Joint Evaluation: Collective Site Management and Coordination (CSMC) in Informal Tented Settlements (ITSs) – Lebanon

Report
from Concern Worldwide, Norwegian Refugee Council
Published on 16 Nov 2016 View Original

The purpose of this evaluation is to provide evidence based information on the effectiveness and connectedness of the CSMC response in Lebanon.

Since 2013, humanitarian agencies in Lebanon have been implementing Collective Site Management and Coordination (CSMC) programmes. The CSMC aims to ensure that refugees are protected and assisted effectively by plaing a role in building the capacity of refugees who are resident in the collective sites and in linking them to the local authorities, service providers and the surrounding neighbourhood. Seven agencies implement CSMC programmes in Lebanon and three participate in this evaluation; Concern Worldwide, Organisation B and the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC).

The purpose of the evaluation is to provide Concern, Organisation B, and NRC (as well as the wider CSMC Task Force and its stakeholders) with evidence based information on the effectiveness and connectedness of the CSMC response, its appropriateness to the context, and recommendations for future implementation.

The key learning identified in NRC's management response to the evaluation is as follows: 

  • There is a need for a stronger focus on outcomes in terms of meeting basic needs, with community capacity building as an instrumental part of this but not an end in its own right - i.e. the traditional ‘camp manager’ role needs to be emphasised more (coordination, advocating for needs/gaps to be covered, etc.), which is a strategic shift that needs to be reflected in NRC's Theory of Change and Macro Log Frame Approach, plus shift in thinking of programme staff.  It also leads to a rethinking of our assumptions about exit.
  • Improving targeting of the most vulnerable within CSMC approaches, both in terms of selection of areas and sites, as well as identification and referrals of individual residents within sites.  Also suggests a need to enhance our own service offer for the most vulnerable.
  • Development of municipal approaches, with better linkages between different stakeholders, and clearer targets for improvement in service provision and protection within the defined area
  • Improving the efficiency of CSMC to reach more sites, including small and extra-small sites, though this is something that NRC was praised for in the evaluation due to its clustering approached and use of focal points rather than full committees in smaller sites.
  • Enhancing effectiveness of committees to engage with service providers through rethinking of committee structure, membership, and roles/responsibilities while also rethinking the ‘Shawish’ role and how to mitigate the protection risks of his presence in CSMC sites
  • Making better use of technology to enhance two-way communication with and information dissemination among refugees
  • Considering ways in which CSMC methodologies can be applied to refugees living outside of collective sites (the ‘Urban Displacement and Out of Camps’ approach)