Shelter Cluster Palestine Building cluster capacity for assessments

Shelter Cluster Palestine Building cluster capacity for assessments Shelter Cluster Coordination Workshop, Geneva, 2 nd October 2017 Shelter Cluster Palestine Shelter. Palestine. org & Shelter. Cluster. org Coordinating Humanitarian Shelter 1

Gaza Shelter Response Evaluation Rationale: • $236 m recorded on FTS between 2014 -2016 • $626. 5 m recorded on norg. report - $9 m initial emergency response/winterization; $6 m Tshelter/caravans; $<90 m cash for rent; $207 m repairs; $335 m reconstruction Two-phased approach with support of REACH: • Phase I: Qualitative Lessons Learned exercise - To gather and collate collective knowledge, experiences and best practices • Phase II: Quantitative Data collection - To test/validate qualitative data and gain statistically significant data on key achievements and residual needs Overall recommendations for future response Shelter Cluster Palestine Shelter. Palestine. org & Shelter. Cluster. org Coordinating Humanitarian Shelter 2

Phase 1: Qualitative participative evaluation July - September 2016: ‘Lessons Learned’ exercise to capture sector knowledge - Secondary data review Lessons Learned workshop Online survey Purposively sampled semi-structured KIIs - External REACH facilitator with good knowledge of context Focus on humanitarian (emergency response, temporary assistance and durable repairs) clarified cluster scope Reflections: Results: - Shelter Cluster Palestine Shelter. Palestine. org & Shelter. Cluster. org Coordinating Humanitarian Shelter Need for better prioritization and targeting of assistance Need for agreed minimum shelter standard Need for quantitative data verification of findings 3

Phase 2: Quantitative data collection October – December 2016: Household survey of 1, 037 households (vs 1, 195) - Sampled per damage category 95% confidence +/- 5. 64% 25 teams, 14 days, budget $30, 000 incl partner contributions - Keep To. R/objectives in mind Be clear on roles/responsibilities Clarity in questions: Damage asst data vs beneficiary perception Lack of distinction in cash assistance Reflections: Results: Shelter Cluster Palestine Shelter. Palestine. org & Shelter. Cluster. org Coordinating Humanitarian Shelter Presented to donors to highlight recommendations for future response and outstanding needs MPWH revised shelter assistance policy (discussions ongoing) 4

Minimum standards housing conditions survey Minimum standards TWG: • Support from GSC Technical Surge Coordinator • 30 criteria agreed by SC partners • Coordination and buy-in from MPWH Housing conditions survey: • 2012 report by NRC – no quantitative information • Representative sample from two sources MCIT population registration Mo. SA hardship cases • 95% confidence +/- 4. 56% • 20 teams, 10 days, budget $13, 000 (+ in kind) Shelter Cluster Palestine Shelter. Palestine. org & Shelter. Cluster. org Coordinating Humanitarian Shelter 5

Building cluster capacity for assessments REACH evaluation: • Buy in from cluster members on outcome level/better monitoring • Set agenda for cluster workplan/TWGs • Influence on MPWH policy and CB on IM Housing conditions survey: • Experience used to inform cluster-led survey • Shelter standard in MIC, coord with MPWH/Mo. SA • Data used for HNO Pi. N Definition of IDP? • Now in process of data analysis Capacity building for IM/report writing Shelter Cluster Palestine Shelter. Palestine. org & Shelter. Cluster. org Coordinating Humanitarian Shelter 6