Ethiopia is the second-most populous country in Sub-Saharan Africa with a population of more than 85 million (UN, 2011). It is also one of the world’s poorest countries. On the 2011 Human Development Index Ethiopia ranked 174 out of 187 countries. More than 30 percent of the country’s population lives in extreme poverty, earning less than US$0.6 per day. Due to recurring droughts and declining natural resources, extreme poverty remains common in Ethiopia. More than 80 per cent of the population live in rural areas and rely on rain-fed agriculture for their livelihood. Their vulnerability is frequently exacerbated by natural and man-made hazards, including drought, flooding, disease outbreaks, inter-communal conflict and refugee influxes from neighbouring states. 

The country is one of the largest aid recipients, receiving $3.6 billion in 2011 representing over 11 per cent of national income, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. Major donors include the US, United Kingdom, the World Bank, the European Union, and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria. The aid is primarily in health, agriculture, food and nutrition security and primary education1. 

Drought and El Niño response: The El Niño affect wreaked havoc on Ethiopia’s summer rains in 2015. It hit after failed spring rains, and has led to food insecurity, malnutrition and water shortages throughout the country. A countrywide, Government-led inter-agency assessment concluded that over 10.2 million people will need humanitarian food assistance in 2016. When combined with the 7.9 million Ethiopians slated to receive emergency food and cash transfers, through the Government Productive Safety Net Programme, the total number of people receiving emergency food aid will be in excess of 18 million. Based on a review of past El Niño events, it is predicted that 1.5 million children and pregnant or lactating mothers will require supplementary feeding through 2016, and 400,000 children will become severely acutely malnourished. 
Some 2 million Ethiopians are expected to be without regular access to safe drinking water. 

Coordination: The cluster system has been active in Ethiopia for a number of years. Currently, there are 9 clusters including an operational S/NFI cluster. Bi-monthly (fortnightly) Inter-Cluster Coordination meetings are held in Addis Ababa and sub-national inter-cluster meetings take place in some regions, chaired jointly by OCHA and the Disaster Prevention & Preparedness Bureau/Commission (DPPB/C). Prior to the recent escalation in crises/drought response (2015 going into 2016), cluster coordinators were typically “double hatting”, with both coordination and cluster lead agency program responsibilities. With operations scaling up through 2015 into 2016, OCHA, who meets regularly with CLAs as a separate forum, applied pressure to ensure that CLAs met their cluster coordination obligations including deploying dedicated staff. 

S/NFI Cluster & Cluster Response: The S/NFI Cluster is led by Disaster Risk Management Coordination Commission (NDRMC) Logistics Directorate, with IOM taking on the responsibility of the co-chair position and secretariat duties. The cluster meets bi-monthly at the Federal level, and on ad hoc basis as required, to ensure a coordinated and effective response. Regionally, the cluster meets on a monthly basis in Somali Region State under the leadership of DPPB. Ad hoc coordination meetings also take place in Afar, Tigray, Gambela and Oromia regions. At the sub-national level, the cluster relies on IOM project staff to act as focal points for their region. 
The S/NFI response predominantly consists of the provision of in-kind emergency shelter, kitchen sets, and dignity and hygiene kits, enabling IDPs to resume their normal lives faster in their place of origin or at a new location. 
 a) Planning & Strategy Development: Clarifying funding requirements and helping to set priorities – unsatisfactory b) Monitoring & Evaluation: Monitoring of activities and reporting on needs – unsatisfactory c) Supporting Robust Advocacy: Identifying concerns and contributing key information – unsatisfactory. 

Overall the S/NFI cluster is generally perceived as being in good shape and the coordination team performance meets expectations particularly as it was one of the last to benefit from dedicated staff. 
Many of the key informants highlighted the strength of the cluster compared with other clusters in Ethiopia. 
A number of key recommendations are presented in this evaluation along with some general suggestions which support the key recommendations listed. Annex C brings together all the key recommendations and 17 additional/complementary recommendations which are presented for the coordination team to review with the cluster partners. It is not anticipated that the coordination team will be able to address all the complementary recommendations below and the team will work with partners to assess their practicality and prioritise accordingly. 
Key Recommendations 1. Coordination Team to facilitate a workshop in early 2017 to complement the on-line CCPM survey. 2. IOM to continue to seek funding for dedicated coordination resources in order to maintain dedicated staff at the national level and build capacity at the regional level (See also regional coordination below for additional comments). If direct donor funding is potentially not available to IOM, consider contacting partner agencies at the GSC level (Ethiopia Red Cross/IFRC, WVI, CARE, CRS, SCI, UNHCR – all active in Ethiopia albeit not necessarily in the S/NFI cluster) to explore the possibility of contributing staff to the coordination team. 3. The S/NFI cluster to develop a TOR for the strategic advisory group (SAG) and form the group with 3 to 4 partners and the government counterpart (donors are normally welcome to observe). It is further recommended to consult and collaborate with OCHA in the formation of the SAG in order to take advantage of lessons learned in other clusters. 4. In consultation with SAG, review cluster objectives in line with any revised strategy and the overall strategic objectives set out in the 2017 HRD. Consider including the contingency stock initiative as a key objective as it meets SO3 of the 2016 HRD. 5. Streamline the websites and ensure that some housekeeping is carried out to archive old files and make new IM tools available. 6. In consultation with SAG, cluster partners and affected populations, develop more diversified responses with potentially more durable solutions for long-term displaced communities. 

Purpose: To identify and share key lessons and recommendations on the role played by the Ethiopia Shelter & NFIs Cluster in the Humanitarian response from 2015 to 2016. Lessons learnt and recommendations will be used for improving and informing future shelter cluster responses, by evaluating the impact and effectiveness of the coordination services. 
The objectives of the evaluation are to 1. Document, review and analyse the experience of the IOM-led country Shelter Cluster team with respect to the establishment and operation of the Shelter Cluster, with a particular emphasis on standard operating procedures and lessons to be learnt for future operations; 2. Appraise the service provided by the shelter cluster team to shelter cluster participants (Government, UN agencies, NGOs both national and international) at federal and regional level. 

The review of the Ethiopia SC included semi-structured interviews with key informants lasting approximately 45-60 minutes and address the questions listed in Annex B, and as outlined in the evaluation Terms of Reference (Annex A). Questions varied as different informants have different perspectives. 

To conduct the assignment, the evaluator adopted the following methods of data collection and analysis: Desk Review – a thorough and comprehensive desk review of documentation, files and reports, available on sheltercluster.org and documents provided directly to the evaluator, and using any other information available online, including on humanitarianresponse.info Key informant interviews – Global Shelter Cluster focal point, Cluster Coordinator, cluster partners, OCHA, donors, other Cluster Coordinators and government counterparts. A list of the key informants is provided in Annex B. Interviews with key staff and consultants who had a key role in coordination since 2015. These are also listed in Annex B. 

Site visits – Somali Region: The evaluator spent two days in Jijiga meeting with IOM staff and cluster partners. The Somali region was identified by the S/NFI cluster as the region with the highest S/NFI needs (2016 S/NFI cluster operational plan). 
Cluster Coordination Performance Monitoring Reports: Cluster Coordination Performance Monitoring (CCPM) is a common tool used globally by the country coordination teams, with support from the Global Shelter Cluster, to assess its coordination performance against (i) The six core Cluster functions set out on the ‘Reference Module for Cluster Coordination at Country Level’; (see text box below) and (ii) Accountability to affected populations. 
Lessons Learned Workshop: The evaluator participated in an OCHA-led lessons learned workshop in Addis Ababa attended by the HC/RC, OCHA staff, heads of UN agencies, International Organisations and NGOs. The evaluator participated in the group work on Leadership and Coordination that specifically addressed the roles of the clusters and the coordination architecture. 

The on-line cluster coordination performance monitoring was carried out for the first time in Ethiopia as part of the evaluation and there was not a comprehensive response to the survey by the partners. However, what information and analysis was available is used and its potential limitations are acknowledged. The cluster coordination team will organise a complementary workshop (as recommended in the GSC for the CCPM) and that process can be used to validate or expand on the points and comments that came out of the on-line survey. 
The evaluation is limited to the scope of the Shelter/NFI cluster, which focuses primarily on IDP issues in Ethiopia. There are also a large number of refugees in Ethiopia (the majority in 25 camps across the country) whom UNHCR is mandated to support and protect. As such, this evaluation does not discuss refugee shelter/NFI issues. However, it is acknowledged that there is much scope for sharing lessons across agencies responding to the needs of both IDPs and refugees, particularly in terms of possible durable shelter solutions for both IDP and refugee populations. 
The evaluator spent 4 working days in Ethiopia and the limited time available for the review also prevented additional cross-examination and validation of some of the issues highlighted through the document review and interview processes. 

US, United Kingdom, the World Bank, the European Union, and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria. The aid is primarily provided in the sectors of health, agriculture, food and nutrition security and primary education4. 

The Government is engaged in a major effort to transform the Ethiopian society to become a middle-income economy by the year 2025. Despite recording an annual economic growth of 11 per cent during the past eight years, more than 20 million people are living below the poverty line, according to the UN Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) 2012-2015. More than 10 per cent of the population remains chronically vulnerable to food insecurity and dependent on national safety-net programmes. Every year several million people require emergency assistance to meet their basic survival needs. The population has doubled since 1984 and is projected to more than double again by 2050. 

In the period 2004 to 2015, The World Bank noted significant progress in key human development indicators: primary school enrolments have quadrupled, child mortality has been cut in half, and the number of people with access to clean water has more than doubled. The poverty headcount fell to 30% in 2010- 2011. However, the majority of people do not benefit from the growth, and a third of the population still lives below the poverty line. The country still struggles against poverty, preventable diseases, and child mortality. There is a concern that macroeconomic challenges that include high inflation rates especially on food prices, a shortage of foreign currency, lack of strong capital market, and logistical bottlenecks, could reverse some of the improvements made in recent years. 

The El Niño effect wreaked havoc on Ethiopia’s summer rains in 2015. It hit after failed spring rains, and has led to food insecurity, malnutrition and water shortages throughout the country. A countrywide, Government-led inter-agency assessment concluded that over 10.2 million people will needed humanitarian food assistance in 2016. When combined with the 7.9 million Ethiopians slated to receive emergency food and cash transfers, through the Government Productive Safety Net Programme, the total number of people receiving emergency food aid was in excess of 18 million. Based on a review of past El Niño events, it was predicted that 1.5 million children and pregnant or lactating mothers would require supplementary feeding through 2016, and 400,000 children would be at risk of becoming severely acutely malnourished. Some 2 million Ethiopians were expected to be without regular access to safe drinking water. 

Drought exacerbated by El Niño, combined with extensive flooding, disease outbreaks and the disruption of basic public services, is having a negative impact on the lives and livelihoods of 9.7 million Ethiopians. 
Food security and agricultural production are severely affected, with cascading effects on livelihoods, nutrition, health, water, sanitation, education and other sectors. According to the Mid Term Review (August 2016), the key humanitarian issues are: Lives remain at risk due to a lack of food and water, and the risk of disease outbreaks; Livelihoods continue to be threatened due to livestock death or poor health, or remain precarious due to limited agricultural inputs for the rest of the year; Flooding and other drought or conflict-related displacement continues to lead to critical needs for food, shelter and non-food items. 
OCHA considers that there is generally a well-coordinated, rapidly expanding Government-led response under way5. At the OCHA-led lessons learned workshop held in December 2016, OCHA reported that since 2015, the HRD had received $985m with the Government of Ethiopia contributing an additional $785m which makes this protracted crises, one of the best funded around the globe. 
The Government and Humanitarian Country Team have jointly reviewed collective needs analysis and projections and this evidence base has been used to develop a response plan and appeal, included in the 2016 Ethiopia Humanitarian Requirements Document (HRD). The 2016 HRD expresses three objectives: to save lives and reduce morbidity caused by drought; protect and restore livelihoods; and to prepare for and respond to other humanitarian shocks, including flooding and displacement. Ethiopia has achieved impressive economic growth over recent years, building a robust disaster risk management system to respond. Government-managed services are well established and supported by the international community. 

The cluster system has been active in Ethiopia for a number of years. Currently, there are 9 clusters including an operational S/NFI cluster. Bi-monthly (fortnightly) Inter-Cluster Coordination meetings are held in Addis Ababa and sub-national inter-cluster meetings take place in some regions, jointly chaired by OCHA and the Disaster Prevention & Preparedness Bureau/Commission (DPPB/C). Up until the recent escalation in crises/drought response (2015 going into 2016), the cluster coordinators have typically been “double hatting”, with both coordination and cluster lead agency program responsibilities. With operations scaling up through 2015 into 2016, OCHA, who meets regularly with CLAs as a separate forum, applied pressure to ensure that CLAs met their cluster coordination obligations including deploying dedicated staff. 

Technical Working Groups (DRMTWGs) across Ethiopia and hosts a series of specialised task forces that work in tandem with the clusters/sectors, including food and agriculture. As the crisis evolves, the Government is strengthening the DRMTWGs across Ethiopia, with OCHA’s support. All clusters have been assigned a government counterpart who leads the cluster with the CLA acting as co-chair and secretariat. 

The Cluster Coordination Performance Monitoring (CCPM) methodology is set out above (See Methodology) and the survey questions can be found in Annex D. With assistance from the cluster coordinator and IM support from the GSC (UNHCR), the first performance monitoring exercise was carried out during the course of the evaluation using an online survey (http://sheltercluster.limequery.com/533576?lang=en). The results and feedback from the preliminary performance report have been integrated into this report. The partner typology and numbers of partners who responded to the survey are presented in the table below. 

Purpose and Objective of workshop: Discuss the findings of the Preliminary Coordination Performance Report and this evaluation report Reflect, highlight areas of strong performance as well as areas that require attention, and identify where support may be needed from the Cluster lead agency, partners, the HCT, or GSC. 
Identify instances of good practice, constraints, and actions that will improve the Cluster’s coordination. 
Workshop also enables the Cluster to contextualize the report before sharing it with global Clusters, Cluster lead agencies, the HC/HCT, OCHA, and national authorities. 
The specific objectives of the workshop are to: (i) discuss and if necessary amend the Cluster Description Report; (ii) contextualise the findings of the Preliminary Coordination Performance Report (narrative comment boxes); and (iii) identify actions for improvements. 
On the basis of these discussions, a Final Cluster Description Report and Final Coordination Performance Report are produced. 

Based on the analysis and discussion within the cluster and the final CPPM report, identified actions that will be taken to improve core cluster functions and the cluster’s accountability to affected populations should be included in the cluster work plan (see Strategic Planning & Work Plan below) In addition to reviewing the findings of the CPPM and potentially developing a cluster work plan, the workshop would be an opportunity to advocate for sub-national focal points (where IOM is unable to provide resources). 

The Emergency Shelter /NFI cluster was established as part of the roll-out of the IASC cluster system in Ethiopia initially being co-led between IOM, UNHCR and UNICEF. Since 2010, IOM has assumed the coordination and leadership role for the cluster, and coordinates the response at country level in close collaboration with government and humanitarian partners. The cluster works in support of established coordination mechanisms including the Disaster Risk Management Technical Working Group (DRMTWG) both at federal and regional level, as well as Ethiopia Humanitarian Country Team and Cluster Leads. The IOM mission in Ethiopia has field offices in Assosa, Gambella, Jijiga, Dollo Ado, Moyale and Shire. 
As is the norm in Ethiopia, government bodies lead the sector/clusters with the CLA providing co-chair and general day-to-day coordination support. The S/NFI cluster membership includes government, UN agencies, international and local NGOs. Active members and contributors to the cluster thus far include IOM, UNOCHA, UNICEF, IRC, ICRC, ERCS, Goal, Concern, WVI, SCI, NRC, OXFAM and ACF. 
In early 2016, IOM recognised the need for dedicated coordination resources in recognition that: 1) a government counterpart (NDRMC) had been designated to lead the cluster; 2) IOM anticipated being central to NFI pipeline (DfID supplied kits) and project staff wanted to ensure that there was no conflict of interest; 3) General scaling up of ES and NFI distributions. 
This coincided with a concerted effort by OCHA and the RC/HC to ensure that CLAs were providing suitable resources to the clusters. The 2016 HRD included a section for Shelter and NFI activities for the first time and the funding request was subsequently increased in the mid-year review to reflect the increase in Shelter and NFI needs amongst the displaced populations. The cluster was involved for the first time in the seasonal Belg (May) and Meher (November) inter-cluster assessments. 
The first dedicated coordinator was deployed in June 2016 (originally for 6 weeks but remained in the post for 9 weeks while the next coordinator was recruited). A longer term coordinator deployed in June 2016 courtesy of CANADEM and with funding from DfID. In both cases, the coordinators have information management (IM) experience and put those skills to use in fulfilling IM functions until a dedicated resource could be established. However, the coordinators could not be expected to commit the requisite time to IM and balance their coordination duties (see IM section below). In November 2016, IOM engaged a full-time dedicated Information Manager to the cluster after a slight delay caused by visa issues. Initially, the dedicated coordinator focused on issues around the S/NFI kits (DfID) and the newly formed IDP Task Force that was created to raise the profile of IDP populations that were not fully recognised at the Federal level. 
 Generally, partners expressed an appreciation of IOM for their coordination role even before dedicated staff were engaged. Whilst some concern was expressed at the length of time it took to initially recruit dedicated staff, the dedicated coordinators were universally praised for their efforts and collaboration and it was generally perceived that the coordinators contributed significantly to an increased level of performance in the coordination of the cluster and the cluster outputs. The partners demonstrated in the preliminary CCPM report a satisfaction that the coordination team is providing a good platform for service delivery, providing good strategic direction and prioritization of activities (albeit the scope of activities undertaken by the cluster partners is relatively narrow). 
Amongst the cited cluster achievements are the regularity of meetings and the active participation of partners in them. It was noted however, that in the months leading up to the Meher assessments, the cluster meetings at the sub-national level became less frequent. It was noted that emergency situations requiring intensive response operations also adversely affect participation in meetings. Partners reported thatwhenever meetings were held, they resulted in productive discussions with concrete action points. This is partly evidenced by the avoidance of duplication of activities even in cases where partners operate in the same geographical area. It was also noted by a partner that members of the cluster may not fully understand the role of the CLA and the coordination team potentially leading to unrealistic expectations about the provision of the last resort. It was suggested that the coordination team present the ToR for the team again and use GSC resources (e.g. introduction to shelter cluster video: http://www.sheltercluster.org/working-group/about-us) to ensure that there is a better comprehension of the role. 
One of the main challenges cited by the CLA and acknowledged by a number of partners and OCHA is that the government lead agency has dedicated staff who, whilst collaborative, are very much focused on the logistics element of kit distribution and have not developed a broader understanding of the wider implications of the shelter/NFI responses required to meet the needs of displaced populations. NDRMC also leads the Food Security Cluster with WFP and again, NRRMC role is seen as providing a logistics support function rather than being a strategic partner to the cluster. In speaking with OCHA, it was noted that the leadership of the cluster is unlikely to change in terms of government body, and therefore it was suggested that the cluster coordination team develop closer linkages by sharing offices and working closer together on a more regular basis. It was acknowledged that this may present some logistical challenges such as consistent access to internet at the government offices. The team would probably have to split their time between IOM and government offices or invest in communication infrastructure. 
The coordination team (Coordinator & Information Manager) is currently funded by DfID and funding is secure to the end of March 2017. IOM is seeking additional funding for the rest of 2017 and concept notes for DfID and ECHO are under preparation. 

The evaluation included a visit to Jijiga, the coordination and response hub for the Somali region. This region was selected as it has some of the highest needs (according to HRD) for the S/NFI sector and is also one of the locations with the most active cluster partners. A number of interviews with IOM, OCHA, government and partner staff were carried out in Jijiga during the course of the evaluation. There was a common appreciation of the performance of the sub-national cluster considering its relatively short existence (established at beginning of 2016) compared to other clusters. The cluster partners have a common understanding of programming and coordination although this is aided by a relatively narrow response plan - emergency shelter and NFI kit distributions. IOM staff who support the cluster are recognized as performing well in their co-chairing role with the DPPB representative. 
A number of recommendations and comments were provided by the cluster membership and can be summarized as follows: 1) Frustration was expressed about changes in personnel at government level. It was requested of S/NFI coordination team to advocate with DPPB to assign a consistent focal point for the cluster. 2) It was asked that S/NFI coordination team at national level intervene and facilitate quicker information sharing at the national level (with NDRMC) to ensure that distributions can go ahead in a timely manner. 3) Coordination meetings were suspended in October and November as a result of DPPB and cluster agencies focusing on the Meher multi-sector assessment and other assessments. It was felt that coordination meetings should have continued to ensure that distribution activities continued to be well coordinated. 

See Recommendation R2 - Maintain and reinforce sub-national coordination in priority regions such as the Somali region. 
At the time of the evaluation, OCHA was facilitating an Inter-Cluster field trip to Jijiga to assess regional coordination needs. The Somali region is particularly prone to multiple types of crises and displacement caused by floods, droughts and conflict resulting in large numbers of displaced populations. Many of these are supported by host communities in rural, remote areas whilst a smaller proportion find themselves in peri-urban environments with slightly better access to services.7 The following points were highlighted at the inter-cluster meeting held in December in Jijiga: All zones in Somali region except Sitti (which has still not recovered from 2015 drought) experienced failed Meher rains. 
Migration of affected populations to areas with remaining water supply is beginning and will increase through the beginning of 2017. 
The Meher assessment results were not yet available but would be released shortly. 
Displacement and shelter-NFI needs, were not highlighted in zonal Meher Assessment presentations but will emerge in coming months when the affected population’s coping capacities become better known. The HRD 2017 projection is considered conservative. 
Zonal humanitarian coordination needs to be improved. OCHA will deploy coordination staff to critical zones to improve its presence. Cluster coordinators (sub-national coordinators) are requested to go on missions to the zones for the same purpose. 
The five pillars of response proposed by OCHA are WASH, Health, Food, Coordination and Logistics. As noted above, shelter/NFI are not perceived as a priority needs but the situation may change as further displacement takes place. 
R7. Sub-national and national coordinators to monitor the situation closely in Somali region and to advocate for more resources and re-prioritisation as necessary (see also Advocacy below). 

R8. Coordination team to continue the development and refinement of the revised strategy for 2017 in collaboration with the SAG. 
R9. Develop cluster work plan, prioritizing a reasonable number of activities for 2017. This exercise could be commenced during the cluster CCPM workshop (see key recommendation 1). 

There are currently two cluster objectives (see page 12), the first of which relates to the general provision of Shelter and NFIs to affected communities and which ties in with Strategic Objectives 1 and 3 of the HRD (see above). The second cluster objective supports the Displacement Tracking & Monitoring (DTM) system managed by IOM. Whilst the DTM is a valuable tool which provides important data to a number of clusters, it is not necessarily the second most important objective of the cluster. The DTM should be seen as an activity / support service that supports the delivery of humanitarian aid and not necessarily a direct objective of the cluster. However, typically, DTM sits as a function under a single cluster (for example, under Protection in Yemen and sometimes CCCM or Shelter/NFI) and the data produced supports multiple clusters and their partners in identifying and targeting the most vulnerable. 
The S/NFI cluster is actively promoting the provision of a ‘buffer’ or contingency stock of NFI and shelter kits in the HRD 2016 and revised version. This in itself could be presented as a cluster preparedness objective which falls under HRD Strategic Objective 3: prepare for and respond to other humanitarian shocks including natural disasters, conflicts and displacement. 

Partners expressed within the CCPM survey a degree of dissatisfaction with the cluster coordination’s role in supporting robust advocacy. Such matters as the lack of government recognition of the scale of displacement, issues with delayed deployment/distribution of S/NFI kits and a general need to contribute key information may have contributed to the low score. However, it should also be recognized that a number of issues apply to the response as a whole and not just one single sector. It is important that the coordination team engages with senior management of IOM to ensure that such matters are brought up at the HCT meetings and/or the CLA meetings. 
A number of advocacy issues came up during the course of the evaluation. These included: Transitioning from emergency programming to resilience programming and advocating for more durable shelter/NFI solutions. 
Seeking additional funding for the cluster in general but also specifically to support distribution of S/NFI kits from a common pipeline (see common pipeline below). 
Promoting a broader understanding and acceptance of displacement figures (see displacement tracking below) Inclusion of returnees as a vulnerable population Engaging in promotion of Disaster Risk Reduction activities particularly with communities which are prone to flood displacement on a regular basis. 

R11. Engage with SAG to develop key advocacy material for displaced persons and for tracking of those displaced by floods, droughts and conflicts. 
R12. Engage with senior management of IOM to ensure that these advocacy points are communicated up to the HCT. 

Mapping – As yet, there are no maps available to the cluster partners to assist with gap analysis and targeting. The incoming IM is in the process of developing maps linking DTM data and distribution data (from the 4W) which will assist in gap analysis. 
Assessments - Currently, assessment data is not shared across the clusters but the IM will work with OCHA IM staff to look at the possibility of using Humanitarian Data Exchange (HDX) as a platform for sharing common data with the cluster partners and other clusters. 

Monthly fact sheet is a standard shelter cluster output and it follows the standard format of providing a brief needs analysis, an update on the cluster response and the gaps/challenges that exist. Other information within the fact sheet includes the contact details of the Coordinator, key dates, links to key documents and some big picture numbers (estimated people in need, funding etc.). The Information Manager’s contact details should be added. The fact sheet may also be used for more advocacy and for promoting the use of the DTM. 4W: The latest 4Ws are not available on the website and the partners are not able to access the 4W via platforms such as Google Sheet. The newly arrived Information Manager has identified a number of issues and the need to clean the data inputted by partners. The IM explained that there was possibly a duplication of reported distributions and there is missing information. The IM is intending to hold national and regional training with partners to strengthen reporting. The use of common web-based platforms such as Google Sheets is under consideration and may form part of the training to be carried out at regional and national level by the IM. 

Dashboard: The Coordinators, who have demonstrable IM skills, have produced the dashboards to date and this responsibility has now been handed over to the IM. The dashboards are now set up to pull information directly and automatically from the 4W. The IM will continue to canvas the cluster partners as to the usefulness of the dashboards and seek feedback on any other information which the dashboard could convey. 
 R13. Develop gap analysis tools – use DTM and 4Ws as basis for the analysis. Consult with SAG/ cluster partners to seek feedback on the cluster dashboard. 
R14. Hold national and regional training with partners to strengthen the use of information management tools and reporting. 

The cluster partners and CLA expressed a need to diversify S/NFI programming to overcome some of the logistical challenges that large in-kind programs present and to meet growing and diverging needs. The cluster already aims to promote the expansion of activities into disaster risk reduction and recovery assistance in flood-prone areas while maintaining its response to emergency shelter and household NFI needs. The cluster will also promote more flexible emergency response modalities in contexts such as urban displacement and individuals whose displacement has not been part of a family unit. 

R15. Create a Technical Working Group (TWiG) to standardise IEC material and training to complement the standard ES/NFI kit and translate into local dialects or use other appropriate methodologies to communicate the components of the kit and how to use emergency shelter components. The TWiG can also explore adapting flexible solutions for the shelter component to meet the needs of different populations. 

Displacement tracking is one of IOM’s global core competencies and is normally a common service that, whilst normally affiliated with one cluster, provides a common service for all sectors/clusters. However, in Ethiopia, the outputs from the tracking are often restricted at the Federal level and reports are delayed. 
While IOM has signed agreements to carry out DTM activities at the federal, regional and zonal level, and indeed partners with DPP, the Ethiopian Red Cross and Danish Refugee Council to track displacement, the reports are often subject to severe delay subject to verification by government authorities. Often the displacement figures presented at the Woreda and regional level are disputed by the central government. 
The DTM is seen primarily as a tool that sits under the Shelter/NFI cluster and to facilitate ES and NFI distributions. IOM is persisting with the use of the tool and another round of displacement tracking figures is available in December subject, again, to central government ratification. IOM and its partners continue to advocate for bringing the DTM reports “from out of the shadows” and to highlight the true number of displaced (drought/conflict/floods). Cluster partners cited the lack of advocacy for the issue of realistic displacement figures at the cluster and HCT level as a weakness and a major challenge when it comes to resource allocation, and funding. 
R17. It is recommended for the CLA and the Cluster Coordinator to engage with the HCT to advocate for the timely review of reports and for general inclusion of all displaced in the reports so that responses can be effectively designed and implemented. 

IOM and NRC pilot testing a NFI fair approach in Gambela. Not all NFIs will be available on the local market and so items such as plastic sheeting and mosquito nets will have to be imported and subject to the usual supply chain challenges. 
The Cash Working Group co-chaired by OCHA is in fairly embryonic state, developing ToRs for, and establishing a steering committee and working group at the national level. It has support from donors to engage the Cash Learning Partnership (CaLP) who are a sub-recipient through Oxfam with WV as the main grant recipient to support training and technical guidance. The working group is planning market assessments and surveys and it is anticipated that the S/NFI cluster will participate and leverage participation to ensure that market surveys include construction materials and NFIs. 

R1. Consider employing two national field coordinators/associates for a longer-term investment in the coordination team. In consultation with Cluster partners and OCHA as well as the CLA, it is recommended that regional coordination be strengthened through engagement of suitably qualified field coordinators/cluster associates in Somali and Gambela regions. 

R7. Sub-national and national coordinators to monitor the situation closely in Somali region and to advocate for more resources and re-prioritisation as necessary. 
R8. Coordination team to continue the development of the revised strategy for 2017 in collaboration with the SAG. 

R9. Develop cluster work plan, prioritizing a reasonable number of activities for 2017. This exercise could be commenced during the cluster CCPM workshop (see key recommendation 1). 
R10. (See R8) Consider a broader range of cluster objectives recognising that the affected population have shelter /NFI needs beyond emergency shelter/NFI kits (see cluster response below). 

R15. Create a Technical Working Group (TWiG) to standardise IEC material and training to complement the standard ES/NFI kit and translate into local dialects or use other appropriate methodologies to communicate the components of the kit and how to use emergency shelter components. The TWiG can also explore adapting flexible solutions for the shelter component to meet the needs of different populations. 

R17. It is recommended for the CLA and the Cluster Coordinator to engage with the HCT to advocate for the timely review of reports and for general inclusion of all displaced in the reports so that responses can be effectively designed and implemented. 

