governments have been strengthened in terms of their

planning and delivery capacity, along with the strengthening of community groups to be fully empowered

by participating in the design and implementation of the demonstration project. Additionally however, a

probably more important benefit appears to have accrued among representatives of local and regional

governments; the willingness to collaborate with civil society, thus setting aside historic governance

patterns based on a top-down dirigiste model. This change is evidenced by the degree to which at the local

and regional level, there is strong evidence of on-going collaborative efforts where civil society has been

able to suggest programmatic adaptions, something that would have been foreign in the not too distant past.

There is however, a corollary to this positive finding. The same level of transformation of thinking of the

role of government does not appear to have ensued at the national level. This somewhat negative

conclusion is not unexpected.

First, the UNTFHS-supported project, while significant in the lives of the affected populations, is miniscule

in comparison to the totality of government and other partner development efforts which are coordinated by

the central government. It is but one example among a host of others which are more traditional in their

design and implementation.

Second, based on information provided by UNDP staff, it is apparent that the current UNTFHS-supported

project was largely promoted at the national level as an example of how the UN could work together more

collaboratively. In discussion with national level authorities, it was apparent that they have little

understanding of the more existential elements of the human security approach and its application. Rather,

they saw it very much as “things being done together”.


Conclusions

Overall, the UNTFHS-supported project to address the Human Security risks arising from the Aral Sea

disaster has demonstrated its worth in terms of breaking new ground, providing value added over more

traditional means of planning and delivery, integrating new partners and most importantly, highly likely to

contribute to the generation of positive beneficiary impact in the districts of Karalpakstan that are part of

this project.

One of the most innovative aspects of the project in Uzbekistan was the integration of additional donors on

an “in-kind” basis to the project, and more importantly into the management mechanisms of the project.

This project therefore demonstrates the overall worth of the Human Security model at the project level.

However, it also demonstrates the challenges that face the wider application of the Human Security

approach.

Challenges such as the willingness of UN Country Teams to set aside their traditional individual agency-

based approaches to planning and delivery were evident in the Uzbekistan demonstration project. These

challenges in large part remain the consequences of the UN system as a whole not signaling the importance

of the Human Security approach as a major driving factor.


June 2013

43 © UNIVERSALIA

The sustainability of some aspects of this project may be at risk, again due to the residual effects of the

traditional “project model” which in so many instances has resulted in short-term benefits but long-term

sustainability challenges.

Lessons Learned

The principle lessons learned from the UNTFHS-supported project in Uzbekistan are a mix of the positive

and negative. On the positive side, this project clearly demonstrates that it is possible to integrate additional

partners so as to complement and expand the range of the project. It is also evident that this particular

project shows the benefits of collective planning. As well, the unique delivery model developed for this

project may provide a new choice for UN agencies to address not only UNTFHS demonstration projects in

the future, but also other collaborative efforts among agencies.

On the Janus side, the most significant lesson from this particular UNTFHS demonstration project is that

UN Country Teams remain reticent in systematizing the Human Security approach in their work, largely

due to the lack of direction from the center of the UN system as a whole relative to the worth and value

added of the Human Security approach. In Uzbekistan, the successes that have been achieved to date and

which will likely be achieved are being attributed to “working together” as opposed to the entirety of the

Human Security approach.

However, on balance, it is clear that the UNTFHS-supported project in Uzbekistan has all the hallmarks for

a high degree of success and can offer some very positive lessons for others to emulate.


June 2013

45 © UNIVERSALIA

C o ngo : Jo in t

Un i t ed Nat ions

Programme for

Peace

Conso l ida t i on ,

Conf l i c t

Prevent ion and

Hum an Secur i ty in

the Republ i c o f the

Congo .

J u n e 2 0 1 3


June 2013

47 © UNIVERSALIA






















This Rapid Assessment

In May 2013, a High Level Event will be held in New York City. In preparation for that meeting, the HSU

has commissioned this assessment of the Fund’s activities in the past five years. This assessment is “rapid”

because of the tight timeframe; it will explore the relevance and value of the Human Security approach and

of the UNTFHS concept and mechanism. Its focus, rather than on projects per se, is on how projects

contribute to the attainment of Human Security and to the advancement of the concept, both in relation to

beneficiaries and to UN integration efforts. It will:














Three desk top reviews: Republic of Congo, Madagascar, Vanuatu;


48

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA







Title of the UNTFHS project: Joint United Nations Programme for Peace Consolidation, Conflict

Prevention and Human Security in the Republic of the Congo

Executing agencies: UNDP, FAO, WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA

Counterpart organizations: HCREC, HCICEM, Ministry of planning, FAC

Project Purpose: The Republic of the Congo has been struggling to recover from damages of the civil war

for many years, even after the signing of the Peace Agreement in 2003. Following protracted political

instability and hostilities between the national army and armed groups, the country now faces challenges to

reintegrate ex-combatants left without sustainable livelihoods or functioning social networks. With the

majority of its infrastructure destroyed and productive economic activities disrupted, it is critical to address

comprehensively the needs of communities, not only of ex-combatants, to consolidate peace and improve

Human Security in the Republic of the Congo.

The Joint United Nations Programme for Peace Consolidation, Conflict Prevention and Human Security in

the Republic of the Congo seeks to contribute to the consolidation of peace and social stability, provide

sustainable livelihoods to vulnerable populations and enhance the overall level of Human Security in the

Republic of the Congo. The project specifically aims to complete the reintegration of ex-combatants,

improve delivery of and access to basic social services, and to support community empowerment and

promote a culture of peaceful existence, targeting five communities in the Pool region that have a high

number of ex-combatants.

Through collaborative efforts of five different United Nations agencies and national counterparts, the

project engages in:

(i) Support to income generating activities of ex-combatants

(ii) Improved water and sanitation services

(iii) Increase access of ex-combatants, youths at risk and women affected by conflict to better

treatment for HIV/AIDS

(iv) Promoting better understanding of and access to improved school facilities

(v) Improve understanding of maternal and child health care and nutrition issues

(vi) develop a civic education framework and a peace-building and conflict prevention programme

(vii) Protect women and girls against gender-based violence and provide medical and psychosocial

assistance to victims of gender-based violence.

2 . F i n d i n g s

The desk review resulted in the following findings, categorized according to areas of interest for the

purpose of this assessment:


June 2013

49 © UNIVERSALIA


The Joint United Nations Programme for Peace Consolidation, Conflict Prevention and Human Security in

the Republic of Congo constitutes a major milestone to enhance UN coordination with a view to achieving

Human Security in the Republic of Congo. Through the collaborative efforts of five different United

Nations agencies and national counterparts, the interagency programme team endeavored to fulfill thirteen

outputs as delineated in the approved programme document.

While it is widely acknowledged that many normal data sources are non-existent and difficult to document

in the target area, the initial activity of the programme was a survey of 4,016 beneficiaries resulting in

an updated, holistic and multi-sectoral assessment of the challenges to address. The general survey

findings have been strengthened by special in-depth studies on fisheries, agroforestry and livestock. As a

result, the programme has engaged in:

(i) Supporting the income generating activities of 1,130 target beneficiaries;

(ii) Achieving a number of activities to improve water and sanitation services, in the target areas

through the provision the water sanitation equipment;

(iii) Conducting HIV/AIDS awareness-raising activities targeting the youths of three selected

communities;

(iv) Promoting greater access to improved school facilities for 1,674 students targeting 8 initial

schools and started supporting local educational communities to thrive;

(v) Developing a civic education framework and peace-building initiatives through a holiday camp

of 120 youths and robust awareness-raising activities channeled through the organization of

cultural, sport events and related peace building activities; and

(vi) Implementing awareness-raising activities targeting 3,503 people to secure greater protection

for women and girls against gender-based violence and providing the required equipment to handle

post-violence conditions.

Overall Value Added

In the context of Human Security, the value-added of the UNTFHS projects is best seen through the

involvement of the communities. The main beneficiaries of the programme are women and children in

areas affected. The UN partners are working in the sectors of water, sanitation and hygiene, education,

protection, health and cross cutting issues related to conflict resolution and peace building.

It has been noted that UNTFHS is targeted toward the community level and as such implies more long-

term objectives and sustainable findings. The UNTFHS bridges a significant gap for transition programmes

in the Republic of Congo in these particular locales.

Notwithstanding the above , however, the beneficiaries were not involved as much as they should have

been, as is implies in the Human Security approach at the design level. The implementing partners have

recognized this and are trying to move more towards a more participatory approach.

“At the same time, we would like to go through a community-driven process where beneficiaries

identify their needs, priorities and actions. But we are not going to visit the communities just to

have discussions, if we don’t know we are going to have the funding.”

In this light , the 2012 annual progress report indicated:

“In order to address issues related to food security, school attendance or water and sanitation

issues and break the downward spiral into abject poverty, vulnerable populations must be

targeted with assistance and engaged in a process of rebuilding sustainable livelihoods and

reconciliation into social networks. Protection and empowerment of community as a whole,


50

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

with special attention to the most vulnerable social groups, including women and children, is a

key for successful improvement of Human Security”.

Another aspect of the value-added of the UNTFHS deals with the Human Security approach as a whole.

The comprehensive and multi-sectorial Human Security approach of the proposed project provides

concrete and sustainable benefits to ex-combatants and other vulnerable groups by building their capacity

to restore their livelihoods and engage in income generating activities. It also reduces vulnerabilities to

inadequate public and environmental health; and improves educational facilities by supporting people to

build basic sanitation infrastructures such as latrines and wells for schools and communities. It

simultaneously updates the national legal framework to better address gender-based violence. These efforts

are implemented through community-based systems, such as local development committees, in order to

promote recovery and resiliency amongst vulnerable populations and to foster a culture of trust, a sense of

belonging and empowerment at the community level.

The value-adding aspects of the UNTFHS-supported project evident through the lens of the key concepts

of Human Security. First, it recognizes that the threats to Human Security faced by communities are both

direct and indirect, including direct threats of community and personal violence that could potentially be

posed by frustrated ex-combatants, including gender-based violence. Indirect threats include deteriorating

public health and educational services, as well as a deterioration of livelihoods resources, including natural

resources. Second, the UNTHFS project takes a comprehensive approach to simultaneously promote

beneficiaries’ freedom from fear, freedom from want, and freedom to take action on one’s own behalf.

Freedom from want is promoted though income-generating activities, including the necessary infrastructure

for basic social services. Access to social services, including sanitation, maternal and child health, nutrition,

retribution against gender-based violence and citizen’s rights are also all necessary for people to be able to

take action on their own behalf. Third, each of these components is founded on direct community

engagement through local development committees in order to ensure sustainability and to guarantee

engagement and empowerment of community members and leaders.

Breaking New Ground

The UNTFHS-supported projects are breaking new grounds as their impacts are different to those of the

other UN-projects. These differences are described in the 2012 annual progress report:

“While these efforts contributed to recovery of the Pool region after the conflict, they were not

approached in an integrated fashion among UN agencies. As a result, the fundamental needs of

ex-combatants left without livelihoods and access to basic social network and services have

been largely neglected. By ensuring the linkages of UN interventions in various areas under the

common goal of protecting and empowering those who suffer from human insecurity, this

project will contribute to ensuring the consolidation of peace, social stability and economic

recovery in the conflict-affected Pool region of the Congo. The proposed project will

particularly draw from the experience of the UNDP’s undertaken project referred to as

PRESJAR II, which currently implements durable activities in the Pool region based on

increased participation of communities which has resulted in greater ownership on the part of

the beneficiaries. It will focus on the achievement of concrete results aimed at enhancing

Human Security in various areas of activities. The fact that UN agencies will be addressing the

Human Security within a comprehensive and integrated manner will constitute an added value

as compared to previous reintegration experiences. In so being implemented, the proposed

project will address the weaknesses and deficiencies identified in past efforts to reintegrate ex-

combatants into their communities”.

Filling Gaps and Value Adding

The Human Security approach is predicated on “filling gaps” . In this instance, such gaps were identified

through consultations conducted by UN agencies on the ground with the beneficiaries. The gaps therefore


June 2013

51 © UNIVERSALIA

have become the key areas of the project. Local development committees and government’s technical

experts also provided valuable information, which also guided the formulation of the UNTFHS projects.

As described above, the integrated approach, which consists in combining core experience of different

implementing partners and multi-sectoral projects, is the main difference that constitutes the added value of

the UNTFHS-supported projects.

The Overall Impact of the Project

Although the assessment of impact was not included in the initial Terms of Reference for this assignment,

very early on it became apparent that it would be necessary to secure some information about the extent of

the impact of the projects that the Trust Fund had supported so as to be able to answer a very primal

question: what difference did these projects make in the lives of individual beneficiaries and their

















The impacts observed in the Republic of Congo deal with the consolidation of peace and social stability

through the provision of sustainable livelihoods to ex-combatants, youth at risk, women affected by

conflicts and other vulnerable groups in need of reintegration support.

The UNTFHS-supported projects contributed to make the beneficiaries progressively stronger as peace

builders. Their constructive actions complement the government’s effort to decisively enhance the level of

Human Security in the post-conflict Pool region. The needs of traditionally marginalized social strata as

women have also been addressed for.

As stated in the 2012 annual progress report:

“In this context, the joint programme has therefore been positioned to provide the relevant

response required to consolidate peace and prevent conflicts. It has successfully provided a

holistic, multidimensional and context-specific impetus to drive development in the target area.

The joint programme has been able to advance integrated approaches and addressed the broad

range of interconnected issues that take into account the multi-sectorial demands of Human

Security”.


The UNTFHS framework is not necessarily well understood or used by the actors in the Republic of

Congo. Significant numbers of projects in the country are somewhat aligned with the prinvciples that

underpin the Human Security approach. However, Human Security as an integrating approach is neither

discussed among the UN partners, nor used in their project design in Congo.


52

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

To help improve the understanding of the Human Security approach, the interagency programme team

strove to translate into concrete actions the proposed programme through communication and public affair

activities to disseminate Human Security approach in the Republic of Congo and particularly in the target

Pool region. In this regard, a workshop was held in the target region to further the dialogue on Human

Security approach with local authorities and experts. Prior to this, a survey was conducted by the

programme tea. The survey identified “enhanced communications” as a good practice to implement

It is also important to note the difference between “cooperating” and collaborating” in the context of a

project supported by the UNTFHS. Since the UNTFHS supported project constitutes a major milestone in

enhancing UN coordination with a view to promoting Human Security in the Republic of Congo, it has

emphasized the difference between ‘cooperating’ and ‘collaborating’. The desk review revealed that the

UNTFHS encourages “collaboration” as opposed to mere “cooperation” between the main stakeholders

involved in the project. In this view, the 2012 annual progress report mentions:

“Through the collaborative efforts of five different United Nations agencies and national

counterparts, the interagency programme team endeavoured to fulfil thirteen outputs as

delineated in the approved programme document.

In terms of partnerships, initial consultations have revealed that United Nations Development

Programme (UNDP) is well placed to handle the reintegration of ex-combatants, men and

women associated with armed forces and groups and war-affected youths as well as community

recovery, including the economic and psychosocial reintegration. To complement this, the

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) will assume a lead role with regard to educational

issues within the larger topic of economic insecurities; World Health Organization (WHO) and

the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) will address basic and reproductive health and

gender issues; and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) will provide expertise and other

key inputs required for making agriculture a key component in restoring livelihoods, food

security and productive assets of the communities. A number of NGOs will also be engaged as

implementing partners. Discussions took place with other development partners, notably key

bilateral institutions and the European Union, and their views and interests have also been

taken into account in the development of this project.

Within this network of diverse stakeholders, the communities themselves will occupy a central

role in order to ensure that responses to the threats identified above are well adapted to the

particular context of those communities and are sustainable in the long-term. Based on

previous experiences, community empowerment is a key component of ensuring the

sustainability of the programme. The reintegration of ex-combatants, at-risk youths and women

affected by conflict will be carefully tailored to the different needs of each group, in order to

effectively address direct and indirect threats to their Human Security and to ensure that the

ultimate responsibility for successful reintegration lies with the individuals themselves, their

communities and the national Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR)

commission. Community-based projects to address socio-economic security risks will also be

directly informed by community members and leaders themselves in order to promote local

ownership and responsibility”.


The Government and the civil society are fully involved in the projects supported by the UNTFHS. For

instance, the Government of Congo through the HCREC have designed in collaboration with the UN

country team a comprehensive project aiming at decisively addressing the final and residual post-conflict

challenges the southern Pool region has been experiencing since the end of the civil war.

The Government and local NGOs constitute key implementing partners on the ground. The Government is

responsible to assign its experts with various and extensive field experience on agriculture, breeding,


June 2013

53 © UNIVERSALIA

fishery, health, nutrition etc. The Government’s experts and local NGOs already work with UN agencies in

on-going projects and have become familiar with the UN rules, development approaches and strategies.

Upon completion of the project these stakeholders will serve to sustain the results yielded. The programme

team has maintained close consultations and exchanges with local authorities to identify repositioning

opportunities.

The project has been designed in line with national development priorities as outlined in the Government’s

plans and mirrored in the country programmes (2009-2013) of the UN agencies established in the Congo,

which are anchored to the UNDAF developed by the UN country team. At the local level, it should be

noted the significant progress in the design of local development plans in the country, particularly in the

Pool region. With support of UNDP, an initial local development plan (2009-2013) for the Pool region has

been formulated and finalized, which addresses Human Security issues. Based on this plan, consultations

with local authorities have been conducted to secure community ownership of the on-going activities and

those implemented within the framework of the project.

As a matter of fact, the government of the Republic of the Congo is well placed to claim ownership of the

activities and to secure the sustainability of the achievements of the project. Furthermore, UN agencies

currently work with local authorities in areas targeted by the project and benefit from substantial technical

support from the Government’s experts in terms of agriculture, breeding, fishing, civil engineering etc. In

addition, UN agencies have established local development committees referred to as CGDC. These

committees are set up to monitor the implementation of the development interventions conducted on the

ground with a view to claiming ownership of activities and to secure the achievements.


In the context of the Republic of Congo, two main lessons learnt are emerging: the lack of funding and the

proposal format and procedures. It has been noted that the budget of UNTFHS-supported projects were

quite small, making implementation of activities challenging. With respect to the proposal format, the

whole process has been seen as very time consuming, as project documents had to be revised and

submitted six times. However such a process ensures that the project are indeed ones related to Human

Security and note merely traditional developmental or humanitarian initiatives seeking funding via the

UNTFHS.

In the case of the Republic of Congo, the knowledge accumulated during the implementation of the

UNTFHS-supported projects are consolidated into reports, where good practices and lessons learned are

captured and documented with the support of the DDR unit in the UNDP/BCPR. All relevant documents

and final reports are handed over to national stakeholders and UNDP/BCPR as the repository of

reintegration and Human Security knowledge. Results, lessons and good practices are disseminated in the

UN agencies websites, the CPR and DDR communities of practice, including in the annual

UNDP/Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) DDR Chiefs and Programme Managers Meeting

and relevant DDR training and workshop events.


June 2013

55 © UNIVERSALIA

Madagascar :

Hum an Secur i ty

Pro jec t for the

Prevent ion o f

Vio l ence and

Vulnerab i l i ty

R educ t ion f or the

M ost Vu lnerab le

I nha b i ta nt s o f

Ant ananar ivo ,

Madagascar.

J u n e 2 0 1 3


June 2013

57 © UNIVERSALIA























In May 2013, there will be a High Level Event on Human Security in New York City. In preparation for

that meeting, the HSU has commissioned this assessment of the Fund’s activities in the past five years. This

assessment is “rapid” because of the tight timeframe; it will explore the relevance and value of the Human

Security approach and of the UNTFHS concept and mechanism. Its focus, rather than on projects per se, is

on how projects contribute to the attainment of Human Security and to the advancement of the concept,

both in relation to beneficiaries and to UN integration efforts. It will:
















58

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA







Title of the UNTFHS project: Human Security project for the prevention of violence and vulnerability

reduction for the most vulnerable inhabitants of Antananarivo, Madagascar.

Executing agencies: UNICEF, UNDP, FAO

Counterpart organizations: AHM, CCAP, CNPFDH, COOPI, DE.PAR, Don Bosco, DRV, EUDORA,

Groupe Développement, JUNIOR, I. Consulting, Miarintosa, MIDAS, Ny Sahy, PlaNet Finance, SPDTS,

YMCA, Direction régionale de la Jeunesse et des Loisirs d’Analamanga (DRJLA), SAMVA (public

company owned by CUA in charge of waste collection and disposal) and various national ministries.

Project Purpose: The Human Security project seeks to empower local institutions, communities, and

individuals to improve their living conditions through the prevention of violence, the reduction of personal

insecurity and through a better preparedness to crises and disasters, in order to ensure sustainable Human

Security in urban slums of Antananarivo. Since January 2009, Madagascar’s Human Security situation has

been threatened by cumulating effects of frequent natural disasters (cyclones, lack of rain), the global

economic and food crisis (2008-2009) and a long period of political crisis. As a consequence, the already

degraded living conditions of the poorest Malagasy populations have worsened, especially in urban

settings, where the disruption of basic social services and the weakening of family and community support

systems strongly jeopardize the most vulnerable. The lack of socio-economic opportunities has resulted in

an increasingly violent environment for populations already strongly exposed to health hazards and natural

threats. in addition to the deterioration of living conditions, the poor socio-economic situation carries a

long-lasting structural impact and increasing rural-urban economic migration could result in further

marginalization of the urban poor especially in the poorest neighborhoods of the capital city of

Antananarivo. The project will support a four-fold interrelated intervention:

Establishment of community-based mechanisms, and reinforcement of local capacities and

networks to allow communities to manage the reduction of economic, sanitary, environmental and

personal insecurity;

Sensitization of local communities and support of the establishment of local instruments to prevent

and reduce violence and reinforce personal security;

Improvement of living environment through continuous delivery of basic services and a more

stable economic base; and

Anticipation of the risks of deterioration through monitoring and preparedness at city-level.

These interventions have been adopted to reflect the main threats to Human Security in the poorest

neighbourhoods of the capital city. The current political instability remains a challenge to Human Security.

2 . F i n d i n g s

The desk review resulted in the following findings, categorized according to areas of interest for the

purpose of this assessment:


June 2013

59 © UNIVERSALIA


The overall Human Security objective of the project, is that the Human Security of vulnerable inhabitants

of selected neighborhoods of Antananarivo is improved through community empowerment, and

reinforcement of protection mechanisms for the most vulnerable, especially women, children and youth.

Overall Value Added

In the past decades, a variety of stakeholders (UN Agencies, national/international NGOs, civil society,

bilateral donors) have undertaken efforts to address vulnerabilities of these populations on a sector by

sector basis. In some instances, these efforts did not bring the expected results.

In this context, the Human Security project in Antananarivo has adopted a systemic, integrated and

multidisciplinary approach in order to create the enabling environment for the most vulnerable segments of

the population. As such, the Human Security framework has constituted a value-added compared to

previous projects conducted in Madagascar.

The UNTFHS in Madagascar addresses four of the seven dimensions of Human Security:

Economic security (improvement to socioeconomic conditions of the population targeted);

Health security (better access to basic services);

Environmental security (better preparedness to urban risks, hazards, and disasters); and

Personal security (prevention of violence and protection of the most vulnerable population in

particular children, youth, and women).

As a comprehensive approach to community development, where the entire community benefits from the

project, the Human Security approach has created a significant sense of ownership of the project at the

field level. Another aspect of the approach’s value has been the integration of UN efforts in the

development of the specific locale. This greater solidarity in working together has been transplanted

within several government bodies.

Breaking New Ground

The UNTFHS-supported projects are breaking new grounds as the activities encourage the participation of

local population over the different phases of the project. Rather than having one sector addressed by one

agency, the integrated approach benefits the broader community in a horizontal and holistic way,

addressing the complexity and inter-connected nature of needs. The Human Security approach can be

compared to that of an architect looking at the house as a whole, rather than the plumber doing the pipes,

the electrician the wires, and the mason the walls, all in an unrelated way. Here, the “architect” is a

cohesive, collaborative team made up of the “plumber”, the “electrician”, and the “mason”..

The funding characteristics of the Human Security approach also differ from those of the other UN

programming. The UNTFHS supported project has been designed to become part of the overall

development funding structure of the UN operations in the country.

Filling Gaps

The gaps were identified by the participating agencies working with Government counterparts. By

connecting sectors, the project has attempted to cover broader areas of assistance, in a horizontal fashion

rather than with a vertical siloed approach:

Linking health to the community, as opposed to earlier practice of treating individuals;

Linking with other sectors has provided holistic approach for education work;


60

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Bringing technology to communities in key sectors of water and sewage.

Gaps have been filled in a manner quite different than that in relation to other kinds of UN projects. The

fact that agencies have worked closely together, in a truly integrated way (as opposed to simply

coordinated) has resulted in a broader and deeper impact than a single agency / single sector approach

would have had.

The Impact of the Project





















The project is in its earliest stages. Year 1 is mostly directed towards setting up key project structures, and

completing the baseline assessment. As a result, it is difficult to assess the impact that the project has on

either on UN and Government or on the ground, particularly for the most vulnerable targets (women,

children, and youth).

The project has planned a mid‐project evaluation process in early 2013, which will allow for strategic

adjustments over the last 15 months of the project. In addition to completing the strengthening of local

structures and the capacity building in selected neighborhoods, the second year of implementation will

place emphasis on the reinforcement of protection networks, on initiatives intended to support economic

development for the most vulnerable, and on the response to risks and hazards at city‐level.

As explained above, it is still early to assess the impact of these activities. Nevertheless, some indications

of perceived impact on beneficiaries may be found in the first progress report:

“In terms of methodology, the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security (UNTFHS)

advocates for a “framework based on the protection and empowerment of people”. In order to

reach its goal and enhance Human Security, particularly in the four dimensions, the project

respects this framework.

On the one hand, the capacities of individuals and local communities are reinforced through

training, social mobilization, and the creation of local structures (Local Committees for Human

Security (KIFMO), Social and technical mobilizers (MAS), and local Volunteers (VQ));

through these structures, individuals and communities take part in the assessment efforts of the

living conditions in their neighborhoods and are encouraged to take ownership and work


June 2013

61 © UNIVERSALIA

towards the improvement of these conditions through the elaboration of strategies and action

plans, while their rights and duties are built in Charters of shared responsibilities. In order to

encourage these initiatives, the project plans to provide the communities with some support

under the form of sanitation works, rehabilitation / construction of welcome centers for

vulnerable people, grants for little infrastructure projects, support to economic development

through generation of livelihoods and support to business plans. The project also puts an

emphasis on fostering a collective and participative feeling, which should contribute to restore

social cohesion within the target neighborhoods.

On the other hand, the project works with institutions at a local, city and central levels in order

to help them establish responses and promote harmonized procedures for some of the key

issues (e.g. violence against children and women). These bodies, along with partners involved

in emergency and relief efforts, are also involved in improving preparedness to urban risks and

hazards. These efforts are expected to promote a long‐term sustainable change in terms of

generating a better understanding of structural and crisis‐related vulnerabilities which should

help establish a protection framework for the most vulnerable. The impact of such initiatives

should start to be measurable in 6 months’ time. In the meantime, the only measurable data

consists in the strong percentage of women benefiting from capacity building (444 women out

of 714 individuals trained i.e. 62% women vs. 38% men). On the ground, we also witness some

very good signs of a strong involvement of the VQ in terms of fighting the violence made to

children and women.

The outputs linked to the reinforcement of local structures and the capacity building of local

communities have been achieved. Institutional structures are being mobilized, and protection

networks are being reinforced. WASH activities are also unfolding, after some delay due in

part to an exceptional climatic event (Cyclone Giovanna on the 14th of February 2012), as are

the planning for vulnerability reduction and better preparedness to risks and disasters at both

neighborhood and city levels. The base assessment (situational mappings of infrastructure,

risks and hazards with capacity of response) has been completed and all the tools that will help

assess how vulnerability progresses, as well as the impact of the project are now in place”.


The level of inter‐agency collaboration sets a precedent for joint programming and shows that agencies

can work together to achieve complex and interconnected goals. The Human Security experience is

currently being capitalized in the development of two additional joint programs (the first one targeting

Antananarivo, the second one targeting the Southern regions of Madagascar). The joint approach has also

resulted in a greater visibility for the project.


Within the Human Security approach as a whole, the importance of key partnerships between the project,

its beneficiaries and the various levels of government is seen as crucial from a long‐term sustainability

standpoint. In the case of Madagascar, the Government is fully involved in all phases of the project

conception, design and implementation, at capital city level with the engagement of all relevant ministries,

and in the field with the engagement of the local authorities, with participation of non-governmental

organizations in Antananarivo

By and large, the local communities and the authorities at city level have demonstrated a very strong

involvement in the project and the initiatives undertaken. The empowerment framework inherent in the

Human Security approach has been to be very well received by the people and local authorities, resulting

in the people genuinely taking ownership for their living conditions. In particular the local government

representatives of Antananarivo has proven to be extremely motivated in supporting the initiatives of the

project in particular in terms of reinforcement of protection networks, enhancement of economic


62

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

conditions, and conduct / coordination of sanitation works. This level of buy‐in is essential for the project,

both in terms of current activities, and for the long‐term impact and sustainability.


The Human Security project for the prevention of violence and vulnerability reduction for the most

vulnerable inhabitants in Antananarivo, Madagascar is on track. While the implementation was some

three‐month delayed due to late reception of funds, this delay has been made up, with only a couple of

activities originally planned for Year 1 still due to start. Except for two activities which have been pushed

to Year 2 to ensure a more thoughtful process and completion of prerequisite activities, and three activities

which were delayed, all other 31 activities planned to start in the first year of implementation are either

completed or in progress. The level of disbursements has reached 70.9%.

During the Inception Phase, the project has addressed several types of issues, such as:

Complexity linked to the co‐existence of different procedures

Delays linked to external factors

Adjustments to the original planning process

Adjustments to the original outputs due to budgetary constraints

In parallel to the challenges met by the UN agencies, some lessons learnt have emerged. These lessons

learnt are set out in the first progress report, as following:

Working with Partners

The project has promoted an inter‐activity dialogue, and encouraged dialogue between agencies, but also

between implementing partners managed by different agencies and sometimes involved in different

activities. For instance, different partners involved in the establishment of rapid mappings, and data

collection have worked together, in order to create continuity between their assignments and to promote a

consistent approach.

Likewise, several partners involved in social mobilization / sensitization efforts have worked together to

adjust methodologies and harmonize messages. The same approach was used for WASH and economic

activities, as well as the organization of training sessions.

In addition to the implementing partners, the project has also gradually involved more and more public

institutions. The CUA’s support has proven invaluable to reach more efficiently the Fokontany people, and

to help implement some aspects of the project as a whole. This strong commitment early on in the project

offer the expectation of sustained activities beyond the project’s lifecycle.

Recently, the project has also involved ministries and regional levels of government, in order to build

capacities, to ensure support for the project, to provide better access to information, and also to participate

in an effort to ensure that Malagasy institutions as a whole are aware of the different projects unfolding in

the country.

Good Practice and Innovation

The frequency of meetings and exchanges between agencies and between their partners is a good practice

in that it promotes transparency, allows people to exchange on experiences for more efficient actions, and

fosters a collaborative spirit focused on delivering results.

Monthly steering committee meetings become the forum where agencies can communicate freely, and are

also held accountable to each other.


June 2013

63 © UNIVERSALIA

The relationships established with domestic institutions at local and national levels and the positive

involvement of Government also constitutes a good practice, particularly in terms of sustainability and

scaling up.

The level of active coordination has created several communication tools for the project, to help partners

and local communities understand what the project consists of, to highlight which activities will take place

and to showcase which structures have been created. Given the innovative aspects of the project, which

encompasses several sectors and leans on participative methodologies, the use of training and capacity

building are also best practices The project also has identified proactive opportunities to reinforce the

benefits of the Human Security approach (Fokontany, city, partners). Despite being time-consuming, this

focus on communications and empowerment has been crucial and is being reinforced by the creation of

public information leaflets in both Malagasy and French.

Finally, the project has promoted a sense of responsibility among local communities involving the

establishment of local committees that are fully linked to the activities being undertaken, and the strong

involvement of local volunteers (VQ) in conveying messages. This empowerment and capacity building of

local communities constitutes the most promising achievement of the project to date.

Application of Human Security Concept

The Human Security project in Antananarivo has been designed to address the following four dimensions

of Human Security: economic security (improvement to socio‐economic conditions of the population

targeted), health security (better access to basic services), environmental security (better preparedness to

urban risks, hazards, and disasters), and personal security (prevention of violence and protection of the

most vulnerable population in particular children, youth, and women).

In terms of methodology, the UNTFHS advocates a “framework based on the protection and empowerment

of people”, understood as a mix between a top‐down and bottom‐up approach. The project is very much

built on this basis. The capacities of individuals and local communities are being reinforced through

training, social mobilization, and the creation of local structures; they are encouraged to take ownership of

their own living conditions through the elaboration of strategies and action plans, while their rights and

duties are built in Charters. The project is fostering a collective and participative sense of dignity among

communities and among people themselves.

In parallel, the project works with institutions at the local, city and central level, and with partners involved

in emergency and relief efforts, in order to improve preparedness to urban risks and hazards.


June 2013

65 © UNIVERSALIA

Vanuatu :

Communi ty

R es i l i ence and

C op ing w i th

C l imate C hange

and N atura l

D i sas t ers in

Vanuatu , 2011 -2014

J u n e 2 0 1 3


June 2013

67 © UNIVERSALIA























In May 2013 a High Level Event on Human Security will be held in New York. In preparation for that

meeting, the HSU has commissioned this assessment of the Fund’s activities in the past five years. This

assessment is “rapid” because of the tight timeframe; it will explore the relevance and value of the Human

Security approach and of the UNTFHS concept and mechanism. Its focus, rather than on projects per se, is

on how projects contribute to the attainment of Human Security and to the advancement of the concept,

both in relation to beneficiaries and to UN integration efforts. It will:
















68

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA







Title of the UNTFHS project: Community resilience and coping with climate change and natural disasters

in Vanuatu, 2011-2014

Executing agencies: UNICEF, UNDP, FAO

Counterpart organizations: Ministry of Internal Affairs (Department of Local Authorities); National

Disaster Management Office; Six Provincial Local Governments; Ministry of Health Vanuatu; Ministry of

Geology, Mine and Water Resources; Ministry of Agriculture; Eligible Non-Government Organizations,

Community Women Groups, Community- and Faith-based organizations.

Project Purpose: The project “Community Resilience and Coping with Climate Change and Disasters in

Vanuatu” was jointly formulated to demonstrate enhanced short- and long-term community resilience and

coping capacity to at least six categories of adverse effects of climate change and natural disasters, with

special attention to women, children and other vulnerable groups and to draw lessons learned in applying

the Human Security concept to the rest of Pacific island countries and territories. These six categories are

as follows:

Volcanic eruption

Tsunamis

Flooding

Rising sea levels

Typhoons and tropical cyclones

Drought

The main purpose of the project is to demonstrate enhanced short- and long-term community resilience and

coping capacity to at least six categories of adverse effects of climate change and natural disasters, with

special attention to the impact of these risks on women, children and other vulnerable groups, and to draw

lessons learned for the application of the Human Security approach to other Pacific island nations and

territories.

Supported by three UN agencies: UNDP, UNICEF and FAO, the project has aimed at building community

resilience and coping with climate change and natural disasters. It covers the period 2011-2014 but it has

been delayed and with a start only in 2012. Five components are led by these three different UN agencies:

Natural Disasters management – UNDP

Governance and decision making – UNDP

Food and nutrition security - FAO and UNICEF

Water and sanitation - UNICEF

Knowledge management - UNICEF and UNDP

The project targets 12 communities in Vanuatu, which is an archipelago, composed of 80 small islands with

some 250,000 persons distributed across over 50 inhabited islands. Vanuatu has been identified as the most


June 2013

69 © UNIVERSALIA

vulnerable country to natural disasters in the world. Capacity to cope and rehabilitate is very limited and

the economy is particularly dependent on external assistance and external products.

The project is designed to help local people and their governments identify their own threats and

vulnerabilities across 12 communities (two communities in each of the six regions comprising the

project) and to formulate interventions within the first three months of the project and to develop capacity

(monitoring and implementation) so that local governments an enhance their own capacities for the next

three years. Some 75% of households in the selected communities are targeted for enhanced food and

nutrition security.The Government of Vanuatu and the three UN agencies, UNICEF, UNDP and FAO have

agreed to collaboratively work together to initiate this first joint UNTFHS-supported project with a specific

focus on strengthening Human Security in relation to coping with Climate Change and natural disasters.

2 . F i n d i n g s


The project contributes to operationalization the concept of Human Security in relation to the adverse

effects of climate change and natural disasters in the Pacific islands countries and territories (PICTs). Risk

to Human Security such as rising sea levels, severe storms and flooding (largely related to climate change

and weather variability) as well as earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions (natural disasters) increase

vulnerability to loss of lives and livelihoods globally, but are disproportionately higher for the PICTs.

Climate change has increased the risk to natural disasters and disrupted the pattern of “traditional

hydrology”, farming seasons and crop varieties in PICTs.

Overall Value Added

The project is only now (early 2013) entering its operational phases, as such at present , the value-added of

the UNTFHS supported project is the involvement of the local populations and the implementation of

multi-sectorial projects that follow the Human Security approach.

In this light, the first progress report in July 2012 indicates:

“The project seeks to empower communities to better cope with risks and hazards related to

climate change and natural disasters, which require multi-sectoral action and coordination.

For example, the rising sea levels causes soil salinity and contamination of underground water

and the changing precipitation causes storms and floods and both lead to soil erosion, reduced

food production, destruction of infrastructure and depletion of fresh water lenses. Disaster

preparedness and management will provide personal security - preventing loss of lives when

disaster strikes in the short-term and from failure to cope with adverse climate change in the

long-term. Addressing the situations described for criteria V.1 (paragraph 4 in the UNTFHS

Guidelines) and sustaining the concrete and sustainable benefits described for criteria V.2

(paragraph 5), this project will be demonstrating how to apply the Human Security concept in

Vanuatu by protecting people from the diverse and interconnected threats (described in Section

2.1 above) at the same time build the resilience and coping capacity of communities. In

addition, the project applies key Human Security principles such as Peoples-Centered by

reviewing the present planning and budgeting arrangements between the area councils,

provincial governments and national government to ensure the process is inclusive and

participatory and resources are allocated to areas that address threats to subsistence and

commercial production. The necessity for multi-sectoral actions is addressed by interventions

at national, provincial and community levels to ensure that formal and informal governance

systems are strengthened so that they can improve delivery of services to rural communities.

Using the Human Security vulnerability and capacity analytical framework, the project will

review policy and regulatory reforms; institutional strengthening in communications, finance,

human resources management and planning systems; community engagement; and enhanced


70

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

arrangements for service provision, including increased sectoral investment. These are

mechanisms to sustain the project initiatives”.

Compared to more traditional UN projects, the added value of the UNTFHS is that results in a more

integrated and holistic project that recognizes the multiplicity and inter-connected nature of threats to

Human Security. It combines different sectors into a “whole”. The UN agencies engaged in the UNTFHS

supported project are work in a collaborative way and are responding to complex challenges. They are

bringing different innovations that target the same risks but from different perspectives to produce a

holistic approach.

The UNTFHS supported projects show the following examples of “value-adding”:

“Realizing minimum living standards, including assisting community-level efforts to establish

mechanisms to protect people exposed to extreme poverty, sudden economic downturns and natural

disaster”.

“Enhancing health care and service coverage to those whom other initiatives have not reached

successfully”.

“Improving educational opportunities, especially for girls, emphasizing universal primary

education (including the emphasis on safe school environment and respect for diversity”.

“Establishing mechanisms for protection and empowerment”.

“Enhancing food and nutrition security”.

“Developing community action plans for maintaining drinking water security”.

“Building communities’ capacity to protect human lives and prevent loss of property and

destruction of infrastructure when disaster strikes”.

Breaking New Ground

In the context of Vanuatu, the UNTFHS supported project is breaking new grounds since it is the first joint

program by the UN in the country. Operating under UNDP, UNICEF and UNFPA are working with the

Ministry of Health for maternal and child health. To harmonize their activities, the implementing actors

developed a common workplan, an innovation for UN activity in Vanuatu. Another innovative aspect that

is characteristic of the Human Security approach as a whole is the fact that the communities are involved in

the project conception and execution.

Filling Gaps

The UNTFHS project is not the only project in Vanuatu but it is quite different from the other UN projects.

This is in large part due to its “combined” nature. NGOs partners are working on awareness raising and risk

identification by the affected people themselves. However the operational risk remains in that at the end of

the project, the DRR plan developed may not be able to attract the support needed for implementation, a

common threat to the sustainability of UNTFHS supported projects . Notwithstanding this systemic risk,

the UNTFHS supported project is more comprehensive in gap filling than prior efforts.

The Impact of the Project








June 2013

71 © UNIVERSALIA















Though the UNTFHS-supported projects are at the early stages of implementation, some impacts on

beneficiaries are already evident. The main impact is to work with remote villages, so as to reach the most

vulnerable people. For instance, the project is contributing to the acceleration of action by:

Building capacity of all the six provincial governments, enhancing capacity of 12 out of the 72

Area Councils in the country and producing at least 12 community action plans to which line

ministries and other partners will be advocated and encouraged to replicate and support;

Working with Vanuatu Association of NGOs (VANGO) to standardize terminology and

approaches used to engage communities in climate change and natural disasters; and

Advocating and supporting all stakeholders’ annual planning and review.


It is important to highlight that a common understanding of the nature of Human Security seems to exit

exists among UN partners; and that it involves more than “working together”. It is also important to

mention that this understanding of the nature of the Human Security approach, was endorsed by the UN

partners, as well as the Government of Vanuatu.

The UN agencies demonstrate a clear understanding of the challenges that they face in this first ever joint

project in Vanuatu.

The first progress report of July 2012 states:

“Project Management: While coordination currently continues to remain a challenge, meetings

with implementing partners have proven useful in terms of coordination, in particular, on field

visits, and in information sharing. It is anticipated that the bi-monthly meetings will cultivate

stronger coordination”.


The project is being implemented by UN agencies in partnership with and through local government

authorities, community-based organizations, NGOs and faith-based organizations as well as appropriate

central ministries. The involvement of all these stakeholders enhances effectiveness and impact of the

project by:

Building on, standardizing and using existing tools and approaches used to engage communities on

climate change and natural disaster;


72

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Ensuring that the project complement with past and current projects, taking care not to create

redundancies; and

Working together to address multiple human threats in one Area Council.

In the context of Vanuatu, the Government plays an important role in the implementation of the UNTFHS-

supported projects. The Ministry of Internal Affairs through the Department of Local Authorities (DLA) is

the lead implementing agency with the engagement of other Government partner agencies and under the

National Advisory Council for Climate Change for technical oversight. The project was officially launched

in May 2012 with the participation of national stakeholders including Government partners and

representatives of the 12 selected communities referred to as “Community Mobilizers” (CoM) who are

working closely with the Government Area Secretaries to oversee the implementation of the project in their

respective communities. The project goal of enhanced short- and long-term community resilience and

coping capacity to adverse effects of climate change and natural disasters is aligned to:

PAA/PLAS: “National disaster management plan implemented”.

Objective of NAPA: “develop country-wide programme of immediate and urgent project-based

adaptation activities, in order to address the current and anticipated adverse effects of climate

change, including extreme events”.

NAPA Project Concepts 1. Agriculture & Food security: Project Goal: “… to enhance food

security and hence resilience of the economy to the adverse effects of climate change”.

NAP on DRR & DM: “Empower communities through targeted capacity enhancement to reduce

their risks to hazards and prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters”.

Moreover, the project uses the strategies identified in the NAPA, especially in relation to agriculture and

food security, more resilient crops, land use planning and management, and water management and those

identified in the national DRR & DM national plan of action, especially for governance; mainstreaming

DRR & DM in sectoral planning at provincial level; information, information systems and knowledge

management; and government and community capacity building.

To achieve governmental ownership and leadership as well as maximum effectiveness and impact of the

project, all stakeholders were engaged in:

Mapping and ranking of Human Security threats related to climate change and natural disasters;

Developing the criteria used for ranking provinces by Human Security threats; and

Selecting the threats to Human Security in the 12 project sites.

To ensure the sustainability of the project after the conclusion of the current funding, national authorities

have committed to the following:

(a) further implementation of the project using central and provincial government employees;

(b) in recognition of current limited implementation capacity, hire a national project manager to work

under the Director of Local Authorities along with 12 community mobilizers working under the Area

Secretaries or Administrators, with their collective role to kick-start the project and then hand-over to the

government employees; and

(c) develop and pilot interventions in each component of the project being mainstreamed into the national

priorities of Vanuatu.

The first progress report in July 2012 indicates:

“Working with Partners: Ideally, the provincial governments should have been given ample

time to understand the full expectations of the project. This would have helped them to

understand their role better in supporting the project and in mobilizing the Area Secretaries for


June 2013

73 © UNIVERSALIA

the recruitment the Community Mobilizers. Presentation to the Provincial Authorities was done

during the 2011 Provincial Retreat and although a slight change was made to the identification

of one project site, the substance of the project had already been endorsed by the Development

Committee of Officials (DCO). The initiation visit to communities to orient project sites and to

recruit COMs proved the efficient use of provincial personnel in convening meetings.

Communities responded faster to people they know in their provinces”.

“Application of Human Security: In many of the communities consulted, there were one or two

traditional practices identified that demonstrated that the communities already had established

coping mechanisms. These ranged from different resilient crops to ways to coping with the

effects of climate change and natural disasters. An important lesson learnt is to to identify and

make full use of current documentation and research undertaken by a number of partners

(SPC, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), South Pacific

Environment Programme (SPREP), etc) on traditional resilience models, including habitat,

food production/preservation and value adding to local food products and integrate them into

action plans”.

It is important to note that the project has also been harmonized with NGO-funded projects and the location

of the NGO projects have been taken into consideration in selecting the 12 project sites for the project, to

avoid duplication.

The first progress report of July 2012 indicates:

“Good Practice/Innovation: A good practice was the mapping exercise undertaken during the

project design phase, with NGOs and CBOs working in the provinces to identify the project sites

most in need of assistance. This allowed the project design team to identify areas saturated with

assistance from different NGO/CBO partners, and those areas still in need of assistance and

support. There must be time to interact with the community members. The team visiting Aniwa,

for instance, were able to attend the Christian Palm Sunday church service together with

members of the community. This greatly facilitated information sharing amongst different groups

of people and encouraged participation of community members to the meeting”.


In conclusion, the UNTFHS supported project demonstrates a number of challenges and positive

responses in the context of Vanuatu. The first challenge met by the UN agencies was the difficulty to reach

the targeted areas with the corresponding budget, time and staff allocated for the project. The remoteness

of the communities makes the implementation of the project challenging. UN partners struggle to reach

these remote areas which are most costly to access and support than may have been originally planned.

In addition, the UN agencies face a challenge in terms of collaboration, in relation to their office that serve

Vanuatu. FAO is based in Samoa. By contrast, UNICEF and UNDP main offices are based in Suva, the

UN hub for the South West Pacific. As well, UNDP is in Suva. But the agencies do not have a sustained

presence in Vanuatu , making liaison with the Government somewhat problematic.

The desk review highlighted other challenges that the UNTFHS is facing in Vanuatu. The first progress

report in July 2012 indicates the following:

In this first year of this first joint UN project, some challenges and constraints were encountered

both among the UN partners and with national and local partners that resulted in some delays.

Internally, there were initial difficulties in coordinating and synchronizing planning and

management of the different components by three UN agencies concerned located in 3 different

countries (UNDP –Fiji/Vanuatu, FAO-Samoa and UNICEF-Fiji/Vanuatu). The national partners

have also encountered some delays in organizing the project management structures and

preparing detailed implementation work plans due to lack of technical human resources and


74

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

competing projects and activities which resulted in delayed cash requests and releases to support

implementation of activities. Recruitments of community mobilizers and community assessments

and profiling of some areas were further delayed due to logistical challenges especially in

communication and access to the remote rural communities by the provincial government and

DLA. In view of these project initiation challenges, it is then requested that it be granted a no-

cost extension of twelve months ending on 31 July 2015.

As the UNTFHS supported project is at the early stages of its implementation, it has yet to lead to any

lessons learnt. Nevertheless, it is important to note that “Lessons learned from the project will be used to

leverage policies and resources from these development partners”. The UNTFHS supported project is

within the framework of the Vanuatu Government’s Priority Action Agenda (PAA), thus closely linking it

with long term national goals, a factor to improve the chances of sustainability.


June 2013

75 © UNIVERSALIA

The Rap id

Asses sment o f the

Uni t ed Nat ions

Trus t Fund f or

Hum an Secur i ty

O v e r v i e w R e p o r t

M a y 8 , 2 0 1 3


June 2013

77 © UNIVERSALIA

Introduction

This is a global and largely strategic assessment of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security that

was commissioned by the Advisory Board on Human Security in January 2013.

The Objectives of the RAPID ASSESSMENT were:

To assess the added value of the Human Security approach;



empowerment framework);

To present the usefulness of UNTFHS projects in responding to unaddressed areas of human

security; and


situations where there are threats to Human Security.

These four themes constitute the framework of this Overview Report.

A Rapid Assessment differs from a formal program evaluation. While the two share many common

characteristics, several features are unique.

A rapid assessment is usually much more tightly focussed on a narrow set of policy related issues,

as opposed to the more broad approach which is inherent in formal program evaluation.

This Rapid Assessment has focussed largely on issues related to Relevance. These issues related to

Relevance are the core of the policy and programmatic challenges that face the UNTFHS.

In short, this Rapid Assessment represents a purpose built tool to address specific policy and program

challenges in a very timely and focussed manner.

The Table below highlights the key phases of the Rapid Assessment.

Inception January 2013 Development of an Inception Report

Research January and February 2013 Field missions to Uganda, Colombia, Uzbekistan and Mongolia plus desk top reviews of Congo, Vanuatu, and Madagascar

Reporting March - April 2013 Validation Workshops and drafting

Presentation May 2013 Presentation to this High Level Event

We adopted a set of evaluation-based methodologies to ensure the broadest possible coverage and the

greatest degree of data triangulation. Care had to be taken to ensure that our work was not simply a

compilation of country case studies, and to ensure that the methodologies selected were designed to allow

comparability and also to allow the elaboration of broadly relevant findings at the global level which affect

the Human Security approach as a whole and not highly country-specific findings.


78

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Value Added


One of the key issues which underpinned the commissioning of this Rapid Assessment relates to the added

value of projects that have been supported by the UNTFHS and by extension, the added value of the

principles that underpin the Human Security approach within the context of individual actions. This notion

of “added value” however, is qualified to largely relate to changes in behaviors and attitudes of UN staff as

they have worked within the Human Security approach in comparison to more traditional approaches.

The elements of value adding, in relation to the design and delivery of UNTFHS-supported projects, largely

concentrate on the synergistic qualities of the project model itself. The most recent set of administrative

guidelines highlight the requirement for a participatory approach involving two or more UN agencies in

addressing an area of unfulfilled challenges to Human Security; in short, a programmatic gap. The evidence

points to the conclusion that supported projects have in fact filled these gaps; but more importantly is how

they have done so.

The requirement to work together, to plan together and to ensure an

active voice of the affected peoples, those whose security is at risk,

has resulted in a new way of thinking about the interconnectivity of

the threats to Human Security and how traditional approaches cannot

respond to multi-dimensional challenges. There is clear evidence that

the demonstration projects are resulting in a change of thinking

among UN staff at the field and country level about “whole of

problem” solutions as opposed to simply “fixing” something.

Another dimension of the added value of the Human Security

approach relates to how the people affected participate. The current

project model requires the active participation of potential

beneficiaries, individuals or their communities, in the design and

delivery of a project. There is ample evidence to demonstrate the

fulfillment of this requirement and also to show that the affected

populations, by being actively engaged as participants, came to have

a higher sense of their own worth and dignity. There was, in a

number of instances, strong evidence of local pride of ownership and

local determination to expand from the project basis into the

community at large, for example in relation to micro-financing in Northern Uganda or democratic outreach

in Colombia. We also witnessed the positive value adding benefits of the comprehensive, multi-sectorial,

context-specific and people-centered approach which is the crux of the HS approach.

The Usefulness

To present the usefulness of UNTFHS projects in addressing unaddressed areas of human security

If the theme of “added value” spoke largely in the context of UN organizations working together and the

benefits of doing so; then the theme of “usefulness” addresses the more programmatic issue of the extent to

which unforeseen needs or threats to Human Security were addressed through the projects supported by the

UNTFHS. It is very important to understand that the unforeseen needs in this context, and thus the

usefulness, transcend normal single-support developmental or humanitarian challenges. In the context of

the Human Security approach, these unforeseen needs must be multi-dimensional, reflecting the

philosophical concept that threats to the well-being of human kind are seldom linear, seldom one

dimensional. Rather, the Human Security approach reflects the recognition of the 360 degree nature of the


June 2013

79 © UNIVERSALIA

challenges to the well-being of humanity, and therefore the necessity to attempt to ameliorate these threats

in an integrated manner, as well as one which embodies the empowerment of individuals to determine their

own well-being.

There is ample evidence to show that the projects that have been

supported by the UNTFHS were the result of consultative

processes where people themselves articulated the challenges that

they faced. Clearly, it is unreasonable to assume that the citizens in

a district in Northern Uganda or a barrio in Colombia, or a soum in

Mongolia reached out to the UN themselves to seek support.

Rather, what the Human Security approach has fostered, which is

different from many other types of developmental or humanitarian

action, is the degree to which the UN partner organizations listen

and respect a bottom-up approach. A corollary to this benefit also

is the degree to which the Human Security approach in the projects

reviewed encouraged levels of government to become directly

involved, not just being the passive beneficiaries of external

support, but the active partners in the delivery of programming that

reflects the needs of their citizens. In Colombia, Mongolia and

Uzbekistan, there is ample evidence to show the degree to which local levels of government have embraced

project elements and are striving to ensure their sustainability and in some instances, the expansion of

elements to other geographic areas.

On balance, the questions of usefulness or value added, in many respects need to be considered outside of

the things that are done or the people who do them. It became evident that the most successful applications

of the Human Security approach within the context of this Rapid Assessment were those where UN

participants came to recognize that Human Security was not a mechanism for delivery. Rather, it embodies

a new way of thinking about the relationships between the UN as a whole, people, and the governments of

peoples as the three confront fundamental threats to the well-being of humankind, to Human Security.

The Impact

To assess the impact of the Human Security approach

Although it is very important to be able to report about the value added and usefulness of UNTFHS-

supported projects, there is a much more important question: Do these projects actually make a difference

and do they do so in ways that relate to the principles that underpin the Human Security approach? There is

ample evidence to show that the projects in question have contributed to improvements to the human

condition and have done so in a multi-disciplinary fashion which is not characteristic of traditional

developmental or humanitarian programming.

For example, in Colombia, individual beneficiaries reported,

confirmed by other organizational stakeholders, that the

combination of social programming and support for nutrition

combined with health programming resulted in improved overall

livelihoods and a greater sense of community worth.

Respondents there stated that they were continuing to apply the

advocacy skills they had learned. In Uganda, the combination of

activities to improve the milling and marketing of cereal grains,

combined with training for local people to establish community-

based micro-financing has resulted in improved overall economic

and livelihood security. In Mongolia, the linking of improvement


80

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

in community health services combined with infrastructure enhancements in the provision of clean water

and sewage facilities has resulted in lower instances of disease and because of the nature of the

involvement of the local government, a transferal of the support for these initiatives from UN partners to

the local government. In Uzbekistan, the combination of increased outreach to combat TB, combined with

the training of local community health representatives, the provision of enhanced diagnostic equipment and

the strengthening of the infrastructure by solar powered electric generation, is addressing the complex

public health challenges in a depressed rural region. Furthermore, in Uzbekistan, a combination of

community outreach programming to women at risk combined with vocational training has resulted in the

establishment of eco-tourism opportunities and already income generation, transforming women at risk to

women having dignified employment. In Uganda, the combination of infrastructure improvements (road

building) combined with promotion of community-based financing is generating the capital needed for

local residents to pay school fees and thus, with transport improvement, increased the rate of access to

education.

All these are tangible impacts that have affected the lives and livelihoods of people that are at risk. There is

however, an equally positive intangible impact which was witnessed in virtually all the projects under

review. It is that the participatory Human Security approach, when applied at the project level, seems to

result in a greater sense of individual and collective empowerment, less of a sense of being simply a

beneficiary and more of a sense of being a participant in changing one’s own future.

Lessons Learned

To present lessons learned and to determine the added value of the Human Security approach to situations

The mandate for this Rapid Assessment included a request for an analysis of the lessons that have been

learned as a result of recent projects that have been supported by UNTFHS. In this context, there are

several lessons which relate to the degree of organizational learning that may have transpired among UN

partners, especially at the field and country level. There are also several lessons which relate more to the

degree of adaptation and change within the Human Security Unit (HSU) which administers the Trust Fund

and serves as a prototype of a secretariat for the overall advocacy of the Human Security approach and the

preparation of required reports to the General Assembly.

In relation to the lessons learned by the HSU, there is evidence to show that

the set of recent amendments to the administrative guidelines has

strengthened the ability of the HSU to ensure that the projects selected for

support reflect, to the greatest extent possible, the multi-dimensional and

holistic principles which underpin the Human Security approach. Doing so

however, has placed a great strain on the relatively few analytical resources of

the HSU. A second internal lesson for the HSU lies in the extent to which the

management and supervision of supported projects requires a higher degree of

hands-on oversight, to ensure that the Human Security-related commitments

made in applications transpire. Finally, it became evident that the current

approaches to project performance reporting do not sufficiently highlight the

degree of the uniqueness of UNTFHS-supported projects in comparison to

other kinds of activities.

Turning to the lessons that may have been learned by UN partners and others, three are paramount.

First, there is ample evidence to show that there are clearly organizational and programmatic

benefits to be garnered by UN partners when they work within the context of the Human Security

approach.


June 2013

81 © UNIVERSALIA

Second, the demonstration projects supported by the UNTFHS give life and practical reality to the

Consensus Resolution, and among UN partners, tend to confirm the viability and worth of the

Human Security approach as a whole.

Third, there is an awareness that the Human Security approach is philosophically different and has

intrinsic added value over more mechanistic paradigms of working together.

There is however, a final lesson which was evident throughout the Rapid Assessment. While there has been

considerable support for the benefits of the Human Security approach at the country and especially at the

project level, there remain strong organizational dynamics within the UN system that tend to diffuse the

strengths of the Human Security approach.

Conclusions

In addition to these four themes, the Rapid Assessment also addressed a series of general questions which

complement the themes. For this Overview Report, it is important to highlight our conclusions relative to

these questions.

Are these projects responding to un-addressed areas?

In virtually all of the projects reviewed for the Rapid Assessment, previously un-addressed challenges to

Human Security were identified. In several, most notably Uzbekistan, Vanuatu and Mongolia, the

UNTFHS-supported projects were the sole UN response mechanisms. It was also evident that the UNTFHS

projects, by emphasizing inter-sectorial activity, responded to challenges that had, in a way, fallen through

the cracks. This is a major programmatic benefit of the Human Security approach in itself.


The evidence related to the conception and execution of UNTFHS projects points very clearly to different

modalities of design and subsequent execution that emphasize the need to actually collaborate as opposed

to simply participate in a joint project. UN country teams indicated that these different methods of planning

and subsequently rolling out combined programming appeared to have resulted in more sensitive responses,

and may have been instrumental in engaging governments at all levels in the design and roll-out as well.


One of the most unique characteristics of projects supported by the Trust Fund is the degree to which

people themselves are involved in the design of solutions to the multi-dimensional challenges to their

security. The evidence points to a general pattern of the active involvement of beneficiaries in design and to

a lesser extent, in the roll-out.


The projects supported by the UNTFHS, while obviously designed to better the human condition as a

whole, are primarily demonstration projects. Therefore, one of the most important questions relates to the

degree to which participation in these projects is impacting on how UN teams work together at the field

level. The evidence is relatively clear, that in relation to projects themselves, UN partners recognize the

intrinsic benefits of the Human Security approach as opposed to other joint delivery concepts. There even

appears to be a sense of pride among field level personnel about the results which they have collaboratively

generated. More strikingly, many indicated that they had never worked on a joint project with other UN

partners and that the UNTFHS demonstration project constituted a completely new way of thinking and

working.


82

June 2013

© UNIVERSALIA


It is very clear from the review of projects supported by the UNTFHS that new ground is being broken and

that at the field level at least, there is an acceptance of the positive benefits of these new approaches. More

specifically, the breaking down of traditional isolated mandates by emphasizing inter-sectorial challenges

to Human Security and inter-sectorial solutions may constitute the most significant “new ground”.

However, it is equally important to emphasize that the empowerment mandate inherent in the Human

Security approach has been recognized as somewhat different from other approaches that attempt to

animate “the voice of the people”.

In conclusion therefore, it is apparent that over the

last several years, the demonstration projects

supported by the UNTFHS have clearly made a

difference. But, it is necessary to place this solidly

positive conclusion in the context of the overall

magnitude of the work of the United Nations

system.

The UNTFHS-supported projects constitute a

miniscule fraction of the overall work of the United

Nations. Yet, even at this very small level of scale,

they are demonstrating that there are new more

holistic ways of addressing the challenges that face

humanity. They are also demonstrating the extent to

which it is possible for a complex and polycentric

institution like the United Nations to develop collaborative responses to Human Security challenges that are

in themselves, multi-dimensional.

The Human Security approach as recently articulated by the General Assembly has proven

to be effective at the project level.

Filled unaddressed areas of Human Security

Empowered stakeholders and governments (especially at the local level)

Added value that is intrinsic to the three pillars of Human Security

Resulted in holistic solutions to complex problems

Are showing beneficiary impact

In short, Human Security works.


June 2013

83 © UNIVERSALIA

Next Steps

The mandate for this Rapid Assessment asked that we go somewhat beyond merely assessing the intrinsic

value of the projects that have been recently supported by the UNTFHS. The above conclusions decisively

show that there is considerable merit in the Human Security approach as a whole and that it is highly

relevant to the work of the United Nations and all its constituent organizations.

There is a gap however, one which was implied in one of the questions that have guided the Rapid

Assessment.

That question asked whether the Human Security approach was being applied to how UN organizations

generally function, within planning systems and within resource allocation models.

We witnessed that there remains an unfulfilled need to better integrate the concepts which underpin the

Human Security approach into the work of UN agencies as a whole. This may in part be the result of two

inter-related phenomena.

First, the General Assembly Consensus Resolution on the nature of Human Security itself was only

passed in September, 2012. Thus, it is not unreasonable for organizations to require more time to

integrate these approaches.

Second, given the size, scope and complexity of the UN family or organizations as a whole and the

diversity of their planning and resource allocation models, it is not surprising that new and

challenging approaches like that related to Human Security may have yet to be fully embraced.

Time, however, is running short. It is not unreasonable to claim that the principles which underpin the

Human Security approach and which have been proven relevant by this Rapid Assessment could be useful

in articulating whatever may become of the next set of strategic global objectives which will follow on

from the current Millennium Development Goals. The “whole of the challenge” nature which exemplifies

the Human Security approach probably could have a positive contribution to how global goals are to be

articulated and how the resources of the planet harnessed to meet them.

Therefore, this Rapid Assessment recommends that:

The UN as a system affirm its support for the integration of the Human Security approach as a valuable tool to promote development, human rights, and peace and

security - the three pillars of the United Nations.

The Rap id Asse s sment

o f the Uni t ed Nat ions

Trus t Fund f or Huma n

Secur i ty

Vo l u m e I I I - I n c e p t i o n

R e p o r t a n d Wo r k p l a n M a y 1 1

M a y 2 0 1 3

R a p i d A s s e s s m e n t o f t h e U N T F H S - V o l u m e I I I - F i n a l R e p o r t

May 2013

i © UNIVERSALIA

A c r o n y m s

ABHS Advisory Board on Human Security

CHS Commission on Human Security

HQ Headquarters

HSU Human Security Unit

IDP Internally Displaced Person

MDG Millennium Development Goal

OCHA Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

PPT PowerPoint

RC Resident Coordinator

TORs Terms of Reference

UMG Universalia Management Group

UNTFHS United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security


May 2013

iii © UNIVERSALIA

C o n t e n t s

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Purpose of the Rapid Assessment 1

1.2 Background and Context 2

1.2.1 Current UNTFHS Activity – An Overview 2

1.2.2 Our Initial Understanding of the Context of the UNTFHS 2

The Critical Mass of UNTFHS Interventions 3

2. Methodology 5

2.1 Overall Data Collection Plan 5

2.1.1 Field Work Plan 5

2.2 Field Mission Data Collection 6

2.3 Specific Methodologies 7

2.3.1 Document review 7

2.3.2 Desk Top Reviews 7

2.4 Additional In-person Interviews, Telephone Interviews/Focus Groups 7

2.5 Surveys 8

2.6 A Matrix of Key Questions 8

3. Critical Path and Workplan 13

3.1 Level of Effort 13

3.2 Schedule of Activities 14

3.3 Deliverables 15

3.3.1 Overview 15

3.3.2 Deliverable 2: The Validation Workshop 15

3.3.3 Deliverable 3: Draft Assessment Report and Follow-Up Workshop 15

3.3.4 Deliverable 4 –Final Assessment Report 16

3.3.5 Deliverable 5 – Presentation of the Final Assessment Report 16

4. Coordination and Logistics 17

4.1 The Role of the Human Security Unit (HSU) 17

5. Issues Affecting this Assessment 18

5.1 Uneven Availability of Data 18

5.2 The Nature of Stakeholders 18

5.3 The Difficulty in Assessing UNTFHS Interventions 18

5.4 Local Context 19

5.5 Closed UNTFHS Interventions 19


iv

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

E x h i b i t s

Exhibit ‎2.1 Tentative Field Mission Plan 6

Exhibit ‎2.2 Preliminary schedule for field missions 6

Exhibit ‎2.3 Matrix 9

Exhibit ‎3.1 Level of Effort 13

Exhibit ‎3.2 Gantt Chart 14

A p p e n d i c e s

Appendix I Survey 21

Appendix II Interview Protocol (Governments) 29

Appendix III Interview Protocol (UNTFHS Project Leaders at Country Level) 31

Appendix IV Interview Protocol (UN Partners at the Country Level) 33

Appendix V Interview Protocol (Members of ABHS and CHS) 35

Appendix VI Terms of Reference 37


May 2013

1 © UNIVERSALIA


The Universalia Management Group Limited (also known as “Universalia”), is pleased to submit to the

Human Security Unit of the United Nations (HSU) the Inception and Workplan Report for the Rapid

Assessment of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security.

The report provides an update on the set of activities and the decisions made regarding the assessment

methodology. This Inception Report responds to the revised Terms of Reference (TORs). It consists of:

Section 1 – Introduction: presents purpose and scope of the assessment and the Background and

Context;

Section 2 – Methodology: provides details on the methodology and matrix for the assignment

including indicators and data collection and data analysis methods to be used;

Section 3 – Workplan: provides a workplan and updated schedule for activities for the assessment;

Section 4 – Logistics: describes logistics and assistance required for the schedule of activities;

Section 5 - Issues Affecting This Assessment: Describes challenges to the rapid assessment;

Appendices: Present survey and interview tools which will be used in this assessment.

1 . 1 P u r p o s e o f t h e R a p i d A s s e s s m e n t

In a process such as this, there is a clear benefit to beginning an Inception Report by reprising the heart and

soul of the exercise as a whole, namely the Objectives and Key Areas of the assessment. Therefore, as per

the TORs, the Objectives of the Rapid Assessment are:






reports of the UN Secretary-General on human security.”



















2

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

1 . 2 B a c k g r o u n d a n d C o n t e x t

1 . 2 . 1 C u r r e n t U N T F H S A c t i v i t y – A n O v e r v i e w

The United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security (UNTFHS) was established in March 1999. Drawing

input from more than twelve years of experience and over 200 projects funded globally, the Guidelines for

the UNTFHS have been revised to better reflect the principles of the Human Security approach and its

application.


communities, UNTFHS projects have covered a wide range of cross-cutting issues worldwide. While not

exhaustive, the following are some of the areas covered by the UNTFHS:

Transition to peace and sustainable development in fragile and conflict-affected communities,

Protecting and empowering refugees, IDPs, economic migrants and others on the move,

Responding to the multidimensional consequences of climate-related threats,

Urban violence and its impact on health, education, economic, personal and community security,

Poverty reduction, social inclusion and community-based development in isolated areas,


UNTFHS-funded projects have:

Underscored the practical approach of Human Security for addressing multifaceted insecurities in a

contextually relevant and targeted manner,

Provided new perspectives for the development of interventions, particularly where existing

responses have proved insufficient,

Resulted in a deeper analysis on the causes and manifestations of complex and interconnected

threats and their impact on the survival, livelihood and dignity of local communities,

Highlighted the lack of protection and empowerment conditions that can perpetuate insecurities,

Supported the development of mitigation and resilience-building measures that have resulted in

notable increases in the Human Security of the most vulnerable,

Provided examples of successful multi-stakeholder collaborations that have fortified existing

partnerships and promoted avenues for new collaborations among UN organizations, Governments

and local communities.

Based on the 2011 Annual Report, since the inception of the Fund in March 1999, 202 projects have been

approved with a total cumulative budget of $368,536,023. By December 31, 2011, 171 of these projects

had been completed and 31 were on-going.

1 . 2 . 2 O u r I n i t i a l U n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e C o n t e x t o f t h e U N T F H S

The Rapidly Evolving Nature of the UNTFHS

The concepts which underpin Human Security have their genesis in the positive attributions made by

various senior global statesmen in the mid 1990’s. As noted above, the Trust Fund was established in 1999

and for the most part, has been exclusively financed by donations from the Government of Japan. The Fund

itself has undergone at least three operational generations with the most recent being exemplified by the

revised Guidelines that were issued in 2011. Over the years, it is fairly apparent that the work that the Trust

Fund has supported has evolved and has sharpened in focus, as has the very concept of Human Security


May 2013

3 © UNIVERSALIA

itself. While this greater clarity of the underpinning concept, combined with operational improvements,

clearly has led to a more sophisticated and effective UNTFHS, it poses a conceptual problem for this

assessment in that Human Security may in some ways be “a moving target” and thus to assess its relevance,

even in relation to projects that were launched post 2008, requires this process to look at what was

considered to be Human Security at the time of the launch of the intervention.

As well, with the evolution of the Guidelines for the Trust Fund, the same challenge exists in relation to

how the intervention functioned and whether it was functioning in a way so as to promote the holistic

nature of the concept of Human Security itself.

Demonstrating that the Projects actually Reflect the Holistic Values of Human Security

The work of the UNTFHS is designed to support two primary objectives, advancing Human Security in a

practical sense by means of the projects undertaken; and advancing the acceptance of the principles that

underpin Human Security as beneficial for the work of the UN system as a whole.

Without going into a philosophical discussion about the set of principles that are the fundamental pillars of

Human Security, it is evident that from a programmatic basis, the desirable outcome of a project that is

funded by the UNTFHS should be apparently greater than the sum of individual parts. In a way, what is

being sought is evidence of a gestalt within the project design and implementation.

This however, is a somewhat ethereal concept and needs to be reduced to something more practical which

the assessment team can begin to engage. As part of the Inception Phase, we began to explore a fairly basic

but profound notion that the goal of this gestalt process could be characterized as the difference between

organizations coordinating (working separately as part of a joint package); and, organizations “integrating”

(entities actively sharing, working jointly, planning jointly and responding to changing situations in a

collective fashion). What this means in an even more primal sense is that the Human Security approach

requires much more than a project where a number of partners come together, each with their own

repertoire of activities, and each delivering those activities relatively independently.

This implies that we will have to drill down especially in the electronic survey and the field visits to

ascertain whether events like a project steering committee in fact translate into catalytic actions. This will

require a fair degree of candor on the part of the UN stakeholders. It also implies for our team, the need to

carefully ascertain the degree to which the concept of Human Security in a programmatic sense is

understood as more than merely a joint program. As well, we will have to assess the barriers to integration

that are inherent in the UN system – fragmentation, varying planning cycles, varying agendas, etc.

T h e C r i t i c a l M a s s o f U N T F H S I n t e r v e n t i o n s

Based on the last two sets of Guidelines, UNTFHS-supported interventions are relatively small scale, less

than $4 Million over a period of up to three years. Given that the Guidelines also give strong preference to

collaborative efforts of two or more UN agencies, the size of the interventions in question necessarily

becomes quite small. For example, in relation to a project to build Human Security in Uzbekistan to counter

the environmental disaster that has occurred near the Sea of Arel, the team will need to carefully assess the

degree to which the small scale project involved actually resulted in some degree of betterment in the

human condition.

This issue of small size requires us to explore different approaches to causality, and to specifically utilize

elements of a cutting-edge evaluation methodology called contribution analysis which has at its core, the

recognition that few interventions result in direct causality; rather, a collection of contributing interventions

may collectively produce desired changes. Utilizing this methodology however, may be somewhat

problematic in relation to the projects supported by the UNTFHS. While individual projects are required to

prepare in essence a pro forma logical framework, the UNTFHS, does not have a log frame of its own or a


4

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

theory of change model, which links the totality of the work of the Trust Fund to the goals of Human

Security that are embodied in Resolution 66/290 and in the most recent set of Guidelines. This is not to

attempt to build a model that would link to, for example any MDG. Rather, it is to recognize that a theory

of change model related to the encouragement of the acceptance and integration of the Human Security

concept probably is needed to better demonstrate how interventions contribute to these strategic goals for

Human Security. Already, this gap in program design has been raised with the HSU and it has been agreed

that our team will attempt to construct a provisional simple theory of change model so as to better link

individual projects to corporate objectives.


May 2013

5 © UNIVERSALIA

2 . M e t h o d o l o g y

The methodology proposed for this assignment consists of a mixture of qualitative and quantitative data

collection, with attention both to forward-looking, improvement-oriented questions and to assessment of

impact. In summary, while we are conducting an assessment and not a full scale evaluation, we will be

guided by the OCHA Evaluation Policy1 objective of determining:

Is the right thing being done to promote the relevance of Human Security;

Is it being done well;

Could it be done any differently?

The general steps envisaged for this assessment include the following:

Data collection (including survey administration, field missions and desk top country cases);

Data analysis;

Presentation of initial findings at the conclusion of data collection;

Preparation and submission of a draft Final Report for comments by the HSU;

Preparation of the Final Report, including an executive summary and all appendices; and

Presentation of the final findings.

2 . 1 O v e r a l l D a t a C o l l e c t i o n P l a n

2 . 1 . 1 F i e l d W o r k P l a n

The Inception Phase has highlighted the importance of field missions for this assessment. Each field

mission will comprise the following steps:

Initial contact made with the selected country office for logistics;

Request for documents and initial suggestions on key informants. For the latter, key informants

both currently in-country and those who have moved elsewhere will be requested;

Universalia team members will organize and carry out interviews with key respondents who are no

longer in-country;

Document review;

Field mission carried out by one team member and in some cases accompanied by a staff member

from the HSU, including in-person interviews with key respondents and PPT-based Exit Debrief

(template provided).

Based on initial document review and suggestions received from our key respondents during the Inception

Phase, Universalia proposes to conduct four field missions.

1 OCHA Policy Instructions: Evaluations, 2010.


6

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Exhibit 2.1 Tentative Field Mission Plan

Country Consultant Estimated Person days in

the field Tentative dates of mission

February 11- March 1

Colombia Rudy Broers 5 days Early

Uganda Dale Thompson (accompanied by HSU staff member)

5 days Early

Uzbekistan Dale Thompson (accompanied by HSU staff member)

5 days Middle

Mongolia John Horekens 5 days Middle

2 . 2 F i e l d M i s s i o n D a t a C o l l e c t i o n

The general approach for the field missions is one where data collection occurs throughout an entire week

with the debrief occurring at the end.

Based on experience, the following table gives a general idea of how to animate a field mission such as the

ones required for this assignment. It is essential to underscore that Country Offices/UNTFHS Country

Level project management are expected to provide the required data well in advance, at least two weeks if

not more, and that similarly, they will be expected to provide a draft schedule based on the table below at

least a week in advance. Given our collective experience in conducting field missions, these deadlines serve

not only to mobilize country level staff but also to give an indication to the team in advance of the

likelihood of success and also provide a final window of opportunity with HSU personnel to institute

remedial action.

Exhibit 2.2 Preliminary schedule for field missions

Day Event

1 Briefing with the Manager of the UNTFHS supported project

1 Briefing with Resident Coordinator re Human Security and the UNTFHS

1/2/3 Focus group/meetings with UN partners in the UNTFHS

3/4 Meeting with Government stakeholders

4/5 Meetings/interviews with the principal donor (Japan) and/or civil society stakeholders

4/5 Follow-up interviews with UN partners

5 Clarification meeting with Manager

5 Exit PPT debrief


May 2013

7 © UNIVERSALIA

2 . 3 S p e c i f i c M e t h o d o l o g i e s

2 . 3 . 1 D o c u m e n t r e v i e w

The central document review will cover key internal documents provided by HSU, both at the Headquarters

as well as the Country levels, including strategy, planning and annual reporting documents linked to

UNTFHS. These should include information extracted from tracking systems. The Team will also review

other key programming documents relating to the design and management of the UNTFHS and the reports

that the HSU prepares for the General Assembly and others. We will review additional evaluations and

studies linked to the UNTFHS.

As was noted in the early segments of this Inception Report, there are problems with the scope and quality

of the data set. The team has provided the HSU with a list of additional materials that will be essential.

2 . 3 . 2 D e s k T o p R e v i e w s

The TORs for this assignment specified that the assessment will conduct a desk top review of three

additional UNTFHS-supported projects that have been undertaken over the past five years. To ensure

consistency of analysis, a UNTFHS desk top review template has been developed.

The desk top reviews are intended to add breadth and scope to our assessment by going beyond what can be

achieved through field missions. Each of them will include the following steps:

Document review based on the data set provided by HSU; and

Telephone/Skype interviews with 3-5 key informants.

We plan to commence these desk reviews as soon as possible after the acceptance of the Inception Report.

Again, it must be emphasized that the utility of these desk top reviews is completely dependent on the

adequacy of the data set.

The locales for the desk top reviews are:

Vanuatu;

Democratic Republic of the Congo; and

Madagascar.

2 . 4 A d d i t i o n a l I n - p e r s o n I n t e r v i e w s , T e l e p h o n e I n t e r v i e w s / F o c u s G r o u p s

In addition to interviews held during the four field visits and the three desk top reviews, interviews will be

carried out with key informants across the globe. They will be guided by semi-structured interview

protocols. The following stakeholder groups will be interviewed, both in person and through telephone

interviews:

HSU staff and other relevant managers in New York;

Focal points and other senior officials of UN partner bodies;

Members of the ABHS and CHS

Principal donor (Japan); and

Stakeholders from other bodies.


8

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

2 . 5 S u r v e y s

As part of the Inception Phase of this assignment, it became evident that surveys would be required to

bolster the scope of the assessment and especially to reach stakeholders in those locales which have not

been selected for field missions or desk top reviews.

We intend to conduct one combined electronic survey distributed by ourselves.

It will be directed toward institutional stakeholders at the global and country level (HQ level personnel of

UN agencies, country level personnel of UN agencies involved in all UNTFHS supported projects over the

past five years and other stakeholders who have an institutional involvement with these projects e.g.

government stakeholders). The survey, a draft of which is included as an Appendix I, focuses on

perceptions of the benefits of UNTFHS projects and the degree to which Human Security concepts are

being taken up. As well, any issues that detract from these overall benefits will also be explored.

We estimate that it would take about 10 minutes to complete the survey.

In terms of timing, we propose to electronically distribute the surveys in the first week of February with a

follow-up reminder two weeks later.

2 . 6 A M a t r i x o f K e y Q u e s t i o n s

This Matrix is based on the primary evaluation questions listed in the Terms of Reference.

Several areas of inquiry may be somewhat problematic. While the assessment does not specifically ask for

the assessment of beneficiary impact, it is implied throughout. For example, Human Security as a concept

was designed to address the reality of the diversity of challenges to Human Security and the need to address

them in a holistic manner as opposed to one based on traditional function/programmatic lines. It is therefore

inherent that this assessment begin to address whether in fact, in such circumstances, Human Security was

actually strengthened. However, given the fact, as noted earlier, that UNTFHS projects are quite small in

nature, it would be prohibitively difficult to attempt to identify specific impacts. Rather, we will have to

rely on the testimony of country level respondents, and triangulate such with other observations.

It is very important to emphasize that all of the elements of the matrix below and the subsequent

instruments and surveys are designed to answer the following set of core questions which are at the heart of

the four key issues noted above. These core questions are:

Are these projects addressing gaps?




What is the impact on the way they do their business at the country team level?


Is there any added value when compared to more traditional UN projects?

The Matrix below is structured on the four key issues identified in the Terms of Reference: Value Added,

Impact, Usefulness and Lessons Learned.


May 2013

9 © UNIVERSALIA

Exhibit 2.3 Matrix

Issue/Theme Major Questions Example of Sub-

Questions Illustrative Indicators

What is the added value of the Human Security approach in addressing the broad range of insecurities faced by vulnerable communities?

Is there a common understanding among UN partners of the nature of Human Security?

If not, what differences exist and why?

Are there patterns of understanding (HQ, field, etc.)?

Patterns of elements of understanding of what constitutes “Human Security”, grouped by respondent type

Degree of acceptance of the worth of the Human Security approach

What constitutes “value added” in the context of Human Security?

If there are variances in understanding, what are they and why?


Patterns of elements of understanding of what constitutes “valued added” in relation to Human Security, grouped by respondent type

Degree of acceptance of the proposition that the Human Security approach results in “added value”

What are the instances of “value adding” (as understood above) in the range of UNTFHS-supported projects?

Are there patterns of value adding activities?

Do they depend on the size or duration of projects?

Lists of kinds/types of value added activities arranged, if possible by project type and size

Degree of acceptance that UNTFHS-funded activities include “value adding”

Is there a difference between “cooperating” and collaborating” in the context of a project supported by the UNTFHS?

Is there a difference in relation to the degree of value adding?

If there are variances in understanding, what are they and why?


Can “cooperation“ alone contribute to value adding in the context of Human Security?

List of perceptions of what constitutes “collaborating” versus “cooperating” and patterns of responses thereto

Degree of acceptance of the proposition that “collaborating” is different from “cooperating”

How does the UNTFHS select projects so as to maximize the “value adding” elements?

Are there any standards that speak directly to “value adding”?

Are specific weightings given to “value adding” elements?

To what degree is long term sustainability considered?

Project selection data complied as to acceptance/rejection and causes

Degree of perception that UNTFHS projects give extra worth of “value adding elements”

Evidence of efforts to sustain

Evidence of project sustainability by others

How does the HSU raise awareness of the “value added” of the Human Security approach?

What specific mechanisms are/have been used to promote “value adding”?

What level of contact / engagement re Human Security with RCs is/has there been?

Types and mechanisms/rates of information distribution by audience kind

Type of information sent to RCs by source

Perceptions of the degree of worth/outreach of these efforts


10

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA



How does the HSU promote among its UN partners the benefits of the Human Security approach and specifically its “value adding”?

What specific mechanisms are/have been used to promote “value adding”?

What level of contact / engagement re Human Security with RCs is/has there been?

Types and mechanisms/rates of information distribution by audience kind

Perceptions of the worth/degree of outreach of the efforts

What differences in “value adding” if any exist between UNTFHS supported programming and that undertaken in “Deliver as One” environments?

Are there patterns of differences in “value adding”, assuming that “Deliver as One” may have value adding elements?

What are perceived to be the differences between “Deliver as One” and the Human Security” approach?

Perceptions of the differences between “Deliver as One” and “Human Security”

Types of “value adding” activities between the two concepts

What has been the impact of the Human Security approach (i.e., people-centered, context-specific, comprehensive and multi-sectorial solutions that are reinforced through the protection and empowerment framework) on the target populations versus regular UN projects?

What kinds of impacts are anticipated by projects supported by the UNTFHS?

Are impacts identified in project submissions?

Are they identified as “special” in any way?

Are these impacts sustainable?

Is there programming “pick up or continuity?

Type of impacts arranged by project size/type

Degree of sustainability of impacts

Evidence of sustainability of impacts (continuing projects)

What kind of differences are seen to exist between impacts of UNTFHS-supported projects and other UN projects?

What are seen to be the causes for any differences?

How are they identified in comparison to those of “other UN projects”?

Type of impacts arranged by project size/type/UNTFHS support/support by others

Are there any patterns among these kinds of “different impacts”?

Do different kinds of UNTFHS-supported projects generate impacts of different kinds in comparison to other types of UN projects?

Type of impacts arranged by project size/type/UNTFHS support/support by others

Does the size and or duration of UNTFHS-supported project have an effect on the ability to generate impacts / value adding elements that differ from those of other UN programming

Are there different patterns of realized impacts?

Are smaller, shorter projects more or less sustainable or subject to measure to ensure continuity?

Degree of sustainability of impacts

Evidence of sustainability of impacts (continuing projects)


May 2013

11 © UNIVERSALIA



What has been the usefulness of UNTFHS projects in addressing gaps in responses to multi-dimensional insecurities due to its broad focus and its ability to go beyond Agency mandates?

How are gaps identified and by whom?

(At HSU, at country levels?)

What are the types of gaps?

Do patterns exist?

What measures are used to guard against overlap?

Are bilateral efforts taken into account in identifying gaps?

Evidence of gaps not in UNDAF or not otherwise addressed that have been filled

Types of gaps filled

Evidence of cooperation with bilateral donors to ensure reduction in overlap

Degree of satisfaction with UNTFHS as a gap filling mechanism

What is the role of governments and that of civil society in projects supported by the UNTFHS?

Does the role of government or that of civil society differ from that in relation to non-UNTFHS-supported programming?

What is the role of government and or civil society in the continuity/sustainability of programming?

Type of government /civil society roles

Degree of satisfaction by government or civil society with UNTFHS

Evidence of government or civil society putting into place follow on/sustainability measures

Evidence of other development partners doing so

How have gaps been filled in a manner different than that in relation to other kinds of UN projects?

Is gap filling more efficient or effective in the context of UNTFHS projects than in other instances?

Is there data to illustrate greater efficiency or effectiveness?

Is UNTFHS gap filling sustainable?


Perception of relative degree of efficiency/effectiveness of UNTFHS as a gap filling mechanism

Evidence of UNTFHS filling different kinds of gaps than other UN programming

What are the perceptions among UN partners about the “usefulness” of the UNTFHS in relation to gap filling?

Are there differences/patterns of perceptions among varying types of UN stakeholders and others?

What are the perceptions about sustainability and linkage to broader efforts by the UN and others?


Perception of relative degree of efficiency/effectiveness of UNTFHS as a gap filling mechanism

What lessons have been learned related to the Human Security approach to situations in which the Human Security approach was applied (e.g., post-conflict and fragile settings, natural disasters and climate vulnerable communities, and urban poverty and violence)?


12

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA



What specific lessons have been learned?

How many and what kinds of lessons?

Do more relate to the concept of Human Security or to administrative/operational matters?

What percentage of current projects undertakes an evaluation (last five years)?

Lists/types of lessons learned

Lists of mechanisms to distribute them and to what audiences

Rate of acceptance/satisfaction with distribution and quality of material re lessons learned

Rate of evaluation over the last five years

How have these lessons been communicated so as to promote organizational learning?

What mechanisms (formal/informal) exist to disseminate lessons learned?

Do feedback mechanisms exist to share project findings among project participants and parent organizations?



Rate of evaluation over the last five years

How are lessons learned used?

What mechanisms exist to use lessons learned as part of selection processes?

What mechanisms exist to use lessons learned as part of the planning process as a whole?

Aside from the Advisory Board, are there any other formalized mechanisms to share lessons learned among UN partners?

Evidence of lessons learned being used in subsequent selection processes



Types of information distribution mechanisms generally and rate of satisfaction


May 2013

13 © UNIVERSALIA

3 . C r i t i c a l P a t h a n d W o r k p l a n

3 . 1 L e v e l o f E f f o r t

Given the limited timeframe available for this assessment, it was decided that a team of several persons

would need to be recruited so as to ensure the completion of this exercise by early May, 2013.

Accordingly, three internationally experienced consultants were recruited:

Mr. Rudy Broers, a senior consultant with Universalia Management Group;

Mr. John Horekens, an internationally recognized consultant and former senior official with

several humanitarian agencies; and

Mr. Dale Thompson, a senior associated consultant of Universalia Management Group for nearly

20 years and a former senior official of the Government of Canada.

The table below illustrates the allocation of days between these three individuals over two and a half

months.

Exhibit 3.1 Level of Effort

RB: Rudy Broers; JH: John Horekens; DT: Dale Thompson

Activity RB JH DT Total

Phase 1 Inception

Inception Briefings + Initial Doc Review 2 2 4 8

Draft Workplan and Inception Report and Tools 2 1 4 7

Revision and final work plan revision 2 0 2 4

Phase 2 Data collection and analysis

Portfolio Review 15 0 1 16

Administer Survey 9 1 10

External and Internal Stakeholder Interviews 4 6 2 12

Four Field Missions (5 pd x 1 person team) 5 5 10 20

Phase 3 Report preparation

Draft Main Report 3 2 8 13

Conduct Validation workshops in NYC 1 1

Revision and Final Evaluation Report 4 1 4 9

Phase 4 Presentation Workshops

Presentation workshops in NYC 1 1

46 17 38 101Total Days


14

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

3 . 2 S c h e d u l e o f A c t i v i t i e s

The following exhibit presents our updated schedule for this assignment, in keeping with the requirements approved in the proposal and the

discussions which took place during the Inception Phase. As shown, work commenced in January 2013 and will be completed in May 2013.

Exhibit 3.2 Gantt Chart

Jan 2013 Feb 2013 Mar 2013

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Phase 1 Inception

Inception Briefings + Initial Doc Review

Draft Workplan and Inception Report and Tools

Revision and final work plan revision

Phase 2 Data collection and analysis

Portfolio Review

Administer Survey

External and Internal Stakeholder Interviews

Four Field Missions (5 pd x 1 person team)

Phase 3 Report preparation

Draft Main Report

Conduct Validation workshops in NYC

Revision and Final Evaluation Report

Phase 4 Presentation Workshops

Presentation workshops in NYC

ActivityApril 2013 May 2013 June 2013


May 2013

15 © UNIVERSALIA

3 . 3 D e l i v e r a b l e s

3 . 3 . 1 O v e r v i e w

The following provides an overview of the deliverables that will be submitted for this assignment:

Deliverable 1 – Inception Report and Workplan (the present document)

Deliverable 2 – Validation Workshop immediately after the conclusion of the field missions

Deliverable 3 – Draft Assessment Report and follow-up workshop

Deliverable 4 – Final Assessment Report

Deliverable 5 – Presentation of Final Assessment Report

In addition to these deliverables, Universalia will provide the client with regular progress updates

throughout the course of the assignment. These will provide a brief overview of steps taken since the

previous update, status of the overall assignment, immediate next steps, and any issues or challenges that

have arisen that may require the attention of the client or that may affect timely delivery of project

deliverables.

3 . 3 . 2 D e l i v e r a b l e 2 : T h e V a l i d a t i o n W o r k s h o p

The Validation Workshop will occur immediately after the conclusion of the field missions, probably in

the last week of February, 2013. It will be animated by an informal PowerPoint presentation. The

Workshop will present the initial conclusions that the team has derived from the several lines of inquiry

which have been described above. Broad levels of findings will be presented, and a discussion of their

implications will be an essential part of the workshop. General lines for strengthening or improvement

will be discussed; however, specific recommendations will not be presented at this point.

3 . 3 . 3 D e l i v e r a b l e 3 : D r a f t A s s e s s m e n t R e p o r t a n d F o l l o w - U p W o r k s h o p

The Draft Assessment Report will develop key findings emerging from the data collection and analysis.

The Draft Assessment Report will be accompanied by a Methodology Appendix (including tools, TORs,

bibliography, survey results, etc.).

In terms of size, the Report of this assessment should be relatively compact, while following the general

pattern of a traditional evaluation report. Utilizing a compact version of a traditional format will increase

the accessibility of the Report to those stakeholders who are more accustomed to the review of

evaluations. Likewise, adopting a compact traditional format increases the perception of professionalism

and thus increases the possibility of the acceptance of the findings and recommendations. In more specific

terms, it is likely that the Report will be approximately 25-30 pages in length excluding a 2-3 page

Executive Summary and supporting Appendices which will present the tools used and the detailed results

of the electronic survey. For greater clarity, the Report will not include country case studies, beyond a 3-5

page section which will briefly introduce the four UNTFHS interventions that were the subject of field

missions and the three that are subject to desk top review. As well, the Report will only include a 2-4 page

discussion of the “facts and figures”. In short, the Report will focus the majority of its attention to

responding to the key issues and on elaborating recommendations designed to strengthen the work of the

Task Force and designed to broaden the level of donor engagement.

Universalia will conduct a follow-up workshop after a suitable time for the development of comments and

observations.


16

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

3 . 3 . 4 D e l i v e r a b l e 4 –F i n a l A s s e s s m e n t R e p o r t

Upon receipt of feedback on the Draft Assessment Report, Universalia will revise the draft report and

submit a final report, with the addition of an executive summary and all Appendices and Annexes.

3 . 3 . 5 D e l i v e r a b l e 5 – P r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e F i n a l A s s e s s m e n t R e p o r t

The urgency of this entire assignment is largely based on the fact that in early May 2013, there will be a

high level discussion of human security issues in general in New York City. Although numerous issues

will be on the agenda, a firm commitment has been made to brief on the strategic findings of the

assessment process. Accordingly, a short PowerPoint presentation, duration of less than 15 minutes, will

be developed and presented at this high-level forum. This presentation will focus on strategic issues

related to the relevance and complementarity of the human security approach and the relevance of the

work of the Trust Fund to further awareness of the concepts which underpin Human Security.


May 2013

17 © UNIVERSALIA

4 . C o o r d i n a t i o n a n d L o g i s t i c s

4 . 1 T h e R o l e o f t h e H u m a n S e c u r i t y U n i t ( H S U )

The assessment will be managed by the HSU, which will:

Ensure the availability of funding;

Manage the assessment in accordance with agreed budget and timeline;

Draft and finalize the TORs;

Advertise for, select and recruit the assessment;

Coordinate travel;

Participate as agreed upon in field missions where necessary;

Facilitate the assessment team’s access to key stakeholders and specific information or expertise

needed to complete the assessment;

Help coordinate field research and workshops/presentations;

Ensure all stakeholders are kept informed;

Review, comment and approve all deliverables of the assessment, including the final Assessment

Report.


18

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

5 . I s s u e s A f f e c t i n g t h i s A s s e s s m e n t

This is the draft of the Inception Report. Accordingly, this draft has been based on the assessment of

documentary materials collected largely in advance of the commencement of the assignment. In several

instances, the team has already advised the HSU of shortfalls in the pre-assembled material which may

impact subsequent analysis.

5 . 1 U n e v e n A v a i l a b i l i t y o f D a t a

A significant issue that affects the ability to assess the value added and relevance of UNTFHS

interventions is the generally uneven level of data at the country level. In several instances, country level

UNTFHS data is limited to basic information and mandatory reports. This is clearly insufficient, and, as

noted above, the HSU has been apprised of additional data requirements including a list of specific

requirements.

5 . 2 T h e N a t u r e o f S t a k e h o l d e r s

The UNTFHS is designed to provide the UN with a mechanism to promote the acceptance of the concepts

of Human Security itself. It is not an end in itself; nor are the interventions it supports. It is therefore

essential that the assessment be able to differentiate between the two and to be able to engage UN HQ

partners (recipients) in discussions about the complementarity of the projects; to interview their country

level counterparts where appropriate and to survey them in other venues. Access to the full range (five

years) of these stakeholders must be considered to be a prerequisite for this assessment.

5 . 3 T h e D i f f i c u l t y i n A s s e s s i n g U N T F H S I n t e r v e n t i o n s

As noted earlier in this Inception Report, the concept of Human Security, while growing in acceptance in

the international community, still faces interpretative challenges and especially so when the theoretical

concepts underpinning it are translated into programming activity designed to support it and further its

acceptance. It is also very important to stress that the work supported by the UNTFHS may appear to

have dual objectives, the first being the promotion of Human Security in a practical sense through project-

related activities; and, the second being the use of these activities to demonstrate the worth of Human

Security in action per se and thus strengthen the acceptance of the concept within the UN system as a

whole. These two objectives have somewhat different horizons: one on the project; and, the other on the

concept of Human Security itself.

Given the largely country level base of the projects that the UNTFHS supports, it is probably likely that

there will be a degree of ambiguity among stakeholders with respect to these two objectives. Furthermore,

this assessment is primarily charged with demonstrating the relevance and value added of the UNTFHS

interventions as tools to underscore the value of the Human Security approach as a whole. Therefore, the

assessment team will have to drill down with the stakeholders in the four selected country visits and three

desk top reviews to identify the difference between simply working together (coordination) and working

as one ( integration) where the “whole” is greater than the sum of the parts. This will require careful

questioning.

Current UNTFHS guidelines imply that some form of evidence-based assessment be undertaken at the

end of each project presumably to assess actual results versus anticipated results. As well, projects are

required to develop a logical framework, which includes outcome-related goals. While the latter

requirement has generally been accepted, the former, which in some instances has been called an

evaluation, has generally not transpired. This results in a performance information gap and may have

negative consequences on this assessment of relevance and value added. This conclusion has already been

transmitted to the staff and managers of the HSU. The amelioration of this problem, given the importance


May 2013

19 © UNIVERSALIA

of identifying value added characteristics, will require the assessment team, especially in the four field

missions, to forcefully drill down to address the primal question of what difference did this project

actually make to Human Security and what difference did it make to the promotion of the holistic nature

of Human Security.

As part of the Inception process, a number of UNTFHS files were reviewed. While they are complete in

the sense of compliance for a traditional fiduciary audit, their level of detail tends to reflect an output-

based approach. Information is generally available on what was done but not necessarily available on the

consequences of the actions. More importantly, the material, while probably factually correct, does not

seem to highlight what made the intervention in question an example of the collaborative Human Security

approach. Barring a complete set of as yet unknown documents, the ability to assess the consequences and

the value added of UNTFHS interventions, key sets of findings will probably have to be based on oral

testimony that will require some degree of triangulation.

5 . 4 L o c a l C o n t e x t

The TORs for this assignment and a number of the issues and questions contemplate assessment within

the perspective of “local context”. Presumably this consideration may have been designed to address

concerns that some environments have fundamentally different contexts, within the nature of the UN

system and as well, within the country itself. While this notion may have some benefits in theory, it may

pose a problem for the assessment in attempting to see patterns of relevance and value added and to be

able to better determine the characteristics of collaborating as opposed to simply cooperating.

5 . 5 C l o s e d U N T F H S I n t e r v e n t i o n s

The UNTFHS has been in operation since 1999 and has funded several hundred projects with a total value

now exceeding $350 Million. Yet, nearly all of these prior projects reflect earlier iterations of both the

administrative guidelines governing the work of the UNTFHS, and, more importantly, earlier iterations of

the concepts that underpin Human Security itself.

Even if time were available, there would probably be very little utility in going back more than four or

five years to examine earlier interventions given the rapidly evolving nature of the concept and the Trust

Fund.

Therefore, this assessment will focus on activities commenced after 2008, so as to ensure immediacy with

the contemporary understanding of what constitutes Human Security. To that end, it must be emphasized

therefore, that this decision to focus on the very recent activities implies that this assessment cannot be a

complete review of the historic relevance or value added characteristics of the work of the UNTFHS.


May 2013

21 © UNIVERSALIA

A p p e n d i x I S u r v e y

UNTFHS Rapid Assessment SURVEY

Dear Survey Respondent,

The overall objective of the rapid assessment is to determine the added value of applying the Human

Security approach in addressing multi-dimensional insecurities faced by vulnerable communities through

the activities of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security (UNTFHS). The principles and the

framework in the application of Human Security are articulated in the Guidelines of the UNTFHS, the

General Assembly resolution 66/290 and the reports of the UN Secretary-General on Human Security.

The UNTFHS was established in March, 1999. Through its support to over 205 projects in 85 countries,



communities and people around the world. This survey is directed towards participants and partners of the

UNTFHS since 2008.

Projects funded through the UNTFHS have brought together the combined expertise of the United

Nations system and have allowed United Nations implementing organizations to tackle widespread and

crosscutting threats affecting people in all regions. In particular, projects funded from the Trust Fund have

provided examples of successful multi-stakeholder collaborations that address the needs and

vulnerabilities of local communities; highlight the institutional gaps that hinder appropriate responses to

multi-dimensional insecurities; and support empowerment and capacity-building measures that result in

notable increases in the Human Security of the most vulnerable communities and people.












Particular attention will be paid to joint projects in which the design and implementation of activities

involve several UN agencies and programs, as well as local partners where possible. The focus of the

assessment will determine the benefits of UNTFHS projects not only for the participating communities


comparative advantages of each entity, the Organization responds in the most comprehensive and

impactful manner.

You were identified as a survey respondent by the Human Security Unit. The survey focuses on

perceptions of the benefits of the work that has been supported by the United Nations Trust Fund for

Human Security and the added value that ensues when using the Human Security approach. We estimate


22

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

that the survey will take about 10-15 minutes to be completed. The information you provide will be held

completely confidential.

This rapid assessment is being undertaken by a team from the independent consulting firm Universalia

Management Group based in Canada.

Universalia Management Group thanks you for completing this survey. We would appreciate that you

complete the survey by March 1, 2013.

If you require further information concerning this survey or if you experience any technical difficulties,

please contact Jerôme Gandin at [email protected]

Dale E. Thompson

Team Leader


May 2013

23 © UNIVERSALIA

Background questions

The following questions are designed to help us get a broad understanding of your profile.

What country are you currently working in?

Are you:

Male

Female

What is your current function? (choose the most appropriate)

HQ level personnel of a UN Agency (Geneva or New York City)

Country or Regional level personnel of a UN Agency

Representative of a National / Regional or Local Government

Representative of an International/National/or Local Non-Governmental Organization

Member of the Human Security Advisory Board or similar advisory body

Other, please specify.

How would you describe yourself?

I am a manager or supervisor

I am a technical analyst / subject matter specialist

I am an administrative / financial management specialist

Other, please specify

Describe the level of knowledge and understanding of the policies and procedures of the United

Nations Trust Fund for Human Security.

Fully aware and understand them

Aware of them but do not fully understand them

Aware of them with basic understanding

Not aware at all


24

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Strengths and Areas for improvement of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security

Can you please list the three (3) most important strengths?

Can you please list three (3) areas for improvements?

Operational Impact, Effects and Outcomes of UNTFHS Supported Projects

The following statements are designed to assess the operational impact, effects and outcomes, of

UNTFHS supported projects, meaning how they tackle widespread and crosscutting threats

affecting people in all regions.

1 = STRONGLY DISAGREE; 5=STRONGLY AGREE, DNK

UNTFHS Projects have improved the UN’s

response coverage. 1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS Projects address multiple

challenges

1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS Projects contribute to UN

programming mechanisms including

UNDAF, etc.

1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS Projects enable a comprehensive

and coordinated response to current and

emerging challenges.

1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS funding has been directed to the

highest priority areas. 1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS Projects address evolving

priority needs. 1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS Projects build resilience of

communities in view of current or

emerging challenges.

1 2 3 4 5


May 2013

25 © UNIVERSALIA


UNTFHS Projects do not overlap with

other existing UN programs. 1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS funding contributed to filling

gaps in the overall UN response to threats

to Human Security.

1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS Projects resulted in outcomes

that could not have been achieved other

than by using the Human Security

approach.

1 2 3 4 5

On a scale of 1 to 5 (with 1=low and 5 = high) please indicate the value added of the UNTFHS

mechanism in the following aspects:

1 = VERY LOW; 5=VERY HIGH , DNK

Overall UN in-country architecture 1 2 3 4 5

Regional Coordinator strengthening 1 2 3 4 5

Development of effective partnerships

between UN agencies 1 2 3 4 5

Development of effective partnerships

between UN and non-UN actors including

governments

1 2 3 4 5

Development of new ways of UN agencies

working together 1 2 3 4 5

Size of UNTFHS funded projects 1 2 3 4 5

Do you have any additional comments on operational impact, effects and outcomes of the UNTFHS

mechanism?


26

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Partnerships

The following statements are designed to capture the relative importance of UNTFHS-supported projects

in enhancing partnerships, in particular among UN agencies.


Partnerships with among UN agencies have

increased as a result of the UNTFHS

mechanism.

1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS projects are designed to

demonstrate an effective commitment to

engaging in and promoting good

partnerships.

1 2 3 4 5

Please identify any specific examples of enhanced partnerships as a result of UNTFHS projects:

Funding and Project Issues

The following statements are designed to capture the complementarity, additionality, quality and

appropriateness of UNTFHS-supported projects.


UNTFHS-funded projects take into

consideration needs of vulnerable groups. 1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS-funded projects take into

consideration cross-cutting issues such as

gender, social, economic and public safety;

WASH, health, and disadvantaged persons

generally

1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS Projects increase the

participation of affected groups in the

design and delivery of projects

1 2 3 4 5

UNTFHS-supported projects contributed to

enhancing national capacities regarding

Human Security, empowerment, and

resilience.

1 2 3 4 5


May 2013

27 © UNIVERSALIA

Do you have any additional comments on UNTFHS funding and project issues?

Performance Measurement and Lessons Learned

The following section lists the UNTFHS’s systems and tools used for monitoring, reporting and

evaluation. Please indicate how satisfied you are with these systems and tools.

1 = VERY UNSATISFIED; 5=VERY SATISFIED, DNK

Frequency of monitoring visits by HSU

staff. 1 2 3 4 5

Project level evaluations. 1 2 3 4 5

Global UNTFHS evaluations. 1 2 3 4 5

Use of evaluation recommendations to

improve projects. 1 2 3 4 5

Relevance of information provided by

M&E systems. 1 2 3 4 5

Timeliness of information provided by

M&E systems. 1 2 3 4 5

Inclusion of lessons learned as a selection

criterion for future funding decisions. 1 2 3 4 5

What would be the current strengths and limitations with regard to monitoring and evaluation of

UNTFHS-supported projects? (Your comments may pertain to harmonization, impact reporting, key

indicators, data collection processes, etc.)

Final Comments

Do you have any other comments on the UNTFHS itself or the projects that it supports that have not been

addressed?

Universalia Management Group would like to thank you for completing this survey.

Your assistance is greatly appreciated.


May 2013

29 © UNIVERSALIA

A p p e n d i x I I I n t e r v i e w P r o t o c o l ( G o v e r n m e n t s )

You have been contacted as part of the Rapid Assessment of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human

Security mechanism. The following highlights the key issues on which the rapid assessment will focus.











Background Information

1) What is your position within your government?

2) Please describe the type of projects you have been involved with the UNTFHS.

Knowledge of Human Security

3) How did you come to learn about Human Security?

4) How was the project in question started – with your government going to the UN, with the UN

coming to you, or another way? We are trying to map the processes of Human Security.

5) In your opinion, what constitutes or is special about the Human Security approach?

6) Has working with other UN agencies increased the level of partnership between your

government and them?

7) What are your perceptions about the quality of the partnership relationship with the UNTFHS?

Funding and Project Issues

8) Do UNTFHS-funded projects take into consideration the needs of vulnerable groups and cross-

cutting issues (social, economic and public safety; WASH, health, environmental considerations

and disadvantaged groups)? Is civil society representing vulnerable groups in project decision-

making/advisory mechanisms?

9) Does UNTFHS funding entail administrative requirements?

10) Have the capacities of your organization changed as a result of your work with the UNTFHS?

11) To what degree are affected groups involved in the design, delivery and follow on planning?


30

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Performance Management

12) How does the monitoring and accountability framework of the UNTFHS-supported project

compare with other UN-sponsored projects?

13) How do you intend to use the lessons learned of this project?

Impact, Outcome, Effects

14) In your opinion, how has the UNTFHS mechanism improved human security (in terms of

timeliness, prioritization of geographic and sectorial needs, empowerment, collaborative efforts,

additional funding, etc.)?

15) What specific mechanisms differentiate UNTFHS-supported projects from other UN projects?

16) What will your organization do at the end of the project? Will your government continue it? Will

you seek other outside support?

Final thoughts, recommendations

17) In your opinion, what is the greatest strength/benefit of the UNTFHS mechanism?

18) In your opinion, what is the greatest weakness/gap of the UNTFHS mechanism?

19) What would be the most important measures to increase the effectiveness/relevance of the

UNTFHS mechanism?

20) Any other comments?

Thank you for your collaboration.


May 2013

31 © UNIVERSALIA

A p p e n d i x I I I I n t e r v i e w P r o t o c o l ( U N T F H S P r o j e c t L e a d e r s a t C o u n t r y L e v e l )













Background information

1) What organization do you represent?


3) What are your roles and responsibilities in relation to the UNTFHS project in question?


1) How did you come to learn about Human Security in general and the UNTFHS in particular?

2) How was the project in question started – with your organization going to the government, with

other UN bodies coming to you, or another way? We are trying to map the processes of Human

Security.


4) Has working with other UN agencies increased the level of partnership among UN agencies,

between the UN and government/civil society? Examples please.

5) What are your perceptions about the quality of the partnership relationship with the HSU?

6) How does the operating environment impact the functioning of your UNTFHS-supported

project?

Internal factors

7) In your opinion, are there adequate policies and guidelines to support the work of the UNTFHS?

8) Does the size and duration of UNTFHS-supported projects impact the ability to achieve results,

include that of transforming the way you work with others?

9) What has been the role of the RC in relation to the UNTFHS-supported project?

10) What barriers exist in the UN systems generally that hinder the growth of the Human Security

approach?


32

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Partnerships

11) To what extent has the UNTFHS strengthened the coordination among UN bodies?

12) How has it increased the awareness and acceptance of the Human Security approach?

Processes

13) What quality control mechanisms are applied and how are they used to improve performance?

14) How effective and efficient is the support from the HSU?

15) Is there a list of selection criteria used to assess proposals at the country level? What would be

considered as a high quality proposal?

16) Do these criteria include consideration of needs of vulnerable groups and cross-cutting issues

(social, economic and public safety; WASH, health, environmental considerations and

disadvantaged groups)? Is civil society representing vulnerable groups in project decision-



17) How are the various M&E tools used?

18) What mechanism allows for lessons learned to be integrated into other UN projects?

(Coordinating committee, etc.)?

19) Have any evaluations been undertaken?

20) How do you know that the project is achieving more than its basic outputs?

Impact, outcome, effects

21) In your opinion, how has the UNTFHS mechanism improved the acceptance of the Human

Security approach (in terms of timeliness, prioritization of geographic and sectorial needs,


22) What specifically do you see as its “value added”?


24) What will your organization do at the end of the project? Will your agency continue it? Will you

seek other outside support? Will the government take it up?





UNTFHS mechanism?


Thank you for your collaboration


May 2013

33 © UNIVERSALIA

A p p e n d i x I V I n t e r v i e w P r o t o c o l ( U N P a r t n e r s a t t h e C o u n t r y L e v e l )














1) What organization do you represent?


3) What are your roles and responsibilities in relation to the UNTFHS project in question?


4) How did you come to learn about Human Security in general and the UNTFHS in particular?

5) How was the project in question started – with your organization going to the government, with

other UN bodies coming to you, or another way? We are trying to map the processes of Human

Security.


7) Has working with other UN agencies increased the level of partnership among UN agencies,

between the UN and government/civil society? Examples please.

8) What are your perceptions about the quality of the partnership relationship with the HSU?

9) How does the operating environment impact the functioning of your UNTFHS-supported

project?

Partnerships

10) To what extent has the UNTFHS strengthened the coordination among UN bodies?

11) How has it increased the awareness and acceptance of the Human Security approach?

Processes

12) What quality control mechanisms are applied and how are they used to improve performance?

13) Is there a list of selection criteria used to assess proposals at the country level? What would be

considered as a high quality proposal?


34

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

14) Do these criteria include consideration of needs of vulnerable groups and cross-cutting issues

(social, economic and public safety; WASH, health, environmental considerations and

disadvantaged groups)? Is civil society representing vulnerable groups in project decision-



15) How are the various M&E tools used?

16) What mechanism allows for lessons learned to be integrated into other UN projects?

(Coordinating committee, etc.)?

17) Have any evaluations been undertaken?

18) How do you know that the project is achieving more than its basic outputs?

Impact, outcome, effects

19) In your opinion, how has the UNTFHS mechanism improved the acceptance of the Human

Security approach (in terms of timeliness, prioritization of geographic and sectorial needs,


20) What specifically do you see as its “value added”?


22) What do you consider to be the barriers to the spread of the Human Security approach?

23) What will your organization do at the end of the project? Will your agency continue it? Will you

seek other outside support? Will the government take it up?

24) Does the UNTFHS project meet the expectations of the donor, country, and beneficiaries?





UNTFHS mechanism?




May 2013

35 © UNIVERSALIA

A p p e n d i x V I n t e r v i e w P r o t o c o l ( M e m b e r s o f A B H S a n d C H S )














1) What are your roles and responsibilities in relation to the promotion of Human Security and to the

UNTFHS in particular?

What is Human Security

2) Presently, there remains a number of different understandings of what constitutes Human Security. In

that light, can you tell me what you think the term means and how it can be translated into practical

applications to improve the quality of UN interventions in general?

3) We understand the roles of your Advisory Board and those of other high-level advice-giving bodies.

However, there appears to be a gap in the design of the work of the HSU in relation to coordination at a

practical level among UN partners. In that light, what would you suggest to improve the level of

awareness and engagement by major UN partners?

Value Added of Human Security

4) Our rapid assessment is being asked to identify the value added of the Human Security approach, as

has been promoted by the projects supported by the Task Force. In that light what do you consider to be

“value adding” characteristics?

5) Do you see any difference between the concepts of cooperating and collaborating in relation to

multiple partner projects that the Trust Fund supports? If so, which do you consider to be more indicative

of the Human Security approach?

Assessing Performance

6) Over the years, the Trust fund has seldom been reviewed with the exception of an internal audit several

years ago. In that light, do you feel that the HSU and project design in general allocates enough resources

for performance reporting? And if not, why not?

7) We have come to learn that very few projects supported by the UNTFHS have undertaken end of

project evaluations. In that light, do you feel that current procedures give sufficient emphasis to the need

to promote lessons learned? If not, what should be done to increase the frequency of opportunities for

sharing lessons and thus better promoting the concept of Human Security itself ?


36

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Relevance

8) It appears that most of the projects supported by the Trust Fund start at the country level and are

bottom up. Do you feel that the HSU has done enough to encourage key partners like FAO, WFP or

UNICEF to make human security a practical reality in their planning, as opposed to something that they

simply subscribe to ? In that light, what more could be done?

9) The Trust Fund seems to have two related strategic objectives, one being the advancement of the

concept of Human Security as an intrinsic and valuable tool by means of pilot projects; and, the other

being the promotion of improved Human Security in certain fairly narrow circumstances. Which of these

in your mind is more important and which do you think is more important for potential new donors?

Gap Filling

10) Given the role that Resident Coordinators are supposed to play in project design, do you feel that

UNDP in general has given sufficient emphasis to the concept of the promotion of Human Security as an

intrinsic function of the RC?

11) Projects supported by the UNTFHS are supposed to fill gaps, and not duplicate the work of others. Do

you feel that the current bottom up approach adequately addresses this issue of the importance of gap

filling?

12) The concept of Human Security, when translated into projects supported by the Trust Fund, infers a

sort of gestalt. In that light, what do you consider to be this notion of the whole is greater than the sum of

the parts? And to what extent can this be captured in ways to demonstrate its worth, beyond rhetorical

statements?

13) Do you have any practical example of this idea of gestalt?



May 2013

37 © UNIVERSALIA

A p p e n d i x V I T e r m s o f R e f e r e n c e

Draft TERMS OF REFERENCE Rapid Assessment of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security

January 14/13

1. Overall Objective

The overall objective of the rapid assessment is to determine the added value of applying the human

security approach in addressing multi-dimensional insecurities faced by vulnerable communities through

the activities of the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security (UNTFHS). The principles and the

framework in the application of human security are articulated in the Guidelines of the UNTFHS, the

General Assembly resolution 66/290 and the reports of the UN Secretary- General on human security.

2. Background


including regional projects, the UNTFHS has played an important role in translating the human security

approach into practical actions that have helped strengthen the human security of the most vulnerable


Projects funded through the UNTFHS have brought together the combined expertise of the United

Nations system and have allowed United Nations implementing organizations to tackle widespread and

crosscutting threats affecting people in all regions. In particular, projects funded from the Trust Fund have

provided examples of successful multi-stakeholder collaborations that address the needs and

vulnerabilities of local communities; highlight the institutional gaps that hinder appropriate responses to

multidimensional insecurities; and support empowerment and capacity-building measures that result in

notable increases in the human security of the most vulnerable communities and people



ability of the projects to advance an appropriately multisectorial response that is contextually relevant,

people-centered and prevention-oriented; to promote partnerships with national authorities and local



3. What are the key principles and framework for advancing human security?

Through the protection and empowerment framework, human security promotes people-centered,

comprehensive, context-specific and prevention-oriented measures that seek to reduce the likelihood of

conflicts, help overcome the obstacles to development and promote human rights for all.

People-centered

Human security considers the broad range of conditions under which the survival, livelihood and dignity

of people, particularly those most vulnerable, are seriously threatened. Essential to human security is the

advancement of political, social, economic, environmental, military and cultural systems that together

give people the building blocks for achieving peace, development and human progress.


38

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Comprehensive

By understanding how a particular threat can negatively affect freedoms that are universal and

interdependent (freedom from fear, freedom from want and freedom to live in dignity), human security

calls for responses that are comprehensive, multi-sectorial and collaborative. This ensures coherence,

eliminates duplication and advances integrated solutions that give rise to more effective and tangible

improvements in the daily lives of people.

Context-specific

Recognizing that the causes and manifestations of threats vary considerably within and across countries,

and at different points in time, human security advances solutions that are embedded in local realities and

are based on the actual needs, vulnerabilities and capacities of Governments and people.

Prevention-oriented

Looking at the root causes of a particular threat, human security identifies the structural (external or

internal), as well as the behavioral changes that are needed to help mitigate the impact, and, where

possible, prevent the occurrence of current and future threats.

Protection (top-down) and empowerment (bottom-up)

The protection and empowerment framework further guarantees the development of appropriate

responses to a particular threat. By combining top-down norms, processes and institutions, including the

establishment of early-warning mechanisms, good governance and social protection instruments, with a

bottom-up focus in which participatory processes highlight individuals’ roles in defining and

implementing their essential freedoms and responsibilities, human security improves local capacities,

strengthens social networks, and ensures coherence in the allocation of resources and policies.

4. Objectives

The following highlights the key issues on which the rapid assessment should focus.

To assess the added value of the human security approach in addressing the broad range of


To assess the impact of the human security approach (i.e., people-centered, context-specific,





To present lessons learned and to determine the added value of the human security approach

to situations in which the human security approach was applied (for e.g., post-conflict and fragile


Particular attention should be paid to joint projects in which the design and implementation of activities

involve several UN agencies and programmes, as well as local partners where possible. The focus of the

assessment should determine the benefits of UNTFHS projects not only for the participating communities


comparative advantages of each entity, the Organization responds in the most comprehensive and

impactful manner.


May 2013

39 © UNIVERSALIA

5. Scope

The scope of the rapid assessment will be limited to a select group of projects that have been implemented

in vulnerable communities. The assessment will consist of

Four field visits : Uganda, Uzbekistan, Colombia and Mongolia

Three desk top reviews : Vanuatu, DRC, Madagascar

An electronic survey of all project stakeholders post 2009

Interviews and small group meetings with key UN system stakeholders including the UNTFHS

Advisory Board members.

The purpose of the assessment should not be to evaluate the UNTFHS as a whole but to assess the added

value and the relevance of the application of the human security approach to these cases. The assessment

should highlight what makes the selected projects distinct from other activities by the UN and underline

the reasons for their success in line with the key issues outlined in section 3.1. The timeframe for the

assessment should be from 18 January to May 30, with presentation of the Final Report on 8 May 2013

(tbc).

6. Methodology

The assessment should be based on field visits, desk top reviews, interviews, surveys and documents

review to the identified projects in line with the principles and the framework of the human security

approach, as well as the UNTFHS Guidelines. The Assessment Team can also utilize the tools already

developed by the HSU for the application of the human security approach.

7. Stakeholders

Direct stakeholders include the donors of the UNTFHS, the Advisory Board on Human Security and the

UN Secretariat for whom the assessment should provide a strong basis to promote the added value of the

human security approach to addressing multidimensional insecurities both for vulnerable communities as

well as the United Nations system.

9. Management Arrangements

The HSU will manage the contractual arrangements and will provide logistical support to the Rapid

Assessment team; assist in gathering all the relevant background information; set up the relevant

appointments and coordinate/organize the field visits of the team; stay in regular contact with the Rapid

Assessment team for the duration of the Rapid Assessment exercise; and review, disseminate, collate

comments on the draft Rapid Assessment report.

10. Duration of the Rapid Assessment and the Indicative Timeframe

The rapid assessment is expected to take place from 18 January to 30 May 2013, with presentation of the

Final Report on 8 May 2013 (tbc).

Timeline

Work plan 21 January

Desk Review 21 January - 1 February

Field visits (travel included) February 11 - 22

Draft Final Report to be submitted to the HSU 22 March


40

May 2013

© UNIVERSALIA

Final report incorporating comments from the HSU 19 April

Presentation of the Final Report to key stakeholders: New York 8 May 2013

Follow up ( if needed) 9- 30 May

11. Competencies and qualifications

This rapid assessment will require the services of two consultants who combine the following

experiences:

Full familiarization with the reports of the Secretary-General on human security, as well as the

UNTFHS.

Knowledge of multi-sectorial approaches in addressing multidimensional insecurities.

Understanding of protection and empowerment mechanisms that lead to the enhancement of

human security and its sustainability.

In-depth knowledge of inter-agency mechanisms, particularly within the UN context.

Strong analytical skills and ability to prepare well-written reports in a timely manner.

Proven track record in managing and conducting project assessments.

A minimum of 7-10 years of experience in project assessment and programme evaluation.

Fluency in English (one consultant with working knowledge of French and Spanish).

12. Deliverables

The team will produce the following deliverables:

Work plan

Consultation/Workshop

A draft final report for comments from the HSU

Final report reflecting comments received from the HSU

Presentation to key stakeholders on the Final report

13. Audience and Use of the Report

The findings of the report will be shared with the ABHS; UN Member States; UN Agencies, Funds and

Programmes; as well as the general public. Lessons learned from the rapid assessment will be reflected in

the future application of human security through the activities of the HSU, where appropriate.

14 January 2013

Human Security Unit

OCHA

the rapid assessment of the united nations trust fund … assessment of untfhs... · the rapid...

Documents