ProCap

1
ProCap

• Strategic Review Consultation
• May 2009

2
Project Goal

• ProCap seeks to enhance UN protection response
  and contribute to global protection capacity
  through the predictable and effective deployment
  of personnel with proven protection expertise.
• It reinforces the strategic and operational
  protection response for Internally Displaced
  Persons (IDPs) and other vulnerable groups in
  emergencies and protracted complex crises.
• It is a critical part of the inter-agency global
  capacity building effort central to the
  Humanitarian Reform Agenda and supports the goals
  of the global Protection Cluster.

3
SCOPE OF REVIEW

• Strategic Role and Impact Deployments, Work with
  Standby Partners, Training
• Hosting arrangements
• The future?
• Where should ProCap be positioned?

4
Hosting

• Criteria
• Maintaining and reinforcing the inter-agency
  nature of the project
• Ensuring appropriate linkage with the PCWG
• Management is efficient and (cost-)effective
• Consensus
• OCHA remains an appropriate host

5
Standby Partners

• Partners Austcare, Canadem, DRC, NRC, RedR
  Australia, Save the Children (Denmark, Norway,
  Sweden)
• Discussion fora ProCap Online
• Training content and methodology, impact,
  alternatives, sustainability

6
Senior Protection Officer Deployments

• Aim
• Strengthen strategic/operational response of the
  protection cluster lead agency
• Strengthen overall inter-agency protection
  response
• Specific activities or strategies

7
Overarching Questions

• On
• Strategic aims still appropriate and relevant?
• Response effective and efficient?
• Impact?
• What if there had been no ProCap?
• Sustainability mechanisms or staffing in place?
• Recommendations for future focus and improved
  impact?
• Alternatives?

8
Results

• Process straightforward, relatively fast,
  efficient. Varied levels of inter-agency
  consultation
• ToRs relevant and reflecting real needs
  challenge of changing contexts, implementation
  pace
• Impact coordination, building partnership,
  development of tools and strategies, advocacy,
  focus on specific concerns and issues, building
  capacity (international/ nationa)

9
Impact if thered been no ProCap?

• a lot less
• I dont think that there would have been much
  left of the PCWG if it hadnt been for their
  support
• We would not have been able to establish the
  protection cluster
• the development of a national strategy would
  have been severely delayed
• we would have done it anyway but less
  effectively, less relevantly and much more
  slowly
• protection would have been low on the agenda
• support for protection mapping would have been
  limited

10
Alternatives - and Sustainability

• Institutional capacity recruitment timelines,
  senior-level availability, focus on priority
  areas
• Standby Capacity junior, need for specific
  expertise
• Post-ProCap surge/standby, some recruitment,
  integration in other roles, limited follow up

11
Appropriate Roles?

• Support, guidance, leadership for protection
  coordination
• Policy development
• Collection and dissemination of best practice
• Support protection as cross-cutting
• Building capacity of country offices and partners
• Support monitoring and reporting mechanisms

12
Skills

• Knowledge/Competencies experts in their
  field Variety of experience NGO, UN,
  operational, coordination Strategic analysis and
  vision
• Soft Skills Mature, open-minded, flexible,
  friendly, independent, good communication . . .

13
Institutional Capacity

• UNHCR agency-wide IDP training training for
  current\potential cluster leads revised ToRs
  enhanced performance appraisal fast track
  recruitment
• UNICEF building emergency response capacity CP
  training
• OHCHR developing capacity, field response
  roster, training staff
• OCHA support role in protection short term
  deployment of experts roll-out of training

14

• Is further mainstreaming
• of ProCap
• possible or appropriate?