This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 ROME 004005 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FROM THE U.S. MISSION TO THE UN AGENCIES IN ROME 
 
STATE FOR PRM/MCE; IO/EDA SKOTOK 
USAID FOR DCHA FOR JEFF DRUMTRA; OFDA MLUTZ AND MBBRENNAN 
USUN NEW YORK FOR TMALY 
GENEVA FOR NKYLOH/USAID 
BRUSSELS FOR PLERNER AND PMANSO 
 
E.O.  12958:  N/A 
TAGS: EAID PREF EAGR AORC UN WFP FAO
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO DEMARCHE ON "CLUSTER LEADS" STRATEGY 
FOR INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS 
 
REF: STATE 215257 
 
¶1. Summary.  This message responds to reftel query of UN 
agencies regarding a strategy for more effective division 
of labor among these agencies in the field in meeting the 
needs of internally displaced persons (IDPs).  USUN-Rome 
transmitted to the World Food Program (WFP) as the 
sectoral lead on logistics the seven pertinent demarche 
questions (A-G); see Section I for WFP's detailed 
responses.  Also, based on a request by USUN-Rome and on 
communications with USAID/DCHA's Jeff Drumtra, Mission 
transmitted same to the Food and Agriculture Organization 
(FAO); see Section II for FAO's response.  USUN Rome 
echoes many of the concerns raised by the FAO regarding 
coordination, and in addition has concerns regarding the 
possible financial impact of WFP's role in the logistics 
clusters and the need for closer oversight by the WFP 
Executive Board.  End Summary. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
Section I:  WFP Response to the Questionnaire 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
 
¶2. A) APPROVAL PROCESS:  It is important at the outset to 
underscore that the cluster lead approach as approved by 
the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) is projected 
to be used in all large complex emergencies and is not 
restricted only to response to IDP situation.  WFP 
considers its responsibility as cluster lead for 
logistics as an elaboration of an existing role.  WFP has 
previously been given responsibility by the IASC for 
management of the UN Joint Logistics Center (UNJLC) and 
IASC has endorsed WFP leadership of the UN Humanitarian 
Air Service (UNHAS).  WFP has in the past performed 
interagency logistics services on a case-by-case basis 
and views the "cluster lead" designation as providing a 
more formal, systematic basis for providing such 
services.  The WFP Executive Board has already approved 
WFP performing interagency logistics and 
telecommunications services: 1) when requested by other 
parts of the UN system; and 2) when sufficient resources 
are available to perform such services.  WFP therefore 
does not believe it needs additional governing board 
authority to accept the cluster lead agency role, which 
has already been approved internally by its Executive 
Director.  The Program will, however, keep its Executive 
Board regularly informed of WFP activities undertaken in 
its cluster lead role. 
 
B) TIMEFRAME:  The logistics cluster is preparing a 
written plan on future cluster work for consideration by 
the IASC Principals.  Any decision on when and how to 
share this plan with donors will be taken collectively by 
the IASC. 
 
C) FUNDING:  WFP expects there will be some additional 
costs in carrying out its cluster coordination and 
preparedness responsibilities, as well as costs in 
providing interagency logistics and emergency 
telecommunications services in specific emergencies. 
Exact costs will depend on the frequency and size of 
emergencies for which interagency cluster logistics 
services are requested.  WFP does not view the cluster 
lead as having a major role in raising resources for 
other actors involved in the sector.  WFP does have the 
capacity to mobilize cash resources for operational 
implementation of interagency logistics and 
telecommunication services through the Special Operations 
(SO) program category established by its Executive Board. 
 
D) STAFFING & ORGANIZATION:  WFP expects that there may 
be need for some modest staffing increases in the 
logistics service within WFP, but the full implications 
on internal organizational structure are still under 
consideration.  Any staffing changes are likely to be at 
the level that can be approved by the Executive Director 
under his delegated authority, but the WFP Executive 
Board would be informed of the organizational 
implications of cluster leadership.  To the extent 
cluster responsibilities require additional resources, 
board approval may also be required. 
 
E) COORDINATION VS. OPERATIONAL: As food aid provided by 
WFP usually presents the largest logistical requirements 
in any humanitarian emergency, WFP will be "operational" 
in logistics for its own programs in virtually every 
emergency.  The extent to which it assumes broader 
interagency coordination or operational tasks will depend 
on the specifics of the situation and what is requested 
of WFP by the humanitarian coordinator and the UN Country 
Team (UNCT) and what coordination tasks can be managed 
solely by the UNJLC.  At the global level, both cluster 
leads and OCHA are at the service of the IASC.  At the 
country level, cluster leads and OCHA support the 
humanitarian coordinator (HC).  WFP's links with OCHA are 
through the IASC and the HC. 
 
F) LAST RESORT:  The logistics cluster has developed its 
workplan on the basis that other sectors (shelter, water 
and sanitation, food, health) will manage their own 
logistics as part of an integrated supply chain approach 
in most circumstances.  WFP as cluster lead would provide 
interagency logistics services as a "last resort" when 
the size and magnitude of the logistics challenges 
require more robust interagency coordination and action. 
Requests from other agencies/cluster leads, vetted 
through the HC, would be the basis of considering 
providing such "last resort" services.  WFP believes that 
cluster leads should be prepared to initiate activities 
in a crisis even before donor contributions flow if 
donors provide sufficient resources through early 
response mechanisms (such as WFP's Immediate Response 
Account or OCHA's CERF) to permit funding advances to 
cover costs of early response. 
 
G) PILOT COUNTRY TEST:  The UN Country Teams in Liberia, 
DRC and Uganda have proposed cluster arrangements that do 
not exactly parallel the nine clusters established by the 
IASC at the global level.  WFP believes such flexibility 
at the country level is essential. In the case of Liberia 
and the DRC, the UNCT has expressed interest in having a 
food security cluster (with WFP and/or FAO leadership), 
representing an enhancement of existing sectoral 
coordination mechanisms already existing in country.  It 
is not clear at this time if the logistics requirements 
in any of these three countries will require any 
additional responsibilities for WFP as cluster lead.  WFP 
believes it is too early to tell if the cluster approach 
will lead to changes in the division of labor in Sudan, a 
situation that is further complicated by the existence of 
a significant humanitarian coordination structure under 
the authority of the UN integrated mission in Sudan. 
WFP believes that, on balance, use of the cluster 
approach in Pakistan was positive, but that there were 
lessons for improving the cluster approach in the future. 
These include: 1) the importance of allowing the country 
team to modify global cluster divisions of labor and 
leadership roles if required to respond to local 
circumstances; 2) the need to manage cluster meetings and 
coordination mechanisms more efficiently so they enhance 
rather than delay quick operational action; and 3) 
clarity that cluster leads at country level report to the 
HC, and not to the global cluster lead headquarters unit, 
so as to ensure coherent management of the overall 
humanitarian response at country level. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ------------ 
Section II:  FAO Response to the Questionnaire 
--------------------------------------------- ------------ 
 
¶3. Global clusters with lead agencies have been 
identified to address key gaps in humanitarian action, 
following the findings of the Humanitarian Response 
Review (HRR) that was commissioned by OCHA in the wake of 
the perceived slow humanitarian response to the outbreak 
of conflict and massive displacement in Darfur.  The OCHA 
led cluster initiative was meant to be about identifying 
ways of plugging the gaps, particularly in the first 
three months, to sudden onset crises.  However, the 
process has gained a lot of momentum and is likely to 
influence the architecture of planning in protracted 
crises and post conflict transition, as we have seen in 
DRC where the DSRSG has taken up the HRR clusters with 
enthusiasm. 
 
¶4. Organization and leadership is: not yet cast in 
concrete; far from comprehensive (i.e., it does not cover 
those sectors not identified as a problem); and meant to 
be applied flexibly.  For instance there is no food 
cluster because it was not identified as a gap and 
leadership of WFP is not in question.  But there is a 
Nutrition cluster led by UNICEF, which focuses only on 
supplementary and therapeutic feeding.  While the 
clusters were not intended to become the basis for a new 
architecture for appeals, it does seem to be going that 
way. 
 
¶5. Most agencies are unhappy with the plethora of HQ- 
based meetings (particularly in the Geneva bubble) and 
emails when the focus would rather be on supporting the 
field.  Many agencies are also complaining about the 
excessive haste in the process resulting in many problems 
and confusion so far, particularly in rolling out the 
cluster approach in Pakistan and the DRC.  On the other 
hand, the big agencies that have been assigned or lobbied 
heavily for cluster leadership roles do see it as an 
opportunity to better their own resource mobilization. 
 
¶6. In the field, the Resident/Humanitarian Coordinator 
and the UN Country Team (UNCT) define the clusters, 
sectors, leaders and architecture of appeals based on 
crisis-specific humanitarian issues to be addressed and 
the comparative advantage of each agency for a leadership 
role.  For instance in DRC, FAO leads a food security 
cluster with WFP and there is no early recovery cluster 
(which was meant to be a forum for addressing a cross 
cutting issue and not to be a component of an appeal). 
 
¶7. In Pakistan, it made no sense to have a nutrition 
cluster focusing on therapeutic and supplementary 
feeding, as this was not an issue.  Thus, WFP and UNICEF 
joined forces and formed a food and nutrition cluster and 
did a food security assessment with Oxfam including the 
impact of the earthquake on livelihoods.  FAO was 
sidelined to an early recovery/reconstruction cluster led 
by UNDP (which donors had no interest in because 
funds were short and priority was given to life saving. 
In FAO's view, this really backfired as it reinforced the 
divide between saving lives and saving livelihoods while 
FAO, the Tufts Famine Centre and others have been arguing 
that saving livelihoods saves lives).  In many ways, FAO 
was marginalized by the UNDP Coordinator and UNCT even 
though FAO did try hard to include a better livelihoods 
assessment than by Oxfam.  Ninety-five percent of the 
affected population have agricultural-based livelihoods 
and have lost most of their productive assets.  Unless 
steps are taken to protect surviving livestock and ensure 
the spring planting, malnutrition will become a problem 
and food aid will be required at a much higher cost 
through 2007.  FAO has discussed this experience with 
WFP.  At the HQ level, WFP is interested in joining 
forces on a food security cluster and in food security/ 
livelihood assessments.  In the field, however, some WFP 
directors may not want to play that way. 
 
¶8. A real issue is that cluster leaders may abuse their 
leadership role particularly when resources are short to 
bias decision-making on resource allocation towards their 
agency and sector and that other sector leaders lose 
their voice in meetings with the UN Coordinator and 
donors.  Already some strong sector leaders are arguing 
for their sector to become a cluster.  For instance, 
health was not identified as a gap, but WHO argued and 
won the case for a Health cluster; similarly UNICEF is 
arguing for an Education cluster.  FAO should join forces 
with other agencies around food and nutrition security, 
and fight very hard when it believes protection of 
agricultural-based livelihoods is not being given the 
attention and funding it deserves. 
 
¶9. FAO will raise these issues at the December meeting of 
the heads of agencies to discuss the cluster approach in 
humanitarian action.  FAO believes that clusterization is 
not yet principled, but over driven by the strong 
agencies' funding interests.  Meanwhile, work on 
standardizing a Needs Analysis Framework (NAF) that would 
be less biased by agency interests has gone on the back 
burner.  Donors could ensure that the NAF is brought back 
to the top of the agenda.  Moreover, if rampant 
clusterization continues the guidelines for needs 
analysis, Common Humanitarian Action Plans (CHAPs), 
Consolidated Appeals Process (CAPs) and Flash Appeals 
will have to be modified.  FAO will continue to advocate 
for an holistic approach to food security, including 
protection and early rehabilitation of agricultural-based 
livelihoods as a key component of humanitarian action in 
order to reduce needs first and enable a rapid exit. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ------------ 
USUN Rome Comments: 
--------------------------------------------- ------------ 
 
¶10. USUN Rome finds the frank discussion of concerns of 
clusterization in the FAO response useful.  We have 
concerns over WFP's responses to B) Approval Process and 
C) Funding.  In the interest of more transparent and 
controlled costs as well as an efficient and effective 
WFP, USUN Rome and USAID/Food For Peace are currently 
engaging WFP in a dialogue on issues of increased costs 
relative to food aid delivered and an Indirect Support 
Cost charge that exceeds actual overhead costs.  Although 
the WFP Executive Board has approved Special Operations 
to include enhanced coordination within the UN system and 
with other partners through the provision of designated 
common services, of which interagency logistics 
coordination and telecommunications projects are part, as 
its largest donor, the U.S. must be mindful that this 
extended role may generate financial implications to WFP 
and donors.  Understanding the clusters framework was 
created to fill notable gaps in humanitarian assistance, 
the WFP Executive Board at a future date may need to 
discuss this issue to further clarify the parameters for 
the use of funds related to the clusters strategy.  We 
are concerned that decisions made by the IASC and OCHA 
may circumvent or work at cross-purposes to the WFP 
Executive Board.  USUN Rome is available to query further 
on this or any related UN cluster leads strategy. 
 
CLEVERLEY