HEALTH CLUSTER COORDINATION TRAINING...3 1.SUMMARY This fifth Health Cluster Coordination Training...

1

HEALTH CLUSTER COORDINATION TRAINING

20 – 29 November 2018

Divonne les Bains, France

Training Report

Prepared by Gillian O’Connell

Global Health Cluster Learning and Development Consultant

2

Contents

1.SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 3

2. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .......................................................................................... 5

2.1. Overview of the humanitarian challenges ......................................................................... 5

3. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................. 5

3.1. The aims of this training were to: ........................................................................................... 5

3.2. Specific Objectives: ................................................................................................................ 6

In addition, Information Management Officers will also be able to: ................................. 6

4. STRENGTHENING COMPETENCIES ................................................................................................ 7

5. TRAINING DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 7

6. THE TRAINING AGENDA ................................................................................................................. 8

6.1 The Training Agenda ................................................................................................................ 9

7. THE PARTICIPANTS ......................................................................................................................... 10

8. THE PARTICIPANTS PACK ............................................................................................................. 15

9. THE TRAINERS AND FACILITATORS............................................................................................... 15

10. THE SIMULATION EXERCISE (SIMEX)........................................................................................... 18

11. THE EVALUATION OF THE TRAINING ......................................................................................... 19

11.1. Feedback from Participants .............................................................................................. 19

11.2. Pre and Post Training Questionnaire ................................................................................ 25

11.3. Feedback from the Training Team ................................................................................... 26

12. FINANCIAL REPORT ................................................................................................................... 29

13. RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................................. 29

ANNEX 1: THE HEALTH CLUSTER COORDINATION COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK ...................... 31

ANNEX 3: STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH INFORMATION SERVICES ...................................... 39

ANNEX 4: PARTICIPANT EXPECTATIONS (21 responses) ............................................................. 40

ANNEX 5: FINAL PARTICIPANTS EVALUATION OF WHOLE TRAINING .......................................... 45

ANNEX 5: PARTICIPANTS DAILY EVALUATIONS DAYS 1 – 6 .......................................................... 53

ANNEX 6: OTHER PARTICIPANTS FEEDBACK FROM THE SIMEX .................................................... 55

ANNEX 7: FEEDBACK FROM THE TRAINING TEAM ON LINE SURVEY ........................................... 65

3

1.SUMMARY

This fifth Health Cluster Coordination Training for current and potential Health

Cluster Coordinators and Information Management Officers took place at,

Divonne-les-Bains, France, from the 20 to 29 November 2018.

After the relaunch of the current series of Health Cluster Coordinator Training in

2015, joint Health Cluster Coordination training was designed by the Global Health

Cluster Capacity Development Task Team, the Public Health Information Services

Task Team, the Global Health Cluster Unit and other members of WHO staff. Since

its inception in 2016, each joint Health Cluster Coordination training has been

based on this design with adjustments as required to reflect the learning from

previous training evaluations and to adapt to the needs of each cohort.

This nine-day training programme contained a blend of didactic and practical

sessions, including three joint desk-top exercises and a two-day joint simulation

exercise (SIMEX), and closely followed the Humanitarian Programme Cycle.

The training was attended by thirty-eight (38) Participants. Thirty-two (32) of the

Participants were working for WHO, and six (6) of the Participants were with

Partner organisations, i.e. IMMAP x 3, SCI x 1, NRC x 1 and IRC x1. This means that

Health Cluster Partner Participants represented 15.7% of the cohort and is one of

the lowest rates for Partner participation since the current series of training started

in 2015. This was mainly due to this iteration of the training targeted participants

from the SEARO and WPRO Regions where there are few current official Health

Clusters and therefore few NGO co-coordinators.

In previous Health Cluster Coordination Training the Participant breakdown was as

follows:

Training

Number of

Participants

Number of

Partner

Participants

and % of

Cohort

2015 Health Cluster Coordinator

Training, Divonne les Bains

20

(6)

30%

2016 Joint Health Cluster

Coordination Training, Jordan

42

(13)

30.9%

2017 Joint Health Cluster Coordination

Training, Divonne les Bains

18

(3)

16%


Coordination Training, Senegal

29

(7)

24%

4

There were twelve Health Cluster Coordinators, with five working at Sub-National

level and six Information Management Officers. The other twenty Participants had

a wide variety of roles, and sixteen were WHO WHE personnel mainly from the

SEARO and WPRO Regions. These participants were targeted as they are

frequently assigned partner coordination roles, using the cluster approach.

The regional breakdown was as follows:

AFRO 6

EMRO 13

EURO 2

SEARO 10

WPRO 5

WHO HQ 2

There were 26 male and 12 female Participants. Female Participants represented

31.5% of the cohort and is the highest proportion of female Participants since the

current series of training started in 2015.

Please see Section 7 for more information about the Participants.

The feedback from the Participants and the Training Team was very positive. The

Participants rating of the training overall was 3.44 out of a maximum rating of 4

and they provided positive and constructive feedback throughout the training.

The training was rigorously evaluated and provides a firm foundation for

continuing to strengthen and refine future training for Health Cluster Coordination

Teams. Please see Section 11 and Annexes 5 for more information about the

feedback from the Participants and Training Team.

We would like to

gratefully

acknowledge

funding from the

United States Agency

for International

Development’s

Office of Foreign

Disaster Assistance

(USAID/OFDA). We

would also like to

gratefully

acknowledge the

technical and in-kind

support from members of the Public Health Information Task Team, WHO Regions

and Departments and the personnel in the Global Health Cluster Unit.

5

2. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

2.1. Overview of the humanitarian challenges

The need to protect and improve the lives and health of crisis-affected people

has never been greater with over 135.7 million people in need of humanitarian

assistance, including 68.5 million forcibly displaced people, the highest on record.

Disease outbreaks are a persistent threat. Over the past 6 years, WHO has

documented over 200 epidemic events globally per year.

There are currently 27 countries with active health clusters, 56% have emergency

operations. Most of these health clusters have one or more sub-national hubs and

globally there are 109 sub national sites. Staffing gaps are often solved by adding

Health Cluster responsibilities onto existing staff (so-called “double-hatting”), who

may not have the necessary skills, knowledge or support to fulfil these roles

adequately. Despite best efforts, this short- term approach can result in poor

strategic planning for emergencies, weak coordination and poor information

management, which in turn may result in a less than optimum response to the

needs of affected people.

The Global Health Cluster (GHC) seeks to increase the pool of competent Health

Cluster personnel by developing Health Cluster Coordination Training as part of a

wider Health Cluster Capacity Development Strategy. Since the relaunch of

Health Cluster Coordinator and Coordination training in September 2015, a total

of 147 personnel have been trained.

There have also been significant changes in the humanitarian system and

extensive and continued changes in the WHO /Health Cluster Lead Agency have

taken place. The WHO is reforming to be better equipped to address the

increasingly complex challenges of health emergencies in the 21st century. From

persisting problems to new and emerging public health threats, WHO needs the

capability and flexibility to respond to this evolving environment.

Health Cluster Coordination Training reflects these changes to ensure that the

Participants have the requisite skills and knowledge to effectively fulfil their roles

and responsibilities. The training curriculum has been designed around the phases

of the Humanitarian Program Cycle as endorsed by the IASC Principles and builds

on the directives of the Reference Module for Cluster Coordination at Country

Level (2015), both documents are among the eight protocols supporting the

implementation of the Transformative Agenda.

3. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

3.1. The aims of this training were to:

1. Build and strengthen the capacity of Health Cluster Coordinators to lead and

coordinate the planning, implementation and monitoring of more effective,

efficient, timely and predictable evidence-based humanitarian health

interventions in acute and protracted emergencies.

2. Build and strengthen the capacity of Information Management Officers to lead

and coordinate the generation of evidence-based planning, implementation and

6

monitoring of humanitarian health interventions in acute and protracted

emergencies.

3. Ensure that Participants can effectively and collaboratively carry out the tasks

and duties associated with the Terms of Reference for Health Cluster Coordinators

and Information Management Officers.

3.2. Specific Objectives:

On completion of this training ALL Participants will be able to:

1. Understand and apply the key elements of the Transformative Agenda and

Humanitarian Reform in WHO and the implications for the Health Cluster.

2. Describe the role of the Global Health Cluster in facilitating access to

information, guidance and tools.

3. Describe, understand and implement the 6 Core Cluster Functions at national

and sub national level as well as the importance of accountability to affected

populations and protection mainstreaming.

4. Describe and understand the key roles and responsibilities of the Health Cluster

Coordinator and Information Management Officers and how these link to other

Health Cluster roles at country level.

5. Gain knowledge and understanding about collaborative leadership styles.

6. Identify and reflect on their own preferred styles of leadership and the areas

they need to further develop and strengthen.

In addition, Information Management Officers will also be able to:

7. Implement and manage core field-based information management tools.

8. Describe, understand and implement the Public Health Information Services

core quality standards.

The specific learning objectives and key messages for each session and training

components, including the Simulation Exercise, were based on the Health Cluster

Coordination Competency Framework and the structure of the training followed

the Humanitarian Programme Cycle:

• Needs Assessment and Analysis

• Strategic Response Planning

• Resource Mobilization

• Implementation and Monitoring

• Review and Evaluation

And the six core functions of a Cluster at the country-level:

• Supporting Service Delivery

• Informing Strategic Decision making of the HCT

• Planning and Strategy Development

• Advocacy

7

• Monitoring and Reporting

• Contingency Planning, Preparedness and Capacity Building

The training is also underpinned by the need for accountability to affected

populations and protection mainstreaming.

4. STRENGTHENING COMPETENCIES

The Global Health Cluster Capacity Development Task Team, in collaboration with

the Global Health Cluster Public Health Information Services Task Team,

developed a Health Cluster Coordination Competency Framework (HCC CF). The

HCC CF aims to be inclusive of the priorities, approaches and structures of the

different members and organisations that carry out Health Cluster activities in

emergency situations. The Competency Framework identifies eleven functional

competencies with specific examples of behaviours, each of which have been

grouped into domains that are reflective of the stages of the Humanitarian

Programme Cycle stages and the Cluster Functions at Country Level. The HCC CF

also contains ten competencies that are personal, rather than role-specific, in

nature. Please see Annex 1 for the HCC CF.

The training sessions were all mapped against the HCC CF and work continues to

ensure that the Simulation Exercise also tests the relevant competencies and has

clear learning outcomes.

During this training a HCC Personal Competency assessment and feedback tool

was piloted by the WHE Training Task Team to provide direct individual feedback

to participants on demonstrated personal competencies throughout the

simulation activities. The Personal Competencies were taken from the HCC

Competency Framework. The aim of this assessment and feedback tool is to

provide objective feedback on the competencies which are being performed

well and those which require strengthening. Observers from the Training Team

recorded Participants performance during the SIMEX activities only. In total, 1184

observations were recorded for the group as a whole. The results were fed back

individually to the Participants at the end of the SIMEX. The Participants were able

to opt out this process if they did not wish to receive this feedback. All the

Participants chose to receive feedback. See Annex 2 for the tool which was used

and the average results for the whole group. There were some concerns

expressed by the Participants and Training Team about the effectiveness of this

tool to measure the performance of personal competencies at its current stage of

development. These concerns were discussed during the final plenary on the last

day of the training when further explanation was given about the purpose of this

process and its current stage of development. Assurances were also given that no

record of the outcome would be kept or referred to by the Global Health Cluster

Unit.

5. TRAINING DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This nine-day training programme, which built on the learning and evaluations of

all previous trainings since 2015, contained a blend of didactic and practical

sessions, including two desk top exercises and a two-day simulation exercise. The

training closely followed the Humanitarian Programme Cycle.

8

The agenda, content and methodology were designed to ensure that there was

a good balance between technical knowledge and theoretical input from

Trainers and Facilitators, and practical sessions to work on group learning

activities, to share experience, to apply learning, to enable reflection and to

receive feedback on performance and outputs.

To ensure high levels of attention, concentration, reflection, retention and

application most of the more didactic/theoretical sessions took place in the

morning and most of these sessions also had short practical group work exercises.

This balanced and blended approach to learning ensured that the training was

building on the experience of delivering previous training, good learning practice

and the training methodologies responded to a wide range of learning styles.

Compulsory Pre Reading

The Participants were asked to ensure that they had completed the following pre-

readings before starting the training. The pre-reading was kept to a minimum in

recognition of response priorities and high workloads.

• Reference Module for Cluster Coordination at the Country Level (June 2015)

• Health Cluster Operational Guidance on AAP

• Public Health Information Services Standards (June 2017)

• PHIS Toolkit (October 2018)

• Working Paper for Considering CASH transfer programming for health in

humanitarian contexts

• Humanitarian Programme Cycle Reference Module Version 1.0 (June 2015)

• Humanitarian Needs Overview Guidance

• WHO Guidance for Contingency Planning

6. THE TRAINING AGENDA

The training agenda consisted of joint

sessions for Health Cluster Coordinators and

Information Management Officers, two desk

top exercises with four optional evening

Clinics for areas not included in depth in the

main agenda and a joint two-day SIMEX. The

training agenda was adjusted as the training

was running to take account of feedback

from the Participants and Training Team.

9

6.1 The Training Agenda

Day 0

20 November

Day 1

Wednesday 21 November

Day 2

Thursday 22 November

Day 3

Friday 23 November

Day 4

Saturday 24 November

Day 5

Sunday 25 November

Day 6

Monday 26 November

Day 7

Tuesday 27 November

Day 8

Wednesday 28 November

Day 9

Thursday 29 November

Activity Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session Session

08.30 - 08.45 Start of Training Start of Training Start of Training Start of Training Start of Training Start of Training Start of Training Start of Training Start of Training

08.45 - 10.15Arrival of Participants

Hotel Check-in

1.1. Updates from the Global Level

Linda Doull

2.1. a) Needs Assessment and

Analysis: What information is

needed?

2.1. b) PHIS Standards

2.1.c) EWARS

Boris Pavlin and Emanuele Bruni

3.1 HeRAMS

Samuel Petragallos

4.1 CASH Programming

Andre Griekspoor

5.1 Humanitarian Response Monitoring

Emanuele Bruni

6.1a ) Advocacy

Gabriel Novelo Sierra

6.1b) Attacks on Health Care

Hyo Jeong

Free time for Participants 6.1. Simex 7.1. Simex

Coffee Break Coffee Break Coffee Break Coffee Break Coffee Break Coffee Break Coffee available Coffee available


Hotel Check-in

1.2. Health Cluster Coordination

Overview

Critical Health Cluster

issues


2.2. Needs Assessment and Analysis:

Public Health Indicators and

secondary data analysis

Boris Pavlin

3.2 HNO

Patricia Kormoss

4.2 Humanitarian Response

Planning

Patricia Kormoss

5.2 Resource Mobilisation

Karim Yassmineh

6.2 Preparedness, Contingency

Planning, (PPE)

Patricia KormossFree time for Participants 6.2. Simex

7.2.a) Simex debriefs

7.2.b) Individual feedback on

Personal Competencies

7.2.c) Post Training

Questionnaire

12.30-13-30 Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch


Hotel Check-in

1.3 a) AAP and Protection

Mainstreaming


1.3 b) HIV in emergencies

Bryony Stevens WFP

Ann Burton UNHCR

2.3.Needs Analysis and Assessment:

Rapid Field Assessment

Boris Pavlin

3.3a) Cross-cutting issues

3.3.b) Inter-cluster Coordination

Patricia Kormoss

4.3 Humanitarian Response

Planning con't

Patricia Kormoss

5.3 Resource Mobilisation cont.

Karim Yassmineh

6.3.a) Communicable disease Alerts:

GOARN response

Alex Rosewell

6.3.b) Coordination with Emergency

Medical Teams

Christophe Schmachtel

5.4. Start of SIMEX

and Simex schedule6.3. Simex

7.4. Final Plenary

session, certificates and

closing of training

Coffee Break Coffee Break Coffee Break Coffee Break Coffee Break Coffee Break Coffee available Coffee available Training finished at 1500

15.45-17.30

Arrival of Participants

Hotel Check-in

Registration from 1600

1.4 Collaborative Leadership

Leadership Styles Reflection Group

Gillian O'Connell

2.4. Joint Desk top exercise on public

health situation analysis (based on

Simex)

Boris Pavlin and Emanuele Bruni

3.4 Health Cluster Coordinators -

Humanitarian Development Nexus

capacity building

Andre Griekspoor

4.4 Joint desk top exercise on HRP

(based on Simex

Ala Abouzeid

5.4 CERF exercise

Karim Yassmineh

6.4. a) CCPM


6.4.b) Wrap up of training sessions and

summary of learning objectives for

each session

Ala Abouzeid

5.5 Simex 6.4.Simex Participants depart

17.30 - 18.00Daily summary / Catch up of time if

session or breaks run over

Daily summary / Catch up of time if










18.00 - 19.00 Break Break Break Break Break Coffee available Break

19.00 - 20.00

1830 1930 - Optional Drop in Clinic

Building High Performing Teams

Gillian O'Connell

1800 - 1900 - Optional Drop in Clinic

OCHA

1800 - 1900 Optional Drop in Clinic

Coordination Dilemmas


1800 - 1900 - Optional Drop in Clinic

Accountability to Affected Populations

Emma Fitzpatrick

5.6. Simex

Evening sessions can go late. Please do

not make other plans.

6.5. Simex

Evening sessions can go late.

Please do not make other plans.

18.00-19.00

Welcome Reception

Opening of training, welcome

and introductions, overview of

training, expectations

Time

Afte

rn

oo

n S

essio

ns

Mo

rn

ing

S

essio

ns

Ev

en

ing

10

The Clinics

The training agenda contained four one-hour evening slots for Clinics on

optional topics identified by the Training Team. These optional sessions

were an opportunity to go deeper into areas not covered in detail in the

main agenda or to respond to requests from the Participants.

The Clinics were

positively received

by the Participants

who attended

them, and were as

follows:

CLINIC LED BY NUMBER

ATTENDING

Building High Performing Teams Gillian O’Connell 10

Working with OCHA Annarita

Marcantonio 16

Coordination Dilemmas Gabriel Novelo 14

Accountability to Affected Populations Emma Fitzpatrick 12

7. THE PARTICIPANTS

The training was originally planned for 48 participants, but 8 Participants were

unable to attend because of their visas were not approved, and two participants

had last minute work emergencies. This meant that the training was attended by

thirty-eight (38) Participants. Thirty-two of the Participants were WHO Personnel

and six were from Health Cluster Partners. There were 26 male and 12 female

Participants. Female Participants represented 31.5% of the cohort and is the

highest proportion of female Participants since the current series of training started

in 2015. Please see below for the number of female Participants in previous

trainings.

11

Training

Number of

Participants

Number of Female

Participants and % of

Cohort

2015 Health Cluster

Coordinator Training, Divonne

les Bains

20

4

20%


Coordination Training, Jordan

42

10

24%


Coordination Training, Divonne

les Bains

18

2

22%


Coordination Training, Senegal

29

5

17%

The Participants had a very wide range of experience, and represented AFRO (6),

EMRO (13), EURO (2), WPRO (5), SEARO (10), WHO HQ (2). Partners were

represented by IMMAP (3), Save the Children (1), NRC (1), IRC (1). AMRO (1),

There were twelve Health Cluster Coordinators, with five working at Sub National

level and six Information Management Officers. The other twenty participants had

a wide variety of roles and sixteen were WHE personnel.

Please see below for a detailed breakdown of the Participants and their roles.

12

REGION NAME COUNTRY ORGANISATION ROLE

AFRO

1 Umesh Kattel Addis/Ethiopia WHO Sub-National HCC

2 Beatrice Muraguri Addis/Ethiopia WHO IMO/Acting HCC

3 Yaoklou

Mawuémiyo

ADANDJI Niamey/Niger WHO HCC

4 Muhammed

Kamran

Baig Maiduguri/Nigeria IMMAP IMO

5 Muhammad Shafiq Maiduguri/Nigeria WHO Health Sector Coordinator

6 Arsene Enyegue Goma/DRC NRC Sub-National HCC

EMRO

7 Sailab Ayubi Kandahar/Afghanistan WHO Sub-National HCC

8 Samuel Omara Erbil/IRAQ IMMAP IMO

9 Karol Ramirez Duque Erbil/IRAQ IMMAP IMO

10 Hussein Hassen Tripoli/Libya WHO HCC

11 Nour Said Jerusalem/OPT WHO IMO

12 Mohammed Marouf Gaza/OPT WHO IMO

13 Dayib Mohamed Ahmed Mogadishu/Somalia SCI Co-Coordinator

14 Arun Mallik Khartoum/Sudan WHO HCC

15 Fares Kady Aleppo/Syria WHO Sub-National HCC

16 Nadia Aljamali Damascus/Syria WHO Head of WHO Homs Sub-Office

17 Christina Bethke WoS WHO HCC - Jordan

18 Kais Al Dairi Whole of Syria IRC WOS Co/coordination

19 Judith Starkulla Jordan WHO WHE Team Lead

EURO

20 Oleg Storozhenko EURO WHO HEP Technical Officer, Emergency Ops

21 Jorge Martinez Turkey WHO HCC

WPRO

22 Zaixing Zhang PNG WHO HEP Team Coordination

23 Satoko Otsu Vietnam WHO HEP Team leader WHE

24 Philippe Guyant Vanuatu WHO HEP Communicable Disease

25 Ariuntuya Ochirpurev Mongolia WHO HEP WHE

13

26 Vannda Kab Phnom Penh/Cambodia WHO HEP Technical Officer

SEARO

27 Egmond Evers SEARO WHO HEP Partnershipis Officer

28 Purvi Paliwal SEARO WHO HEP Resource mobilization

29 Sugandika Perera WCO Sri Lanka WHO HEP National Professional Officer

30 Balwinder Chawla WHO CXB Bangladesh WHO HEP Health Sector Coordinator

31 Reuben Samuel WCO Nepal WHO HEP Technical Officer/Team leader

32 Pushpa Wijesinghe Pyong Yang/WCO

DPR Korea

WHO HEP MO/CDS/WHE focal point

33 Tika Sedai New Delhi/SEARO WHO HEP Data Management

34 Md Mazhar WHO CXB office WHO HEP Surveillance and Outbreak Officer

35 Zahid Rahim WCO Bangladesh WHO HEP NPO/EHA

36 Win Bo Yangon/Myanmar WHO HEP National Technical Officer

HQ

37 Erna Van Goor Cameroon WHO HQ Cluster Coordinator

38 Judith Maina WHO HQ WHO HQ Emergency Officer

14

Participants Expectations

Before the training started the Participants were asked via Moodle to identify their

top three expectations of the training. Twenty-one Participants sent in their

expectations. These were reviewed by the Training Team on 20 November 2018

and responded to during the Welcome Reception, when it was confirmed that all

expectations which had been received would be covered during the training.

Summary:

Participants wanted to learn about,

experience, share

Number of times

mentioned

Tools, standards and processes 17

The Health Cluster 16

Applying and continuing the learning 8

Lessons and good practice 8

Coordination challenges and issues 7

Understanding the role of the Health Cluster

Coordinator

5

Networking 4

Inter-cluster and Partner Coordination 2

Please see ANNEX 4 for a record of the Participant expectations which were

received.

15

8. THE PARTICIPANTS PACK

Information for Participants before, during and after training was shared by means

of an online Participants Pack on Moodle. Moodle is a learning platform designed

to provide educators, administrators and learners with a single robust, secure and

integrated system to create personalised and training specific learning

environments. This information included Participant and Training Team profiles, visa

and venue information/logistics, expectations, essential pre-reading, learning and

training materials and resources and evaluation tools.

9. THE TRAINERS AND FACILITATORS

The training was co-ordinated by the Global Health Cluster Unit in close

collaboration with the Public Health Information Services Task Team and other

WHO/EMO units. Patricia Kormoss, Partnership Officer, WHE/EURO, Alaa Abouzeid

Partnership Officer, WHE/EMRO and Gabriel Novelo, Health Cluster Coordinator

Ukraine were part of the core expert group for the delivery of the training

throughout the 9 days. In total, twenty-four personnel were directly involved in

developing, delivering and supporting this training.

Please see below for more information about the Training Team:

16

THE TRAINING TEAM

Name Organisation Position Role

Alaa Abouzeid WHO EMRO Team Lead, Operational

Partnerships Session Trainer and SIMEX support

Alex Rosewell WHO

Global Outbreak Alert

and Response Network

(GOARN)

Session Trainer and SIMEX support

Andre Griekspoor WHO Senior Humanitarian

Policy Advisor Session Trainer

Annarita Marcantonio OCHA Humanitarian Affairs

Officer Clinic Lead, Session resource expert

Ann Burton UNHCR

Chief, Public Health

Section at UNHCR, IASC

HIV Task Team

Session Trainer

Boris Pavlin WHO

Epidemiologist - Health

Operations Monitoring &

Data Collection Officer

Session Trainer

Bryony Stevens WFP IASC HIV Task Team Session Trainer

Carolyn Patten-Reymond WHO Administrative Assistant -

Global Health Cluster Secretariat and SIMEX support

Christophe Schmachtel WHO EMT Technical Officer Session Trainer

Elisabetta Minelli GHC GHC Technical Officer Secretariat and SIMEX support

Emanuele Bruni WHO HIM Health Information

Officer Session Trainer and SIMEX Support

Emma Fitzpatrick GHC GHC Technical Senior

Officer

Training Manager, Event Co-Facilitator, Secretariat and

SIMEX support

Gabriel Novelo Sierra GHC Health Cluster

Coordinator Ukraine Session Trainer and SIMEX support

17

Gillian O'Connell GHC Learning and

Development Consultant

Training Event Co-Facilitator, Session Trainer, and SIMEX

support

Heini Utunen WHO

Technical Officer

Learning and Capacity

Development

SIMEX Manager

Hyo Jeong Kim WHO

Technical Officer

Humanitarian Policy and

Guidance

Session Trainer and SIMEX Support

Karim Yassnineh WHO Resource mobilisation

officer Session Trainer

Linda Doull GHC Global Health Cluster

Coordinator Session Trainer and SIMEX support

Monta Reinfelde WHO

Consultant on Learning

and Capacity

Development

SIMEX support

Oliver Stucke WHO Learning and Capacity

Development Officer

SIMEX support, Personal Competency Feedback

Coordinator

Patricia Kormoss WHO Operational Partnership

Officer Session Trainer and SIMEX support

Samuel Petragallos WHO Information

Management Officer Session Trainer

Silvia Sanchez GHC Intern at the Global

Health Cluster Secretariat

Sophie Bonnet WHO Intern at WHO SIMEX support

Corentin Piroux WHO Intern at WHO SIMEX support

18

10. THE SIMULATION EXERCISE (SIMEX)

The two-day SIMEX scenario was based on a real protracted crisis with small

changes to accommodate the training context. The same scenario was also the

basis for practical sessions and desk top exercises in the preceding training. The

scenario has been developed for this training over the last four training events

and has been retained because it has proven to very effective in eliciting and

developing the required health cluster coordination competencies and learning

outcomes.

The aims of the SIMEX were to:

• Build and strengthen the capacity of Health Cluster Coordination Teams to lead

and coordinate the planning, implementation and monitoring of

more effective, efficient, timely and predictable evidence-based humanitarian

health interventions in the field over 15 days following the onset of a large-scale

emergency.

• Practice and reintegrate what have been learned in the training.

• Experience Health Cluster functions and deliverables in different phases of an

emergency.

The specific objectives of the SIMEX were to:

• Demonstrate knowledge of the Emergency Response Planning and

Humanitarian Program Cycle.

• Apply field skills, including team work, self and stress management, working

under pressure, and an understanding of the code of conduct and ethics.

• Build on and exercise professional and interpersonal skills of increasing

importance: learning how to handle diverging views, positions, interests and

values, networking techniques, negotiating skills.

During the previous practical sessions and desktop exercises the Participants

developed the following documents:

• A Health Situation Analysis;

• Strategic objectives and detailed activities for a Flash Appeal (including

19

costings);

• A strategic response plan;

• Determined the structure of the health cluster needed for the response;

• Health Cluster Bulletin

• 3 Ws matrix and dashboards;

• EWARS reports;

The following drills also took place with a set of deliverables which built on the

earlier learning activities:

• Organizing a Needs Assessment exercise;

• Participating in a Needs Assessment Mission;

• Strategic Response Plan;

• Presenting the Cluster Response Plan to the Health Officials;

• Resource Mobilisation – Donor Conference;

• Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation;

• Detailed update to donors.

Members of the Training Team took on the roles and provided feedback on the

deliverables throughout the SIMEX.

11. THE EVALUATION OF THE TRAINING

The training was rigorously evaluated throughout and immediately after the

training and feedback was continuously garnered from the Participants and the

Training Team. This produced a wealth of detailed and constructive feedback

which will be referred to in the planning and design of future training.

11.1. Feedback from Participants

Feedback was collected from the Participants during the training by means of:

• Daily feedback from participant representatives in short “navigation” meetings

with the Training Facilitators at the end of days 1 to 6. This feedback was

immediately fed back to the Training Team in the daily Training Team meetings

and acted upon where possible and appropriate;

• A “Parking Lot” for questions and queries which were unanswered or not

addressed in the sessions, the questions were mostly responded to the following

day in plenary by the appropriate member of the training team or directly with

the Participant who asked the question

• On line evaluation forms for days 1 – 6

• On line feedback on the whole training and SIMEX on the last day;

• A SIMEX debrief with all Participants in their teams.

The feedback from the Participants was consistently very positive throughout the

nine days and showed very high levels of participant satisfaction with the quality of

the training.

The rating scale for the on-line evaluation for training days 1 – 6 and the final

overall training evaluation was:

1 = Poor; 2 = Fair; 3 = Good; 4 = Excellent

20

The feedback also provided many examples of how the Participants intend to use

and apply their learning and provides a firm foundation for developing and

strengthening future global and regional training for Health Cluster Coordination.

Feedback was collected from the Participants on a wide range of areas and the

full feedback will be referred to by the Global Health Cluster Unit and Public Health

Information Services Task Team when planning and designing future trainings.

The Participants’ Final Evaluation

Thirty-two Participants had completed the final training evaluation by the 4

December 2018.

The results of the quantitative questions were as follows:

Question

Overall how would you rate?

Rating

This training 3.44

The facilitation 3.53

The training logistics and administration

before and during the training

3.68

The pre-training information and joining

instructions on Moodle

3.44

The venue and training spaces 3.44

The meals and refreshments 3.08

A summary of the qualitative feedback showed that overall the Participants

gave very positive feedback about the training, with many of the Participants

commenting on how well the training was organised and how closely it

matched their expectations.

There was very little consistency in the final constructive feedback, but some

Participants reported that they:

• Found the training too long

• Would like more concise presentations

• Would prefer more practical sessions

There was one request for the knowledge components to be available

by eLearning. Two Participants found the training too basic.

In answer to the question “Which 5 sessions or learning activities contributed

most to your learning and development? the top five sessions were identified as:

• Session 3.2. Humanitarian Needs Overview

• Session 2.4. Public Health Sector Analysis

• Session 3.1. HeRAMs

• Session 1.3.a) AAP

• Sessions 5.2. & 5.3. Resource Mobilisation

21

In answer to the question “Were there any gaps in the training or any areas which were

not adequately addressed?” there were no consistent answers or patterns to the

feedback, and the responses were very individually specific, for example:

• More on emergencies where the Health Cluster is not activated

• The role of a Partnership Officer

• Preparedness, Contingency and Planning

• There were two comments about connecting and harmonising themes: HRP, ERP,

Civ/Mil coordination.

In answer to the question: “In

addition to learning about

Health Cluster Coordination,

what else have you gained

from participating in this

training?” there were many

mentions of networking and

building relationships with the

Global Health Cluster Unit and

WHO Head Office. The

following statements are

typical of this type of

feedback:

“I have networked with brilliant

colleagues from different regions,”

“I have learnt a lot from my colleagues”

Participants Learning

A review of all the responses to questions from the daily and final evaluation regarding

how much the Participants had learned showed that most reported learning was about:

• The Health Cluster

• Leadership

• Humanitarian Response Planning

• HeRAMS

• Information

• Humanitarian Needs Overview

• Data Assessment

• Public Health Sector Analysis

There were also many examples of how this learning would be applied in the work place.

Please see Annex 5 for additional feedback from the final evaluation.

Participants’ Daily Evaluations: Days 1 to 6

The quantitative feedback for Days 1 to 6 showed a rating range of 2.3 for Session 1.3.b)

HIV in Emergencies to 3.67 for Session 4.4. Desk Top Exercise on Humanitarian Response

Planning.

22

The full results for each Session are below:

Summary of qualitative feedback Days 1 to 6

The Participants provided a rich amount of daily qualitative feedback and a summary

of the more consistent feedback is below. All the constructive feedback was also

identified in the Navigation Group feedback at the end of days 1 to 6, and was

addressed or responded to as the training ran:

• The feedback was very positive from Day 1 and became more so as the week went

on.

• There were many examples of learning and reflection about how the Participants

were planning to use it

• The Participants enjoyed the practical methodology and group work

• The Participants wanted more time for discussion

• There were some strong constructive comments about the session on HIV in

Emergencies. There was also some constructive feedback about the sessions on HNO,

Cross Cutting Issues and Preparedness and Contingency Planning, but there was no

strong consistency with these comments.

• Some of the Participants didn’t like three sessions in a row being given by same

presenter, for example Resource Mobilisation

• Two Participants asked for all presentations to be up dated

• There were requests to share the Learning Objectives for each session

• Participants like the tight time management and were quick to comment on sessions

which over ran.

23

Please see Annex 5 for additional Participant feedback from Days 1 – 6.

Participants’ SIMEX Evaluation

Team Debriefs:

The Participants were allocated to four teams for the SIMEX - Alpha, Bravo,

Charlie and Delta and for associated desk top exercises during the training.

At the end of the SIMEX each of the teams were debriefed separately on the

SIMEX overall and the activities and injects. Overall the feedback from these

debriefs was very positive.

SIMEX evaluation

Thirty-six Participants had completed the on line SIMEX evaluation by the 4

December 2018.

The Participants were asked to show whether they: Strongly Agreed, Somewhat

Agreed, Somewhat Disagreed or Strongly Disagreed with statements about their

experience of the training.

The results showed a very high level of Participant satisfaction with their learning

from the SIMEX activities with 97% of the Participants agreeing with the

statement: “I’m better prepared to act and respond appropriately according to

my role”. 53% of the Participants strongly agreed with this statement.

Please see below for the additional responses to other statements.

QUESTION STRONGLY

AGREE

SOMEWHAT

AGREE

SOMEWHAT

DISAGREE

STRONGLY

DISAGREE

I was able to apply

learned knowledge and

skills to build and

strengthen the capacity of

Health Cluster

Coordination Teams to

lead and coordinate the

planning, implementation

and monitoring of

more effective, efficient,

timely and predictable

evidence-based

humanitarian health

interventions in the field

58% 36% 6% 0%

I was able to demonstrate

knowledge of the

Emergency Response

Planning and

Humanitarian Program

Cycle in a series of

emergency-like scenario

64% 28% 8% 0%

24

I was able to experience

Health Cluster functions in

different stages and

deliverables related to

emergency situations

61% 31% 8% 0%

I was able to practice and

reintegrate what has been

learned in the training

58% 31% 11% 0%

I’m more familiar with field

skills, including team work,

self and stress

management, working

under pressure

56% 42% 3% 0%

I’m better prepared to act

and respond

appropriately according

to my role

53% 44% 3% 0%

I have been building and

exercising professional and

interpersonal skills of

increasing importance:

learning how to handle

diverging views, positions,

interests and values,

networking techniques,

negotiating skills

61% 28% 11% 0%

The qualitative feedback from the SIMEX was also very positive with most of the

Participants reporting that they enjoyed the team work and working under pressure.

Suggested Improvements included:

• Increase the time for the SIMEX.

• Have smaller teams

• Assign roles, so everyone has something to do

• Provide better briefings about scenario activities and what is expected

• Develop Natural disaster scenario

• There was one comment about the need for Facilitators to be “a bit more

culturally sensitive specially to evaluate the participants. Communication skill is

very subjective.”

In the final training evaluation there was one comment which said:

“The evaluation portion of the SIMEX needs a complete overhaul”. It is unclear if this

comment is referring to the on-line evaluation or the assessment of the Personal

Competencies.

Please see Annex 6 for a summary of additional feedback from the final

Participants’ evaluation of the SIMEX.

25

11.2. Pre and Post Training Questionnaire

The Participants were asked to complete a pre-training questionnaire on arrival

at the venue. The questionnaire consisted of 25 questions which were designed

to test the knowledge base expected of all Participants. The same questionnaire

was repeated by the Participants on the last afternoon of the training.

The Results

There was a total of 38 Participants on the training. Thirty-three of the

Participants completed the pre-training questionnaire, with mean of 16.71. The

maximum possible score was 25.

Thirty-seven Participants completed the post-training questionnaire with a mean

of 19.62.

Thirty-two of the Participants completed both the pre and post training

questionnaire. The pre-training mean for these 32 participants was 17.66 and the

post training mean was 19.24, so a gain of 2.28. The results therefore show some

evidence of a small impact on short term knowledge retention.

An analysis of the disaggregated results for Health Cluster personal only, showed

a pre-training mean of 17.62 and a post training mean of 19.93 so an increase of

2.31, i.e. no significant difference in comparison to the whole cohort.

The analysis of the results also showed that although 22 of the Participants’

scores had increased, 7 of the post training scores went down, with three

Participants having a reduced score of 3 points. The scores of 3 Participants

were unchanged. One possible explanation for this is that the pre-training

questionnaire was not completed under controlled conditions and was given to

the Participants with their hard copy Participants folder and some Participants

may have referred to while completing the pre-training questionnaire. If so this

may have inflated the pre- training scores. The pre and post training

questionnaire are a learning activity as well as a guide to knowledge retention.

A comparison of results with

previous trainings is as

follows and shows that the

largest increase in the

scores was in the

Participants on the training

in Senegal in 2017.

However, the number of

questions had decreased

from previous trainings so

direct comparisons are

questionable.

26

Training

Results of the Pre and Post Training

Questionnaire


Coordination Training,

Jordan

Total number of questions 34

15 out of 42 Participants completed both:

Pre 22.06 post 23.6,

1.54 increase

but the conclusion was that the results

were not able to give a reliable measure.



Divonne les Bains


All 18 Participants completed both:

pre 21.7 post 25.4

3.7. increase

5 stayed same.



Senegal


23 out of 29 Participants completed both

pre16.62 post 21.3

4.69 increase

2 stayed the same.

11.3. Feedback from the Training Team

Feedback was received from the Training Team by means of a teleconference

which took place on the 10 December 2018 and an online survey.

Training Team Meeting/teleconference

The meeting/teleconference was attended by:

1. Alaa Abouzeid

2. Emma Fitzpatrick

3. Gabriel Novelo Sierra

4. Gillian O’Connell

5. Karim Yassmineh

6. Linda Doull

7. Oliver Stucke

8. Patricia Kormoss

Agenda:

1. The Structure of the Training Report

2. A summary of all feedback received from the Participants

3. Key messages from the Training Team from the current training

4. Thoughts on the development of future training

5. Recommendations

The Feedback from the Training Team members who took part in this meeting

was as follows:

27

NAME

Key Messages from recent training, and thoughts on future training

Alaa Abouzeid • Shorten the training – it’s currently very resource intensive

• This was the most successful training he’s ever seen

• Ensure all essential pre-reading is completed

Gabriel Novelo

Sierra

• IMOs scores had increased in the post training questionnaire

• Identify which sessions could be replaced by pre-eLearning

• Some Participants complained that not all Participants had

done the pre-reading and that this impacted on group

learning activities which assume everyone had the

foundation knowledge

• Develop other scenarios for the SIMEX – too much reliance on

URUK

• Develop regional training

Emma Fitzpatrick • Training could be shortened to 6 days, with more focus on the

SIMEX

• Separate out role players and observers so as not to over

stretch Training Team

• Have NGO staff in the Training Team

• Develop contextualised regional training

Oliver Stucke • Improve personal competency assessment methodology

and tool – improve clarity

• Train Observers in use of the tool and in using common

standards

• Ensure ALL Participants do pre-reading

• Provide training/guidance on preparing and holding

meetings

Gillian O’Connell • Ensure all sessions and SIMEX activities have clear learning

objectives which are shared with the Participants at the start

of each session

• Share session plans with Training Team early enough for

effective peer review and comment

• Strengthen links between Leadership session and the SIMEX –

build in Situational Leadership

Linda Doull • Shorten training, some learning can be covered by new

eLearning modules

• Make better use of trainers who are available, so not to rely

on same people

• SIMEX – ensure role players don’t take over the Participants

learning space – give Participants the space to engage in

the learning activities

• Ensure clear learning objectives for all sessions and SIMEX

activities.

• Training content felt too WHO focussed at times, with not

enough emphasis on Partners and Partnership –review and

adjust language in training sessions and SIMEX to reflect

Partners

• Refresh SIMEX – to bring in how the Health Cluster

works/interfaces with GOARN, EMT and Incident Managers

28

• Develop contextualised regional training as next stage

Karim Yassmineh • Don’t have three sessions on same topic and with same

presenter back to back, as there is a lot of information from

Participants to absorb

• Add familiarity with Pool Fund to the Learning Objectives

• Participants at different levels of knowledge, makes it

challenging for the trainers

• Not all Participants were Health Cluster personnel – need to

get a better balance

Patricia Kormoss • As the competencies and expertise of the participants were

very different - scaling from none to high - finding the right

balance on what needed to be taught was very challenging.

The knowledge between WHO regions was very diverse and

different approaches are currently used therefore the sessions

might have created additional confusion for some of the

participants.

• Some participants were taking it as granted that they had

the right knowledge, "already known", others were not

interested in the training at all. This jeopardized the sessions. A

few of the participant had very negative attitudes and

behaviours during the sessions.

• Future trainings should be organised at regional level, taking

into account regional specificities, context and expertise.

• GHC and WHE teams should work closer to each other and

ensure that they have common understanding on and use of

specific terminologies (especially related to emergency

preparedness and contingency planning)

• For future, sessions flow and management, I would

recommend that one trainer should not perform several

sessions in a row.

The Online Survey

All the Training Team were also asked to provide feedback by means of a short

online survey. Fourteen members of the Training Team had completed the

survey by the time this report was written.

The Training Team gave a rating of 3.43 out of 4 for the training over all.

Please see ANNEX 7 for the additional feedback received from the Training

Team.

29

12. FINANCIAL REPORT

The direct costs of this training for 38 Participants were as follows:

ITEM COVERED BY CURRENCY AMOUNT EXCHANGE

RATE

AMOUNT

US$

Venue GHCU EUR 93.775 0.879 106,683

WHO Travel -

including per diem

(WHO

staff/Consultant)

WHO USD 146.294 0 146,293

Extras, stationery

etc. GHCU CHF 200 0.996 199

GHCU Consultant

contract GHCU GBP 6245.25 0.783 7,975

Other - equipment

rental GHCU EUR 6774 0.879 7,706

Total 268,856

This represents a unit cost per participant of USD 7,075.

The unit cost compares with previous trainings since 2015 follows:

Health Cluster Coordinator Training 2015

(Divonne les Bains)

USD 8254.65

Joint Health Cluster Coordination Training

2016 (Jordan)

USD 5315.26


2017 (Divonne les Bains)

USD 6295.16


2017 (Senegal)

USD 8311.74

13. RECOMMENDATIONS

These recommendations are based on the discussions which took place

at the Training Team meeting on the 10 December 2018:

(not in priority order)

1. Develop contextualised and shorter regional (and Global) training.

2. Review the curriculum framework and introduce appropriate eLearning modules as

essential pre-learning.

3. Ensure that essential pre-learning and any essential pre-reading is completed by all

Participants before the training starts.

4. Refresh the SIMEX to include coordination with GOARN, EMTs and Incident Managers

30

5. Develop new scenarios for the SIMEX, to include natural disasters (flood, Tsunami,

earthquake, typhoon).

6. Ensure training content reflects Health Cluster Partners and the partnership approach.

7. Identify Partner representatives for future Training Teams.

8. Refresh the Health Cluster Coordination Training Pack and ensure that all training sessions

and SIMEX objectives have clear learning objectives and are linked to the Health Cluster

Coordination Competency Framework.

9. Ensure that all sessions are shared with all Training Team members well in advance of the

training.

10. Ensure that Participants more closely match the target group, or that there are strong

reasons for inclusion in the training.

31

ANNEX 1: THE HEALTH CLUSTER COORDINATION COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK

Purpose

The purpose of this competency framework is to provide a set of standards to:

• Facilitate staff recruitment into cluster roles on the basis of expected competencies

• Define the learning outcomes for a capacity development and professional development programme

• Provide the basis for appraising and managing staff performance

The competencies are designed to be:

• Primarily for Health Cluster staff in humanitarian contexts

• Complementary to other function specific or technical frameworks, such as the Core Humanitarian Competencies and the Public Health

Information Services Technical (PHIS) Competency Framework

• Relevant to different professional levels

• Sufficiently flexible to be used as a recruitment, learning and development and performance management tool

• Concise, logical and easy to use

• Transferable globally across people, countries and cultures.

-

The framework, therefore, aims to be inclusive of priorities, approaches and structures of the different members and organisations who carry out

Health Cluster activities in emergency situations. It identifies 11 functional competencies with specific examples of behaviours, each of which

have been grouped into domains that are reflective of the stages of the Humanitarian Programme Cycle stages and the Cluster Functions at

Country Level. These competencies are followed by ten competencies that are personal, rather than role-specific, in nature.

Each competency has the following components:

• Competency: a blend of the knowledge, skills and qualities needed to complete a task, deliver an input, achieve an output and to have

an impact.

• Role-Specific Behaviours: examples of how Health Cluster staff can demonstrate the associated competency.

32

DOMAIN1

COMPETENCY2

ROLE SPECIFIC BEHAVIOURS

HEALTH CLUSTER COORDINATORS

ROLE SPECIFIC BEHAVIOURS

PHIS OFFICERS

Needs Assessment &

Analysis

1. Coordinate timely and

effective needs assessment

and response gap analysis

(across sectors and within

the sector).

A. Ensure that humanitarian health

needs, gaps and risks are identified by

planning and coordinating timely joint,

inter-cluster, initial rapid assessments

adapting to the local context the MIRA

and/or HESPER methods, as well as

instigating mortality estimation and

surveillance of epidemic-prone diseases

and attacks against health care, as per

global GHC standards.

B. Assesses and monitor the availability of

health services provided by all health

actors by instigating timely data

collection as per global GHC standards

(Health Resources Availability Mapping

System [HeRAMS], 3/4W matrix).

C. Advocates for assessments to be

conducted jointly by local and

international health agencies.

A. Locally adapts and executes (or, in the case

of MIRA, supports) data collection, analysis and

reporting so as to deliver public health

information services relevant to needs and risks

identification, including rapid assessment,

HESPER, EWARS, population mortality estimation

and monitoring of violence against health care,

based on GHC global standards and

applications, where appropriate training and

supporting data collection by health partners.

B. Locally adapts and executes HeRAMS and

3/4W matrix data collection, analysis and

reporting, while maintaining an up-to-date list of

health partners, based on GHC global

standards and applications, training and

supporting data collection by health partners.

2. Coordinate analysis to

identify and address

(emerging) risks, gaps,

obstacles, duplication, and

A. Leads and contributes to the joint

interpretation of assessment data, set

against pre-crisis baseline health data,

leading to joint identification of priority

A. Compiles literature searches of pre- and in-

crisis secondary health data, rapid assessment

and other available primary data into a

regularly updated public health situation

1 The GHC Competency Framework domains are taken from the stages of the Humanitarian Programme Cycle (HPC), a coordinated series of actions undertaken to help prepare for, manage and deliver humanitarian response. For more

information, please see: www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/programme-cycle/space 2 The GHC Competency Framework competencies are taken from the Reference Module for Cluster Coordination at Country Level, which outlines the basic elements of cluster coordination for field practitioners to help facilitate their work and improve humanitarian outcomes. For more information, please see: https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/coordination/clusters

http://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/programme-cycle/space

https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/coordination/clusters

33

cross-cutting issues. risks and gaps in the health sector

response and agreement on priorities to

inform the development (or adaptation)

of a health sector response strategy.

analysis document, structured as per global

GHC standards.

B. Produces info-graphics, including graph,

maps and dashboards, as required, so as to

illustrate specific aspects of the health situation

Strategic Response

Planning

3. Collaboratively develop

sectoral plans, objectives

and indicators that directly

support realisation of the

HC/HCT strategic priorities.

A. Works closely with the Ministry of

Health and the SAG and other local and

international cluster partners to establish

clear strategic imperatives that support

existing coordination mechanisms and

the delivery of long-term strategic

objectives.

B. Produces purposeful, evidence-based

plans that define life-saving and realistic

priorities and gaps developed in a clear

objective/results which are underlined

with relevant indicators. A detailed

funding plan is mandatory.

n/a

4. Accurately identify

response priorities grounded

in response analysis and

(emerging) public health

information.

A. Work with HC partners on an ongoing

basis to interpret available information,

identify new threats to public health, as

well as emerging or outstanding gaps in

service provision, and decide and follow

through on actions to address these.

B. Represents the Health Cluster in inter-

cluster coordination mechanisms at

country/sub-national level, contribute to

jointly identifying critical issues and

scenarios that require multi-sectoral

A. Maintains EWARS and monitoring violence

against health care data collection systems,

producing regular analyses and bulletins.

34

responses, and plan the relevant

synergistic interventions with the other

clusters concerned.

C. Informs the CLA Representative of

priority gaps that cannot be covered by

any health cluster partner and requires

CLA action as provider of last resort.

5. Ensure effective

contingency planning,

preparedness and capacity

building.

A. Leads joint Health Cluster contingency

planning for potential new events or

setbacks, when required.

B. Continuously monitors the health

situation and inform partners regularly.

C. In a protracted crisis or health sector

recovery context, ensures appropriate

links among humanitarian actions and

longer-term health sector plans,

incorporating the concept of ‘building

back better’ and specific risk reduction

measures.

A. Maintains and updates the public health

situation analysis, introducing secondary data

as they arise, so as to support evidence-based

contingency planning and preparedness.

Resource Mobilisation 6. Clarify funding

requirements, priorities and

cluster contributions for the

HC’s overall humanitarian

funding considerations (e.g.

Flash Appeal, CAP, CERF,

Emergency Response

Fund/Common

Humanitarian Fund)

A. Provides leadership and strategic

direction to Health Cluster Partners in the

development of the health sector

components of FLASH Appeal, CHAP,

CAP and CERF proposals and other

interagency planning, resource

allocation and funding documents.

B. Advocates for local health actors and

joint operations of international and local

A. Produces ad-hoc info graphics as required

to support planning, resource allocation and

funding documents.

35

agencies.

Implementation &

Monitoring

7. Coordinate service

delivery through the

implementation of the

cluster strategy and results,

recommending corrective

action where necessary.

A. Holds regular coordination meetings

with country health cluster partners,

building when possible on existing health

sector coordination forums.

B. Develops and implements mechanisms

to fill gaps and eliminate duplication of

service delivery.

C. Regularly checks implementation

results against set targets.

A. Locally adapts and supports partner

execution of a Health Management

Information System (HMIS), as per GHC global

standards and applications, producing regular

reports, to support monitoring of health system

performance.

B. Designs, executes and reports on

administrative or survey-based estimation of

vaccination coverage.

C. Maintains and produces regular analysis or

bulletins from key information systems (HeRAMS,

3/4W matrix) so as to support monitoring of

health service availability.

8. Promote and ensure

application and adherence

to the Core Humanitarian

Standard and relevant

technical standards and

guidelines3.

A. Promotes application of standards

and best practice by all health cluster

partners to the local context.

B. Promotes the use of the Health Cluster

Guide to ensure the application of

common approaches, tools and

standards.

C Identifies urgent training needs in

relation to technical standards and

protocols for the delivery of key health

services to ensure their adoption and

n/a

3 Any health response should be based on the Core Humanitarian Standard, thereby translating our commitment to improve the effectiveness of humanitarian response and to respect humanitarian standards and principles. For more information, see: www.corehumanitarianstandard.org

http://www.corehumanitarianstandard.org/

36

uniform application by all Health Cluster

partners.

9. Coordinate participation

and engagement with

standard monitoring and

reporting mechanisms such

as Cluster Performance

Management procedures

and other tools.

A. Ensures partners’ active contribution to

and involvement in joint monitoring of

individual and common plans of action

for health interventions; collate and

disseminate this and other information

related to the health sector in Cluster sit-

reps and/or regular Health Bulletins.

B. Links monitoring and reporting to

programmatic responses.

A. Compiles data from multiple sources and

supports the publication of a health cluster

bulletin, as well as an EWARS epidemiological

bulletin, as per GHC global standards and

applications.

B. B. Locally adapts and executes Operational

Indicator Monitoring application of the GHC in

order to collect, analyse and report on key

health performance and service output

indicators for the whole health cluster.

10. Identify advocacy

concerns and undertake

effective advocacy

activities on behalf of cluster

participants and the

affected population.

A. Collects information required to

contribute to HC and HCT messaging

and action.

B. Includes health cluster partners in

advocacy for priority health actions and

changes.

A. Maintains and regularly updates analysis and

reports on attacks against health care.

B. Supports ongoing interpretation of data on

health risks, service availability and

performance in order to correctly identify

advocacy issues and concerns.

Operational Review &

Evaluation

11. Coordinate participation

and engagement with

Operational Peer Review

(OPR)and Evaluation

procedures and activities.

A. Ensures the Health Cluster’s active

contribution to relevant OPR assessment

activities.

B. Translates recommendations of the

OPR into Cluster strategic plan for

implementation.

C. Supports and facilitates possible

evaluation missions.

A. Produces analyses from active data

collection applications and systems, including

ad hoc info-graphics, to support OPR and

evaluations.

37

PERSONAL COMPETENCIES HEALTH CLUSTER COORDINATORS IMO/PHIS OFFICERS

1. Lead, guide and inspire partners, stakeholders

and country CLA to deliver results and impact.

√

2. Actively develop self, others and the Health

Cluster as an integral part of building the Cluster’s

coordination capacity.

√

√

3. Effectively facilitate training events and

workshops, acting as the trainer and/or resource

person as necessary

√ √

4. Work collaboratively and build high performing

teams within a particular context.

√

√

5. Build effective networks with partners and

stakeholders to ensure service delivery.

√

√

6. Demonstrate effective meeting organisation,

management and participation

√

√

7. Speak and write clearly, confidently, accurately,

and with impact for different audiences.

√

√

8. Consistently influence decisions in best interests of

affected populations.

√

9. Ensure the full engagement and participation of

current and new partners and stakeholders.

√

10. Build consensus for effective decision making.

√

38

The WHE Training Task Team compared the GHC personal competency framework with the WHE

personal competency framework and aligned the two frameworks under general thematic areas

for the purpose of the pilot exercise to provide direct personal feedback to participants.

ANNEX 2: PERSONAL COMPETENCIES ASSESSMENT TOOL

39

ANNEX 3: STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH INFORMATION

SERVICES

Please follow link for standards:

https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/

phis-standards.pdf

https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/phis-standards.pdf

https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/phis-standards.pdf

40

ANNEX 4: PARTICIPANT EXPECTATIONS (21 responses)

Tools, standards and processes - 17 expectations

• Mechanisms for emergency funding sources and donors and the procedures for mobilizing emergency funding for health cluster response

in humanitarian emergencies

• Assessments/HeRAMS how to make it more effective in the health cluster work and clear policy on its timeline and implementation

strategy - WHO responsibility or Health Cluster?

• HNO-HRP processes how it can be improved for better planning of humanitarian response.

• Reporting, Information management products standardization - Bulletins, SItreps, annual reports etc.

• Updates guidance, tools and templates: ISAC guidelines/guidance, tools and templates for humanitarian coordination, in particular,

health cluster/sector coordination in humanitarian response context.

• Updates tools and templates for health cluster coordination for health sector emergency response

• How to prepare gender-sensitive proposal (HRP/JRP etc) in initial period when sex-age-disaggregation data not available Better

understanding of PHIS; when to use them, frequency, uses, and desired outcomes.

• Gain a more thorough understanding of technical health (cluster) coordination concepts and approaches, and test and learn to apply

these through a detailed, high-quality SIMEX Group discussion and way forward for mutual indicators for cross sectoral analysis (Health,

Nutrition, Wash etc.)

• Way of Integration of cross sectoral data set on severity indicators

• Management of Secondary dataset through standardize tool kit

• Analysis toolkit for HeRAMS and its correlation with other datasets

• Sector specific assessment tool and DTM dataset integration to get clear monthly progress reporting

• Sector/clusters IMO's experience and challenges during HNO/ HRP and MSNA, SDR.

• Harmonization of existing dataset with cross sectors and cross department (HMIS, DHIS, IDSR, e-Health) to bring on single platform.

• Improve my ability to conduct HNO process in general

• Improve my ability to perform (Local adaptation, data collection and interpretation, used data and results for action) for some PHIS

services as:

➢ Public situation analysis

➢ Rapid assessment

➢ HESPER scale

➢ EWARS

➢ Health Cluster Bulletin

➢ Operational indicator monitoring

• Tools and template on public health risk analysis, needs assessment, strategic risk assessment

41

• To understand public health information standards required for health cluster operation

The Health Cluster - 14 expectations

• Better understanding of the Health Cluster structure, roles, expectations, and outputs

• Better understanding of the global health cluster

• Broader discussion and brainstorming on different issues related to health cluster in different countries

• Harmonization and standardization of health cluster mandate and operations

• Update on Global health cluster TOR, SOPs

• I want to understand the Global Health Cluster Structure and how it works.

• Handling of Critical Health sector/cluster issues

• I would like to come away with a better understanding of the overall positioning of the cluster vis-a-vis WHO. Where and how does the

cluster function as a part of WHO versus independently - particularly with release of information, bulletins, advocacy, etc? What are

reasonable expectations of support from WHO that the clusters can have? How do we navigate lines of authority when they don't work

according to the proscribed guidelines (i.e. who do we go to, what are our support resources, etc)? These issues have come up in other

meetings I've attended, but I don't feel that it's fully resolved in my mind of what is the "real world" position of the cluster with regards to

WHO (since paper versus practice seems to vary).

• I would like to better understand the application of HCC guidelines. Specifically: -

a) What are the reasons why something is called a cluster versus a health sector working group? In Syria specifically, it seems this

decision was made regionally and with some input from OCHA but I've actually never received a clear answer about why Gaziantep is

a Cluster, but Damascus, Jordan and Northeast Syria are sector working groups. So, what are the factors in making this decision? Who

is consulted and who is the final decision-maker?

b) Also, with cluster "membership" - this seems to apply differently across

various clusters even though there are clear definitions of what constitutes a member. Further - what do we do with non-state actors /

ad hoc government in settings where there are not official government entities? Similarly, the issue raised in #1 above comes into play -

WHO as a member of the cluster with respect to its implementation versus your seemingly "neutral" role of HCC often may cause

blurred lines, particularly when there are instances of double-hatting.

• Under agenda item 1.2, addressing the structural relations, constituting for health cluster, among WHO, OCHA, IASC, and other UN

agencies and NGOs, could be an added value to the topic.

• SAG composition/needs

• Definitions of members, partners, donors, etc.

• Health Cluster Exit/Transitional Strategy / NEXUS

42

• Be active member of the GHC and have more opportunities with WHO

Applying and continuing the learning - 8 expectations

• A path for deployment of newly trained health cluster coordinators/ IMOs to further develop skills on the ground

• By end of the training I want make myself prepared to work for any health cluster coordination system.

• Using learning from this course to apply at country level

• Orientation on the technical content for health cluster coordination and hands on exercises to develop skills needed in the field

• To gain experience from desk top exercises and drop in clinics

• To apply the knowledge gained from the training in my country

• Learning how to better organize a simulation exercise in the training, comparing the past experiences of exercises in HELP and UNDAC

courses.

• (Develop) soft skills that are useful in performing the health cluster coordination role

• At the end of the training to be confident on coordinating the health cluster on behalf of the WHO at the country level and conduct

operations as per required global standards

Lessons and good practice - 8 expectations

• Lessons and best practices and challenges in health sector/cluster coordination in different types of humanitarian emergencies.

• Refreshing my knowledge and understanding of disaster management and response by learning the most up-to-date and evidence-

based information and skills from the course and hearing lessons learned from past experiences

• To share experience with colleagues from GHC and other countries.

• Experience sharing, and lessons learnt from sticky situations in health cluster coordination from previous emergencies WHO has responded

to

• Exchange experiences with other participants regarding their current practices in relation to some topics addressed during the training

(interactive approach). Interaction with WHO and MoH participants who are currently leading health clusters in refugee related

humanitarian settings versus natural hazard related settings with only IDPs to compare notes with my experience and learn.

• Insights and sharing of practices on the mechanisms available for coordination of partners in countries which do not fully endorse the IASC

cluster system,

• To share the experience and lessons learnt in the part response in public health emergencies and outbreaks of diseases.

• Sharing experiences with/from other countries

Coordination Challenges and Issues – 7 expectations

• Challenges in Coordination and how to overcome (want to know some common challenges of health cluster coordination, EMT

Coordination and other coordination cells)

• On a global level, it seems humanitarian principles are being increasingly tested and often watered down in complex emergencies like

Syria, Gaza, and Yemen. How are we navigating this from the HCC perspective? Can we look at specific case examples of political

43

challenges to upholding humanitarian principles and the right to health and how we have successfully and unsuccessfully responded

(perhaps in the simulation)?

• I want to know the important components of Health Cluster Coordination

• Emergency medical team coordination and WHO CO IMS Would like to learn about how the fairly new WHO Incident Management

System is subsuming and facilitating the functioning of the more established Health Cluster system? What are the best practices and what

are the challenges and tensions from the ground?

• EOC functions in emergencies and IMO’s role to facilitate stakeholders

• EOC operations how it links or work with the existing Health Cluster architecture.

• As for the situation in Syria: the LNGOs have taken many tasks which were previously functions of the Ministries. I want to have among the

trainings, how to reduce reliance on NGOs in providing health services and other services and do not get a gap in services at the present

time.

• To acquire basic knowledge a country focal point requires in relation to health cluster and its coordination

Understanding the role of the HCC – 5 expectations

• Role/place of the health cluster coordinator in WHE structure and clear lines of responsibilities

• Further UNDERSTAND the role of HCC as WHO (agency staff member) to serve as HCC for the CLA for Health i.e. WHO, since HCC is

responsible for facilitating and coordinating the engagement of all health partners including WHO in countries

• Clarify Role of HCC in the context or New Ways of Working (NWOW), Humanitarian Development and Peace Nexus (HDPN) and Collective

Outcomes (COs)

• Further UNDERSTAND the role of HCC in Inter-cluster coordination mechanism.

• Review Country HC ToRs, adaptation? have a better understanding of support modalities by the GHC to coordinators operating in the

field.

Networking - 4 expectations

• Knowing people who work for 'disaster management and response' in WHO and developing a network for future collaboration and

coordination in disaster management and response.

• Meet with experts and peers to share knowledge, experiences, and advice

• Get to know key counterparts in other areas of WHO and the world

• To establish network with other colleagues in the health emergency response that is in favour of knowledge, skill and Human Resource

sharing during events.

Inter Cluster/Partner Coordination – 2 expectations

• Inter cluster coordination specially with WASH during cholera outbreak, Nutrition cluster treatment of SAM cases

44

• To learn the key skills on health cluster coordination that are applicable in the field when response to events that need multiple partners’

joint response

Plus

Added value in the existing health cluster response like GBV, Cash, AAP, etc.

Advocacy / resource mobilization within the health cluster work

Relationship between Cash Transfer Programme and Health Cluster Response in Emergencies (give money to the disaster-affected people to

buy drugs is not a good thing which may create Anti-Microbial Resistance, on the other hand health care service is totally free for the affected

people)

45

ANNEX 5: FINAL PARTICIPANTS EVALUATION OF WHOLE TRAINING Role Team Overall

rating

Why have you

given this rating?

What are your key

Learnings from this

training

Which 5 sessions or

learning activities

contributed most to

your learning and

development?

Why did you

choose these

sessions/activities?

(Optional)

Were any critical themes

missing, or inadequately

addressed, in this

training? If yes, which

ones? (Optional)

In addition to

learning about

Health Cluster

Coordination, what

else have you

gained from

participating in this

training?

Do you have any other

comments about this

training, or how we

could improve future

trainings?

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Alpha 3 Because I feel it

was good ;)

Exposure to Health

Cluster

Coordination

guidance,

documents and

tools

Heard from other

country and

settings

experiences in

HCC

Session 2.1 c): EWAR

Session 2.2: Needs

assessment and

analysis: Public Health

indicators and

secondary data

analysis (PHSA)

Session 3.1: HeRAMS

Session 3.2:

Humanitarian Needs

Overview (HNO)

Session 5.2 - 5.3:

Resource Mobilization

Most relevant to

my work

Emergency situations

where Health Clusters

not formally activated.

Not L3 events

Established

relationships with

HQ level for further

support at country

level

Allow for one day

break

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Alpha 4 The duration is

perfect, and the

training is followed

by SIMEX which

covered all

aspects of HPC

Personal Health

Cluster

deployment as a

team and

interactions etc.

Refreshed all

aspects of HPC in

term of guidance

notes and

practical exercises

Accountability to

Affected Populations

(AAP); Needs

assessment and


indicators and

secondary data

analysis (PHSA);

Communicable disease

Alerts: GOARN

response; Resource

Mobilization;

Emergency Medical

Teams

These sessions

helped me to get

further clarity of

my role as HCC

I personally feel, more

practical examples for

the session on HNO

process and

Preparedness,

Contingency planning

(PPE), looking at the

different level of

understating of

Participants

I have learnt a lot

during discussions

I personally feel, GHC

require to organize a

two or three days

workshop inviting

WCOs inviting both

WCO WHE and the

dedicated HCC to

clarify the roles of both

positions

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Alpha 4 All the theory

sessions with

excellent

facilitation and

presentation. The

practical learning

through the SIMEX-

all very useful for

health cluster

work.

All the sessions from

day one to day 9

with simulation

exercise were

equally important

and valuable, and

I will try to use in

the health cluster

work.

Session 1.1: Updates

from the Global Level

Session 1.2: Health

Cluster Coordination

Overview – Critical

Health Cluster

Coordination Issues.

4.3: Humanitarian

Response Planning.

Session 2.2: Needs

These are the most

relevant topics

and areas for day

to day cluster

work.

Very comprehensive

training and so many

themes covered. It

would not be possible to

have additional themes

and topics included

within this period of time.

Knowing so many

colleagues and

friends. An

opportunity for

networking.

Overall an excellent

organization,

facilitation and

management of the

training.

46

assessment and


indicators and

secondary data

analysis (PHSA)

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Alpha 3 It was good

overall; nice

balance of

knowledge and

experience

sharing from peers

and facilitators

and exercises

including group

work and

simulation;

opportunities for

more in-depth

discussion through

clinics and the

consistent attempt

at providing

feedback to the

teams and

individual

Participants. I did

not score it

excellent sine

there are clear

opportunities for

improvement!

1. Opportunity to

systematically go

through the entire

humanitarian

programme cycle

sequentially with

the right amount of

knowledge base

refreshing,

interaction,

experience sharing

and exercises to

bring home the key

points

2. Opportunity to

learn more about

the manner in

which conflict

related complex

and protracted

emergencies are

managed - an

area in which I

have relatively less

experience

3. Discussions on

some of the newer

topics such as AAP,

Cash modalities,

Attacks on health

services; public

health information

frameworks and

tools being

developed; cross

cutting issues;

standby

partnership

arrangements; and

leadership /

interpersonal

interaction "soft"

competencies

Session 1.3 a:

Accountability to


(AAP)

Session 2.1 a): Public

Health Information

Services (PHIS)

standards

Session 3.1: HeRAMS

Session 3.3 a): Cross-

cutting issues

Session 3.4: Health

Cluster Coordinators -

Humanitarian

Development Nexus

capacity building

Session 4.1: CASH

programming

Clinic: Collaborative

Leadership & Team

building

Clinic: AAP

Clinic: Coordination

challenges

These were

relatively newer

topic for me in

terms of aligning

my thinking and

perspectives on

these issues with

what is going on in

the humanitarian

arena and

especially the

official

organizational

perspectives

The inter- relation and

harmonization of the

planning cycles and

plans - ERP, HRP,

Contingency Planning

and BCP was quite

inadequate and would

need much more clarity

in thinking, interrogation

of concepts and

presentation with

authentic expertise

2. Harmonizing the

Public Health

Emergencies /

International Concern as

per IHR and the Natural

Hazards / Complex

emergencies

management concepts

and approaches; the

WHO Incident

Management System

and the Cluster based

management

approach; region and

context specific

iterations of the cluster

management versus

other humanitarian

coordination

approaches

Deliberate

engagement with

and reflection on

the soft skills /

competencies

needed for

functioning as a

HCC / high

performing team;

networking with

peers and

facilitators; learning

from the different,

varied and rich

experiences and

perspectives of

peers and

facilitators

Harmonization of

concepts and

approaches as per

WHE reform;

Breakfast options was

completely

monotonous

throughout the training

period - I am more

used to variety since it

is the major meal for

me!

47

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Alpha 4 I learnt a lot from

experienced

trainers, facilitators

and other

participants on

health cluster

coordination.

I have learnt how

to prepare for

donor meetings,

how to produce

relevant

documents (SitRep,

HNO, Flash Appeal,

HRP, Health Cluster

Bulletin etc.), How

to communicate

with different

actors (MoH, Ngo

Communities and

other UN

agencies).

Session 1.1: Updates

from the Global Level;

Session 1.2: Health

Cluster Coordination

Overview – Critical

Health Cluster

Coordination Issues;

Session 2.1 b): Needs

Assessment and

Analysis: What

information is needed;

Session 5.2 - 5.3:


and Session 6.4: Cluster

Coordination

Performance

Monitoring (CCPM)

Very relevant with

my country level

cluster activities

Health EOC, Civil Military

Coordination and Risk

Communication

How to handle

donor community,

Cluster

Coordination

Performance

Monitoring, Working

experience with

new team members

with a new type of

situations in SIMEX

(Conflict, Disease

Outbreak)

Scenario should be

changed. It would be

better if we select

natural disaster and it

should be focused on

Health EOC, EMT

deployment, Civil

Military Coordination

etc.

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Alpha 4 I developed

myself much in

terms of my

knowledge

attitudes as well as

skills. Also learnt

much on

conducting

training programs

The HC functions

and challenges in

different settings

More on

humanitarian

principles and

practices

Information

products related to

HC

1.2

2.1

3.1

4.1

4.2

Some aspects

were new e.g.

cash program

Very interesting

especially the

discussions around

it

More on leadership

maybe as it is critical

I learnt so much

about the different

contexts colleagues

are working in

It’s great. I really wish

there would be a good

training like this on

leadership

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Bravo 3 The training

covered majority

of what I had

expected,

however some

topics were basic

and took too

much time!

Have a better idea

about the role of

the cluster, and

sharing

experiences with

participants from

all over the world

Session 1.3 a:

Accountability to


(AAP)

Session 1.4:

Collaborative

Leadership - Styles

Reflection Group

Session 2.2: Needs

assessment and


indicators and

secondary data

analysis (PHSA)

Session 5.1:

Humanitarian response

Monitoring

Session 5.2 - 5.3:


Sessions were

practical more

than theoretical

\- Sharing information \-

48

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Bravo 2 Based on the

overall sessions,

content, trainers,

use of time

HNO, HRP,

HeRams, and cash

programming, HDN

and that ultimately

there is no right

answer by the

book, it’s about

assessing what’s

most relevant and

useful for the

emergency

content one is in

2.1 A thru c; 2.2; 3.4;4.1 Best content and

best presenter and

new information

A network of

colleagues around

the world to reach

out to, actually

performing similar

tasks. And often this

wealth of

experience is even

more useful and

relevant than

reaching out to HQ

Choose a different

location if possible

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Bravo 4 Good balance

between

mentoring and

SIMEX activities -

between learning

and practice

Moving forward in

changing

environment

PHSA, Gabriel's clinic,

HNO, HDN, HeRAMS

Most professionally

done and

interesting

PPE could be done

better

Importance of

teamworking

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Bravo 3 Much of my

expectations were

met

I can understand

PIN and donor

relations

All They are all very

important

Costing of the plans Shared experience

and networking

Would like to be

involved in future

training

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Bravo 4 Content was

good and had

good

coordination from

the team

Key cluster

deliverables,

working in HPC

cycle, information

and assessment

3.2 and 1.2, 6.4 \- there were the

areas I needed to

learn more

HIV \-Team work, donor

engagement

Public

Health

System

Information

Officer

Charlie 4 Very good course,

well designed and

delivered by

experts.

Health Cluster

coordination,

HeRAMS, RRA, HRP,

Needs Assessment,

Group Exercises,

SIMEX- practical

scenario-based

learning.

2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 5.1, 6.4 Learning from peer -

diverse group

coming from

different

background and

working settings

Thank you for

organizing this Global

level learning/training

programme, and

opportunity for us

working in developing

& low resource setting.

Looking forward to

having such training in

future, particularly a

separate IMO training

course using tools and

technology.

49

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Charlie 2 While it was

necessarily

comprehensive for

persons new to

the role of HCC,

for those already

in the position,

much of it was

very redundant. It

would have been

nice to have the

opportunity to

either complete

other related,

advance courses

online OR involve

more seasoned

HCCs in

presentations to

help develop our

skills as

trainers/facilitators.

Overall, the most

helpful was to

bolster my learning

around M&E and

also understand

what resources are

available through

other pathways:

1. Appreciated the

Needs Analysis

(2.2) session as well

as the

Humanitarian

Response

Monitoring (5.1) as

this is an area I'm

less strong in.

2. HeRAMS session

was very grounded

in practical

application. Really

appreciated the

"real world

application"

aspect of this

session"

3. Learning about

GOARN and the

kind of resources

they offer was also

super helpful.

2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 5.1, 6.3a Please see answer

in #6

1. How to leverage

iMMAP

2. More practice likely

needed for folks around

navigating the

OCHA/Inter cluster

space which is *QUITE*

political

3. Similarly, how to

navigate the reality of

WHO politics (vis-a-vis

the WR, WCO team, IMS,

etc who are often far

more difficult than

actors)

4. Consensus

building/conflict

mediation

Appreciated the

change to meet

and network with

folks from other

country settings and

also the HQ

counterparts for

things like PHIS.

1. The evaluation

portion of the SIMEX

needs a complete

overhaul

2. Have advanced

options for those who

are already well-versed

in certain topics (like

HNO/HRP)

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Charlie 4 It was a good

opportunity for

learning,

networking and

exchanging

experience

Cash

programming,

Emergency

Medical Teams,

GOARN and

information

management

I did not attend clinics

as I had to catch up

with some competing

priorities from the

country office and we

were instructed to

dedicate our daytime

for the training course

1.1; 1.3; 2.1; 4.1

and 6.1

It would have been

good if risk

communication were

included in the course.

Communication that

includes bulletins, press

releases, sitreps, etc.

I have networked

with brilliant

colleagues from

different regions, it

was all fun with

networking and

learning exercises.

The training was good,

days were long and

exhausted. It is the

longest single training

that I have ever

attended. We could

probably shorten the

number of days and

focus on gaps. The

training was

comprehensive and

had basic and

advanced elements

that have prolonged

the number of days.

50

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Charlie 4 good exercise to

manage the such

emergency

Team work, division

of the tasks.

Accountability to


(AAP)

CASH programming

no no CASH programming no

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Charlie 3 I think the training

was well

organized and the

facilitators were

very engaging. I

have also learned

a lot from other

peers. However,

the training was

somewhat quite

long, especially on

the presentation.

I have mentioned

this in the

evaluation of

SIMEX.

Session 6.2:

Preparedness,

Contingency planning

(PPE)

Session 2.2: Needs

assessment and


indicators and

secondary data

analysis (PHSA)

Session 4.2 – 4.3:

Humanitarian Response

Planning

Session 2.1 a): Public

Health Information

Services (PHIS)

standards

Session 3.1: HeRAMS

Session 3.2:

Humanitarian Needs

Overview (HNO)

networking Make the presentations

more concise and

dedicate more time for

desktop exercises and.

SIMEX

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Charlie 4 It is practical,

informative,

exceeded

expectations and

applicable in

routine work

WHO role in the

health cluster, how

clusters are run in

different regions,

experience of

facilitators and

participants, soft

skills needed for a

HCCT

2.1 (all) 2.2,2.3,3.2,4.2-

4.3

Technically

relevant,

practically

applicable,

content wise rich,

facilitation was

superb

Enough for this course Different styles of

different regions,

experience of other

professionals and

need of using

expertise in multiple

areas in HC

coordination

Develop a e learn

platform and keep the

Moodle accessible for

participants to refer

materials

Public

Health

System

Information

Officer

Charlie 3 It was a very good

opportunity for me

to learn about the

whole health

cluster

coordination and

do the SIMEX.

Team bonding and

leadership was

something that I

learn from my

colleagues. SIMEX

helps me to have

the experience to

work in an intense

situation.

1.3; 3.1; 4.1; 2.4 & 6.2 These sessions

were not familiar

to me and I learnt

a lot.

I have learnt a lot

from my colleagues

There should be more

capacity building

session during the

training and I haven’t

seen any. It was a long

train day training we

could have also build

our skills in these times.

51

Public

Health

System

Information

Officer

Delta 3 to strengthen my

knowledge with all

Health Cluster's

related info

I learned huge

information which

could lead me to

better work-related

aspects and

career path vision

2.3, 2.4, 3.1, 3.2,4.4, 5.1,

3.3

I found that I had

experience in such

field and the

information was

clear enough for

me to give my

analysis to the

situation and the

information.

the overall picture on

how to connect all

these themes in order to

complete the needed

achievements (one big

puzzle)

That I have the

capability and

knowledge,

although I am

working in WHO

since a year, to do

more than IMO,

and to contribute

more in many

related fields of HC.

less lectures' timing and

more exercises

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Delta 2 The best part of

this training was

unable to meet

with wonderful

colleagues from

all over the world.

Their knowledge

and experiences

were impressive,

and I really

appreciated and

enjoyed talking.

As for the training,

it was good to

learn a couple of

new tools to use in

disaster.

Meeting with

global colleagues

1.3, 1.4, 4.1, 6.1 a&b, 6.3

a&b

Informative and

interesting

lectures, well-

structured slides

Missing the session of

sharing field experiences

and participatory and

problem-solving style of

lectures

Meeting and

knowing wonderful

colleagues working

for Health Cluster

The training organizer

should carefully plan

and clarify objectives

and outcomes of the

training, and select

appropriate

participants based on

the objectives. It is

better to introduce

more innovative style

of training for the sake

of the best use of

money and time to

advocate HC system

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Delta 3 This was very

relevant; the

facilitators were

excellent, and the

contents were

also relevant to

our areas of work

I personally had

chance to not only

learn but could use

the practically in

the simulation

exercise for

example, planning

process,

developing flash

appeals, JC

bulletin

All the sessions were

relevant, but HNO,

cluster coordination,

inter cluster

coordination, desktop

exercise,

communicable

diseases, contingency

planning.

These are more

relevant, and I am

dealing with it

more than others

Practical session need

assessment, using the

tools for example using

MIRA

Lots of practical

experience from

colleagues who

had experiences of

a variety of

emergency

responses

Generally, I enjoyed

the training, taking

something from the

training, expanded

relationships with the

colleagues from other

regions which will help

us sharing of

information and

experiences in the

future as well.

52

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Delta 4 Real life situations

and pressure.

Feedback process

HNO

Flash appeal

Meeting with

government

Teamwork

Leadership

Mentoring

1.4

2.1

3.2

4.3

5.3

Already

mentioned

Coordination and

expected TOR towards

Manager

Mentioned already Nothing significant

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Delta 3 I am pleased to

practice the

standard

templates during

the simulation

exercise and

group work.

I contributed my

technical insight in

preparation of

flash appeal and

public health

situation analysis

during the SIMEX. I

made a

presentation for

HRP during the

group work. I

believe I provided

some good

contribution in the

meeting with MoHS

and the donors

group during the

SIMEX.

Section 3.4;5.1;5.2;

6.1;6.3;

These sessions

provided new

knowledge to me.

There is no perfect

health cluster.

Communication is

important for a

health cluster

coordinator.

Health cluster team

needs good support

from WHO country

office. The future

trainings could be

improved by

integrating some

helpful topic on how

health cluster will link to

incident management

system of WHO.

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Delta 3 The theory part

was too slow and

took too long

Networking,

exchange

experiences

1.1

Cash

HeRAMS

New information

that I could not

access before

Role of regional

partnership officers

How to select/engage

members, partners HCC,

roles, responsibilities,

accountabilities

Meet peers No

Health

Cluster

Coordinator

Delta 4 The trainers are

really trained,

ready and prompt

to deliver their

knowledge to the

trainees. They

were able to

respond to any

question asked by

a trainee. The

atmosphere was

very friendly

Patience to

listening other even

what they are

saying is not totally

true. AAP. How to

deal with donors

during a meeting

Clinic 1.3.a: AAP Because,

sometimes we are

not on the fields

with the affected

population and it

is the partners who

are giving us the

feedback: the

population wants

this or that.

When a proposal like

flash appeal project is

accepted and funded,

sometimes it is a

headache with the

award issues and one or

two months will passed

before we start the

project. Luckily, we have

the CFE.

Groupe work under

pressure. To receive

with patience what

the colleague is

saying and then

comment after he

finished to talk.

The training was good

but too much sugar in

the refreshments

53

ANNEX 5: PARTICIPANTS DAILY EVALUATIONS DAYS 1 – 6

Which Sessions contributed most to your Learning?

54

How will you use this learning in your work?

A visual summary of Participants feedback about using their learning from Days 1 to 6 and the

Final Evaluation showing that most Participants were actively reflecting on how they could apply

their learning about the Health Cluster in their work at national and sub national level.

Additional Participant Feedback from Days 1 – 6

The detailed feedback for each session was shared with the whole Training Team as the training

ran and will be kept by the GHCU for future reference.

Day Positive Constructive 1 • Opportunities to network with

colleagues – Participants and

Training Team

• Participants enjoyed the practical

learning activities

• Good timekeeping and keeping

to the agenda

• Have shorter power point presentation and

allow more time for discussion and sharing of

field experience

• Give more concrete examples

• Share case studies from other contexts

• Keep discussion on track and focussed

• Improve timekeeping

2 • Very informative sessions

• More interactive and practical

• Sessions on PHIS and PHSA very

useful

• Very relevant to the field

• Allow more time for practical exercises

• Some of the sessions were too short

• Have more technical sessions for IMOs

• Food good, but too much sugar during breaks

• Build in some time off for Participants

3 • Practical sessions continue to be

appreciated

• First and last sessions very good

(HeRAMS and

Humanitarian/Development

Nexus)

• Sharing experience from L3

countries

• “Warm Facilitators

• Overall a good day

• Share learning objectives with the Participants

• Some sessions are too long and can become

boring

• Vary the Presenters

• Ensure sessions are updated

• Some questions from the Participants too long –

Trainers and Facilitators should control this more

4 • Group exercises are good – lets

have more of them

• Enjoyed the interaction with

colleagues and the lively and

“heated” debate and discussions

• Ensure time for Q&A at the end of all sessions

• Ensure all Participants have done the pre-

reading

• Have more energisers and lively presenters

• Provide more prep for SIMEX

• Have more on acute and chronic

emergencies in non-conflict contexts

5 • Interactive sessions and group

work are “great”

• Enthusiasms of Presenters

• CEFF session very good and useful

• An excellent day and I learnt a lot

• “Keep it up”

• Improve the use of the microphone

• Have faster presentation of some of the power

points

• Allow more time for the CERF exercise

• Have shorter breaks

6 • GOARN session was good

• Appreciated more time for Q&A

and discussion

• Clear sessions

• Good to have a training summary

at the end of the day

• Some sessions too didactic and needed to be

more focussed

• Give more time to some of the sessions and

allow more time for group work

• Review the session on Contingency Planning

• Provide a glossary of terms and acronyms

55

ANNEX 6: PARTICIPANTS FEEDBACK FROM THE SIMEX

Ro

le

Tea

m

The

SIME

X

met

my

exp

ecta

tions

Facilit

ation

was

effect

ive

Logist

ical

set

up

was

appr

opria

te

Refere

nce

materi

als

were

releva

nt

Conte

nts

were

releva

nt

Debrie

fing

was

effecti

ve

Durati

on of

the

SIMEX

was

about

right

The

pace

of the

SIMEX

was

about

right

Durati

on of

the

debrie

fing

was

about

right

My key learnings

were…

Suggested improvements Other comments

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Alp

ha

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Too

slo

w

Ju

st f

ine

Managing

emergency

response

requirements with

a diverse team in

terms of

background and

experience

Have a smaller team, for

some phases there was not

enough to do for everyone

None

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

t

or

Alp

ha

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

My understanding

of the functions of

the HC and the

HCC

None None

He

alth

Clu

ste

r C

oo

rdin

ato

r

Alp

ha

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Team work is

crucial as we do

apply as HCC

during our day-to-

day work which

was demonstrated

during simulations

Not really, it was perfect Excellently organized by a

team of our professional

colleagues

56

He

alth

Clu

ste

r C

oo

rdin

ato

r

Alp

ha

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

"1. The sequential

progression of the

humanitarian

programming

cycle and the

different actions

and products that

are expected of

the health cluster

1. Smaller size groups (max

5) to provide more

opportunities for all

members to take on the

critical roles and also to

induce more urgency since

this would better mimic

real-life situation

2. Opportunity in at least a

few interaction sessions for

the key actors to be able

to show alternate ways of

managing the situation /

approaching the

interaction rather than

being provided feedback

on a single attempt even if

that could be the default

mode of action /

interaction of the individual

I am firmly of the view that the

opportunity to simultaneously

simulate the activation of the

WHE Incident Management

System given that the teams

were large was completely

missed. This reiterates and

reinforces the "silo"

approaches at emergency

management - cluster, WHO

incident management team,

EMT-CC etc functioning

almost as if they are

standalone entities - that I

"presume" the ongoing WHE

emergency management

reform seeks to address!

He

alth

Clu

ste

r C

oo

rdin

ato

r

Alp

ha

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Too

lon

g

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

I have learnt (1)

how to prepare

presentation, how

to handle them in

donor meeting, (2)

what kind of

materials (Need

assessment,

situation report,

flash appeal, HNO,

PHSA etc.) need to

be produced

during emergency

time.

From cluster perspective,

natural disaster (Flood,

Cyclone or Earthquake)

would be fine instead of

man-made disaster

(conflict, disease

outbreak).

HEOC, Civil Military

Coordination, EMT could be

added with the scenario

rather than GOARN.

57

He

alth

Clu

ste

r C

oo

rdin

ato

r

Alp

ha

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Global updates,

EPRP, contingency

planning, EWARNS,

health cluster

coordination tools,

assessment, flash

appeal, HNO,

GOARN

mobilization,

practical skills

through SIMEX,

accountability,

HeRAMS, and

several other

sessions were very

useful.

It was excellent simulation. Organization including all

logistics - accommodations,

travel, food, facilitation all

aspects of the HCC training

have been an excellent.

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Bra

vo

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Too

lon

g

Too

fa

st

Ju

st f

ine

I learnt a lot in IM,

HNO process,

working with

OCHA, HERAMs

Importance to

health cluster work,

team work

spacing in information

flow, the scenario to be

read well in advance

Good training and well

organised

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Bra

vo

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Too

sh

ort

Debriefing process

was somehow

short but was

effective as it was

directly after the

end of each task

To search for new

scenarios from participants

experiences

.

Pu

blic

He

alth

Info

rma

tio

n

Se

rvic

es

Off

ice

r

Bra

vo

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Too

lon

g

Too

slo

w

Ju

st f

ine

Communication

skills, team work,

and donor

approaching

More interaction between

the facilitators and trainees

58

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Bra

vo

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Information flow

within HCC

mechanism

Specific roles should be

assigned to each

participant in the group

H

ea

lth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Bra

vo

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Too

sh

ort

Too

fa

st

Too

sh

ort

Partnership donor

relationship and

PIN

More time for SIMEX Grateful for the chance to

attend

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Bra

vo

So

me

wh

at

dis

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

dis

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Too

sh

ort

Ju

st f

ine

Too

lon

g

The simulation

exercise was the

most useful part of

the training

Could have had more

deliverables that were

hands on, beyond just

products

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

t

or

Bra

vo

So

me

wh

a

t a

gre

e

So

me

wh

a

t a

gre

e

So

me

wh

a

t a

gre

e

So

me

wh

a

t a

gre

e

So

me

wh

a

t a

gre

e

So

me

wh

a

t a

gre

e

Ju

st f

ine

Too

slo

w

Ju

st f

ine

na na na

Pu

blic

He

alth

Info

rma

tio

n

Se

rvic

es

Off

ice

r

Ch

arlie

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Able to learn

knowledge in

coordination and

time management

and task division

among the team.

Some short field exercise

(outside of hotel - open

ground or in a tent)

None

Pu

blic

He

alth

Info

rma

tio

n

Se

rvic

es

Off

ice

r

Bra

vo

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Too

lon

g

Too

slo

w

Ju

st f

ine

Communication

skills, team work,

and donor

approaching

More interaction between

the facilitators and trainees

59

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Bra

vo

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Information flow

within HCC

mechanism

Specific roles should be

assigned to each

participant in the group

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

t

or

Bra

vo

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Too

sh

ort

Too

fa

st

Too

sh

ort

Partnership donor

relationship and

PIN

More time for SIMEX Grateful for the chance to

attend

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Bra

vo

So

me

wh

at

dis

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

dis

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Too

sh

ort

Ju

st f

ine

Too

lon

g

The simulation

exercise was the

most useful part of

the training

Could have had more

deliverables that were

hands on, beyond just

products

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Bra

vo

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Too

slo

w

Ju

st f

ine

na na na

Pu

blic

He

alth

Info

rma

tio

n

Se

rvic

es

Off

ice

r

Ch

arlie

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Able to learn

knowledge in

coordination and

time management

and task division

among the team.

Some short field exercise

(outside of hotel - open

ground or in a tent)

None

60

He

alth

Clu

ste

r C

oo

rdin

ato

r

Ch

arlie

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

The most relevant

parts were

a) seeing how

other colleagues

thinking process

worked and how

their prioritized

various

motives/informatio

n

b) being pushed

by non-

cooperative

counterparts in

MOH/local

authorities/local

leaders and trying

to work around

that

1. Assign roles

2. Do some rotation within

the teams and/or late

arrival of some colleagues

(as if more people are

being deployed to the

emergency)

3. Include barriers WITHIN

WHO (like WR disagreeing

with you or EOC/IMS

excluding you)

4. Be clearer from the start

if folks should abide by the

ACTUAL ROLE of the HCC

and therefore execute key

tasks even without being

asked -OR- if they should

wait to be prompted for

specific deliverables.

We can see that a lot of effort

and time went into preparing

this training. Thank you for the

investment and the sincerity

of all of the facilitators and

supports - there was a lot of

respect shown for our

learning.

He

alth

Clu

ste

r C

oo

rdin

ato

r

Ch

arlie

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

The simulation was

an opportunity to

share field

experience with

other colleagues.

Team members

came from

different

experiences and

some of them had

no emergency

experience or are

new to the context

of emergency. It

was a fun time to

exchange and

support each

other. A key

learning item for

me during the

exercise was IM

and EWARS part as

I am not expert in

these two fields.

I think it would be good to

consistent when giving

feedback to trainees.

Sometimes there were

some inconsistencies

between the debriefing

team. Feedback was

mostly on the areas of

gaps and little attention

was paid to the positive

side. But in fact, this

depended on the person

who was giving the

feedback.

N/A

61

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Ch

arlie

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Too

sh

ort

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Team work, and

leadership

more time for the exercise \- H

ea

lth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Ch

arlie

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

I have learned

both hard and soft

skills from the SIMEX

However, I may

need to reflect on

the skills I have

learned from the

whole training and

apply to my daily

work.

If possible, shorten the

presentation and extend a

bit more on SIMEX.

NA

He

alth

Clu

ste

r C

oo

rdin

ato

r

Ch

arlie

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

The simulation was

an opportunity to

share field

experience with

other colleagues.

Team members

came from

different

experiences and

some of them had

no emergency

experience or are

new to the context

of emergency. It

was a fun time to

exchange and

support each

other. A key

learning item for

me during the

exercise was IM

and EWARS part as

I am not expert in

these two fields.

I think it would be good to

consistent when giving

feedback to trainees.

Sometimes there were

some inconsistencies

between the debriefing

team. Feedback was

mostly on the areas of

gaps and little attention

was paid to the positive

side. But in fact, this

depended on the person

who was giving the

feedback.

N/A

62

Pu

blic

He

alth

Info

rma

tio

n

Se

rvic

es

Off

ice

r

Ch

arlie

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

"1. Team building

and work under

different leadership

H

ea

lth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

Ch

arlie

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Too

sh

ort

Too

fa

st

Ju

st f

ine

"Team work.

Pu

blic

He

alth

In

form

atio

n S

erv

ice

s O

ffic

er

De

lta

So

me

wh

at

dis

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

dis

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Too

fa

st

Ju

st f

ine

to work under

pressure with a

team is my strength

key element,

which I improved

it, especially

dealing with Health

Emergency Plans,

reports, analysis. all

were clear to me

but I didn't get the

chance in most of

the time during the

simulation to

practice my

knowledge and

my capacity to

deliver.

Better briefing about how it

would go. The seniors in

each group to give the

group more space to

deliver, work and give

opinions in order to learn.

I am wondering if you can

provide us with information on

how to be registered in the

health cluster roster for any

future good and better work

opportunities.

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

De

lta

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Too

sh

ort

Too

fa

st

Ju

st f

ine

\-Went through

the planning

process

- had the

opportunity to

work on HC bulletin

\- too many people in the

group, so everyone did not

have the chance to lead

the team-

generally, I found the

simulation a very recap of all

the training sessions and how

to practically apply them.

63

Pu

blic

He

alth

In

form

atio

n S

erv

ice

s O

ffic

er

De

lta

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Although I have

gone through

many real

emergency

situations. But in this

simulation my

concepts are very

clear for team

work, leadership,

sequence of work

and more

cooperation with

coordinator for

better outcome.

However, I can

confidently

provide backup

support for

coordination work

during

coordinator's

leave, R&R or

contract break

period.

I think simulation is

comprehensive enough

H

ea

lth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

De

lta

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

There is no perfect

health cluster in

the world. I

recognize the

need to improve

my

communication

skill and I will put

my best effort to

improve

communication.

This simulation could be

better in explaining the

process before it started.

I am very glad to learn from

GHC team in Geneva and to

share experience among the

colleagues from all the

regions.

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

De

lta

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Able to effectively

coach and

encourage others

No No

64

He

alth

Clu

ste

r

Co

ord

ina

tor

De

lta

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Too

sh

ort

Too

fa

st

Ju

st f

ine

Work under

pressure- the time

to response to an

email with an

appropriate

response, another

request is injected.

Donors meeting is

very important

(how to deal with

donors)

Give more time not to

large but adequately

H

ea

lth

Clu

ste

r C

oo

rdin

ato

r

De

lta

So

me

wh

at

dis

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

dis

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

ag

ree

Too

sh

ort

Ju

st f

ine

Ju

st f

ine

Challenges and

excitements to

work with

multicultural

people with

different

background and

cultures for

achieving one

goal. This training

was as if

experiencing the

coordination

challenges of the

health cluster in

the real world.

The team composition

could be more thoughtful

based the participants

background. The team

dynamics affects the

modality of working and

produced results.

Facilitators can be a bit more

culturally sensitive especially

to evaluate the participants.

Communication skill is very

subjective. The facilitators

should be a good listener, not

a talking or persuading the

norm what they consider

standard.

Pu

blic

He

alth

Info

rma

tio

n S

erv

ice

s

Off

ice

r

De

lta

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

ag

ree

So

me

wh

at

dis

ag

ree

Too

lon

g

Too

slo

w

Too

lon

g

SIMEX is a role

playing, if you are

advising to restrain

your capacities as

a coordinator, I

assumed you

cannot have a real

competencies

evaluation.

Advocacy: Clearly define

the advocacy in terms of

the health cluster (health

issues advocacy) instead

been generic and not able

to properly communicate

the advocacy role of the

cluster.

Use the PHC as the working

base for all presentations.

(Tools, products, functions, etc

against the cycle)!

65

ANNEX 7: FEEDBACK FROM THE TRAINING TEAM ON LINE SURVEY

The purpose of the survey was to inform decisions about the development and strengthening of future direct training. Fourteen members of the

twenty-four members of the Training Team completed the survey by 4 December 2018.

Training Team Member Role Overall

what

rating

would

you give

to this

training?

What are your

thoughts on how

your session went

and what changes

you would make

(if any) to future

similar sessions?

What are your

thoughts on how the

SIMEX went and how

it could be further

developed and

strengthened?

With regard to future

direct training what do

you recommend we

should retain/keep the

same?

With regard to future

direct training what do

you recommend we

should change, add or

strengthen?

Do you have any

other feedback

about the planning,

preparation and

delivery of the

training which took

place 21 – 29

November 2018?

Alaa Abouzeid

Team Lead,

Operational

Partnership

Session Trainer,

SIMEX Role Player

4 Non It went well. Presentations should be

shorter with more time

for discussions. Separate

HCCs from IMOs. Make

sure that there is

minimum

level/experience, so the

participants can get the

benefit of the training.

As mentioned before No

Alex Rosewell

Health Specialist

GOARN

Session Training,

SIMEX Support

3 Further detailing

the session plan

with key

competencies

tested etc. could

be a

consideration, as

well as hot debrief

training/refresher

for facilitators,

highlighting the

key elements to

bring out. Consider

structured debrief

with all groups

rather than

individually per

team so all can

learn from other

sessions.

Looked good. Work

with GOARN for

GOARN part. Happy

to be involved, as is

Polly Wallace.

No comment No comment No

66

Corentin Piroux

Intern in LCD Dept

SIMEX Support 4 I think the overall

enthusiasm of

participants and

facilitators

throughout the

sessions shows that

they went pretty

well.

I think the

participants

understood the

need of going

through this type of

exercise and got the

full experience the

SIMEX actually

implies. From what I

saw, they really took

this opportunity to

improve their know-

how. With more or

less interest and

involvement among

the participants, I

think they all tried to

put into practice the

theories they had

learnt earlier and

that's mainly why the

SIMEX went well too.

Definitely, the SIMEX

which shows exactly

how people work and

interact with each other

in a fast-paced

environment

I think a follow-up on

the good practices

learnt and

experienced during

the SIMEX would help

them have a clearer

understanding of all

the aspects they cover

during the plenary

sessions after having

lived them during the

SIMEX

No

Emma Fitzpatrick

Technical Officer

GHCU

Training Manager,

SIMEX Role Player.

I ran one clinic on

AAP and adjusted

and supported

desktop exercises

throughout the

training

4 I think all the

sessions went well.

I would possibly

suggest more

focused pre-

session/ training

tasks to rather

than just the pre-

reading. Especially

with such a wide

range of

knowledge and

experience of the

group

More team

members, so the

people in charge of

the technical

feedback are not

also called upon to

role play

I think it is helpful to

have a core group of

trainers throughout the

entire period. I also

think we should aim to

keep the entire training

to under 5 days.

Keep the training to

five days. Welcome

reception on the day

of arrival (possibly

include an update

from the Global Level

then). Then move into

1 day of targeted

sessions. 2-3 days of

scenario-based

training but during

normal working hours.

After each main task,

there is time to stop,

feedback and discuss

in detail, and then the

solutions is provided, to

be used for the next

phase in the scenario.

Offer clinic in the

evenings if the

scenario is stopped by

It was helpful to have

the trainers identified

in advance, so they

could update their

presentations in

advance.

67

18.00. Then the final

day for discussions of

any remaining

technical areas of

concern and

evaluation

Gabriel Novelo Sierra,

HCC Ukraine

Session Trainer,

SIMEX Technical

Advisor, - principle

feedback, SIMEX

Role Player

3 Overall, I think the

training and SIMEX

has become too

long in duration

and should stay

relying more on e-

learning for at

least 30% of the

theoretical section

I thought the teams

were a bit too large

this time around and

we should aim to

work with smaller

groups next time,

also we should try to

make sure the

number of IMOs is

more balanced

As mentioned before, I

think that some of the

pre-reading should be

reinforced by e-learning

components and the

face to face training

should focus on

practical examples and

SIMEX

The sessions on AAP

and advocacy need

to be completely

reworked as I think

they were sub-par and

should be improved as

participants were

expecting more on

these topics

Gillian O’Connell

Consultant GHCU

Event Co-

Facilitator, Session

Trainer, SIMEX Role

Player

3 Session 1.4.

Collaborative

Leadership.

Participants

enjoyed the

practical exercises

– need to tighten

the link between

situational

leadership and the

SIMEX

Smaller team sizes

and update the

injects. Review and

strengthen the

personal

competency

assessment tool

SIMEX and focus on

individual learning

objectives.

Blend with eLearning

and mentoring. Enable

effective peer review

of session plans. Have

more information

about the Participants

i.e. review the target

group

This is a very good

training and its

remarkable how the

GHCU puts it all

together

Hyo Jeong Kim

Attacks on Health

Care Focal Point at

HQ

Session Trainer,

SIMEX Role Player

3 I believe the

session went well

as planned, but a

bit more time may

have helped to

address some of

the points raised in

the Q&A as

reflected in the

participant

feedback on the

session. Also, the

different level of

understanding

among the

participants on the

Attacks on Health

The SIMEX was

interesting and well

organized. The

assessment tool was

a new one for me, so

it took me a bit of

time to understand

and comment on it.

It would be useful to

link the tool with the

sessions as well as

the SIMEX as it is

difficult to judge

people properly

based on limited

interaction.

A more adapted

version of the

assessment tool

Some more time for

the attacks on health

care session would be

great, to better

address the points

raised by the

participants.

68

Care Initiative was

a bit challenging

to manage. But I

believe the

objective of

having people

know of this

approach, and

the need to think

about it in their

response was well

achieved.

Karim Yassmineh

External Relations

Officer

Session Trainer,

I delivered 3

sessions on

resource

mobilisation

covering the

following areas: 1-

Pooled funds

mechanisms, 2-

RM Overview 3-

Engagement with

donors. followed

by 2 exercises

4 I think the

interaction was

great, all

participants

engaged in the

discussion. Given

the different

background of the

participants and

to meet the

expectation of

maximum number;

I would suggest

sharing a quick

survey ahead of

the training on the

topics that we are

planning to cover,

that would allow

us to test the

knowledge of the

participants and

check how deep

they would like us

to go on the

proposed topics.

Unfortunately, I

could not

participate at the

SIMEX

As the majority of

participants enjoyed

the RM sessions. I would

recommend keeping it

the same. bearing in

mind that the PPTs were

prepared collectively

by group of experts in

RM. I would

recommend not to

organize the 3 sessions

successively.

Please check the

above answer.

No

Linda Doull Session Trainer,

SIMEX Role Player

3 The first session on

global level

updates always

receives mixed

feedback - as

some participants

Overall the SIMEX

went well, given the

relatively small

support team, but

areas for

improvement

I wasn't present

throughout the entire

course so will provide

feedback based on

review of final written

evaluation feedback.

I wasn't present

throughout the entire

course so will provide

feedback based on

review of final written

evaluation feedback.

Earlier discussion on

the competency

assessment would

have been helpful.

SIMEX material

update needs to be

69

more aware of

issues than others,

but overall

feedback was

positive. Might be

more interesting to

incorporate a

'quick-quiz'

approach for

some sections to

improve

participant

engagement.

include more

attention to detail on

the information

provided (ensure it is

fully up-to-date),

ensure role players

are chosen to 'play

to their

strengths/subject

matter expertise &

ensure role players

focus on the reality

/learning objectives.

Participants I spoke

with suggested the

need to alter session

on X-cutting issues/HIV

& overview of cluster

coordination. The

approach to assessing

participant

competencies needs

to be re-thought.

more complete in

advance of the

training.

Oliver Stucke

Technical Officer

Competency-

based assessment

& participant

feedback

3 Overall the

competency

assessment

worked, and

individual

feedback seems

to have been

appreciated.

- Difficulties arose

from the fact that

participants

compared

individual scores

- Improvements

are required in the

preparation of

assessors to ensure

more standardised

scoring and limit

extreme scoring

(scores 0 and 3) to

behaviours that

merit such a score.

Last minute

changes and

modifications to the

scenario and roles

created

unnecessary stress

and workload. The

more an agreed

scenario is

respected, the easier

it becomes to run

the SIMEX

I think participants enjoy

learning through

practical exercises.

Accordingly, I would

keep the simulation

part. Classroom

teaching may need to

be front loaded (online

learning) in parts and

real focus given on

exercising practical skills

that can be applied in

the simulation later.

Additional thought

should be put into

aligning classroom

content with the SIMEX

tasks. It is e.g. to

observes desired

behaviour, if such

behaviour has not

been defined

previously. E.g. a lot of

tasks revolved around

meeting management

and coordination of

partners, yet there was

no session on good

meeting management

practices or the

definition of objectives

for partner

coordination. Even

though this is the "daily

work" of HCCs, there

seems to be no

common standard in

place.

- I personally missed

stronger references to

the ERF, which actually

provides some good

guidance and can

help structure

Overall, meeting

preparation was very

good, and the venue

was nice.

70

interventions,

especially at the

beginning of an

emergency.

- The design should

also focus more on the

"why". Many tasks are

requested in a

mechanical way, but

reasons behind the

tasks are not always

clear (as they may

seem obvious to

faculty members, but

not to participants).

- Finally, it may be

worthwhile to apply

clear criteria for the

selection of

participants. Too wide

a range of experience

and expertise is

sometimes difficult to

manage. Also a clear,

demonstrated

motivation for learning

and development is a

pre-requisite.

Monta Reinfeld

Digital

Communications

Consultant

SIMEX Support 4 I enjoyed my roles

as an information

manager and role

player for media.

Overall, I think

both tasks went

well. Maybe for

the next one, we

could put in place

a plan of action

on how to respond

to very technical

questions on the

email, taking into

consideration that

the person

I think that the

simulation exercise

was very successful

and so much

valuable feedback

was provided to

participants. I think it

was very nice in 2017

that we went outside

as well to do some

roles, we should do

that again next time.

We should definitely

keep giving a lot of

feedback to

participants and also

allow participants give

feedback to us.

Continue having a two-

way communication

and experience sharing

with participants

throughout the training,

as opposed to just

lecturing.

We could add a few

more tasks participants

need to do

mandatory, otherwise

some teams were

doing much more than

others. We could

expand the

communication role

play to include more

participants.

The training was

great and all staff

putting it together

and carrying it out

were amazing! Really

nice, fun and

professional group!

I'm so happy and

thankful I could be a

part of this and would

love to contribute in

the next training as

well.

71

responding to the

emails is not a

technical expert

and that people

who are technical

experts are doing

their own roles and

they don't have

time to respond.

Regarding media

role play, I agree

with what I heard

from some

participants that

this session should

be expanded, so

more people are

given the chance

to participate.

Otherwise only

one person from

each team was

involved.

Patricia Kormoss

Operational

Partnership Officer

EURO

Session Trainer,

SIMEX Technical

Advisor – Principle

Feedback, SIMEX

Role Player

3 I believe the

session went well

as planned, but a

bit more time may

have helped to

address some of

the points raised in

the Q&A as

reflected in the

participant

feedback on the

session. Also the

different level of

understanding

among the

Participants on the

Attacks on Health

Care Initiative was

a bit challenging

to manage. But I

believe the

The SIMEX was

interesting and well

organized. The

assessment tool was

a new one for me so

it took me a bit of

time to understand

and comment on it.

It would be useful to

link the tool with the

sessions as well as

the SIMEX as it is

difficult to judge

people properly

based on limited

interaction.

A more adapted

version of the

assessment tool

Some more time for

the attacks on health

care session would be

great, to better

address the points

raised by the

participants.

I believe the session

went well as planned,

but a bit more time

may have helped to

address some of the

points raised in the

Q&A as reflected in

the participant

feedback on the

session. Also the

different level of

understanding

among the

participants on the

Attacks on Health

Care Initiative was a

bit challenging to

manage. But I

believe the objective

of having people

know of this

72

objective of

having people

know of this

approach, and

the need to think

about it in their

response was well

achieved.

approach, and the

need to think about it

in their response was

well achieved.

Silvia Sanchez

Intern GHCU

Secretariat, SIMEX

Support

4 The Simex must have

an updated

scenario and the

materials must be

revised because

some of the

information was not

matching. It was

evident for the

participants. The

simulations is the

strongest art of the

training and learners

were very motivated

during the process.

The evaluation for

participants through

SIMEX is not very

strong, even if the

tools, such as the

matrix, is very well

developed. I think a

peer evaluation

could be included at

the end of the SIMEX.

The organization, the

SIMEX, the trainers and

most important, the

daily feedback and all

the modifications made

during the training to

adapt the content and

methodology. Was

obvious for the

participants that we

were paying attention

to their opinions and

thoughts.

The participants must

have the same level to

achieve the learning

objectives. I think it is

during the selection

process and

according to the

experience of them. I

felt some frustration

from those who were

the most experienced

while most of the

group was learning

because everything

was new. To have

different levels could

be a starting point to

develop a second part

of the training, for

those who already

have the

competencies and

skills of this training.

I loved working on it.

Was very fun, I

learned a lot and it

reinforced my

professional

motivation to pursue

a career in the

humanitarian sector.

Date post:	25-Apr-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

HEALTH CLUSTER COORDINATION TRAINING...3 1.SUMMARY This fifth Health Cluster Coordination Training...

Documents