HUMANITARIAN INFORMATION CENTRE IN PAKISTAN 
JOINT REVIEW MISSION 
REPORT 
7 – 15 February 2006 
United Kingdom Department for International Development 
European Commission Directorate General for Humanitarian Aid – ECHO 
United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs 
United States Agency for International Development/Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
2 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 5
PAKISTAN DEPLOYMENT ................................................................................................................... 6
Findings:.........................................................................................................................................................6
Recommendations: ........................................................................................................................................8
(a) Pre-deployment Preparedness...................................................................................................................8
(b) Deployment ................................................................................................................................................8
(c) Human Resources......................................................................................................................................8
(d) Operational Issues .....................................................................................................................................9
THE HUMANITARIAN INFORMATION CENTRE CONCEPT............................................................... 9
Findings:.........................................................................................................................................................9
Recommendations: ......................................................................................................................................10
(a) The relationship with OCHA.....................................................................................................................10
(b) Physical location of the HIC .....................................................................................................................10
(c) Managing Expectations ............................................................................................................................10
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT AND THE CLUSTER APPROACH ..................... 11
Findings:.......................................................................................................................................................11
Recommendations: ......................................................................................................................................11
(a) Linkages to the IASC and the Humanitarian Reform Agenda..................................................................11
(b) Donor Action.............................................................................................................................................12
(c) Operational Level .....................................................................................................................................12
Annex 1................................................................................................................................................ 13
Summary of Recommendations - Table and Implementation Timeline.......................................................13
Annex 2................................................................................................................................................ 16
Core Products and Timelines for Humanitarian Information Centres ..........................................................16
Annex 3................................................................................................................................................ 19
IASC Approved Humanitarian Information Centre Concept Paper (February 2003)...................................19
Annex 4................................................................................................................................................ 22
Mission Programme .....................................................................................................................................22
The Review Team members would like to express their thanks to the United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator 
in Pakistan and United Nations Country Team for their constructive engagement in the review process. Particular 
thanks are due to the outgoing and incoming HIC Managers and the staff of the Humanitarian Information 
Centre, all of whom provided the team with excellent support, advice and guidance throughout the mission. Their 
positive and spirited engagement in the review process is testament to their dedication to the cause of ensuring 
the relevance of information management to humanitarian response. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
3 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
Humanitarian Information Centres (HICs) manage information to support the coordination of response to natural 
disasters and complex emergencies. As such, they provide a common service to the humanitarian community. 
Since 1999 13 HICs have been deployed to a variety of humanitarian emergencies1
. It is only in the last 2 years 
that HICs have been deployed to natural disasters; to Sri Lanka and Indonesia in response to the Indian Ocean 
earthquake/tsunami and more recently to the South Asia earthquake in Pakistan. 
The health of each HIC is a reflection of the state of information sharing and management in a specific response. 
Although understanding the situation on the ground is something that the entire response community requires, 
as is indicated by the high expectations placed upon the HIC, sufficient priority is not given to develop 
information management capacity within all organisations responding to the crisis in order to have access to the 
information required to produce the “big picture”. Similarly, information management has not been addressed in 
the humanitarian reform agenda. The findings of this review confirm this state of affairs. 
This was the first joint review of a humanitarian information centre involving the HIC’s three key donors, DFID, 
EC-ECHO and USAID, together with OCHA. It has been acknowledged that complementary funding 
mechanisms provide flexibility and appropriate resources to support HICs. In this case, EC-ECHO provides 
thematic funding to OCHA to strengthen its information management capacity across the Office, as well as 
geographical funding for individual HICs; DFID provides the HIC equipment module, funding for individual HICs, 
and staff secondments; and USAID/OFDA provides funding for the OCHA/FIS, an HIC Rapid Response Fund, 
technical assistance, and staff secondments. The Review Team notes that this joint review has been essential to 
enhance mutual understanding among OCHA and its donors and ensure that the HIC concept maintains its 
relevance in what is an ever-changing environment. 
Based on this review, the decision to deploy the HIC was correct and timely. However, as at the end of January 
2006 the Pakistan HIC had only partially fulfilled its potential due to a number of both internal and external 
factors. 
Key issues which require attention at the strategic level are as follows: 
(a) Lessons identified in both the 2004 USAID/DFID evaluation of HICs and the 2005 OCHA/ECHO 
monitoring mission to Sumatra and Sri Lanka have been only minimally implemented. While recognizing 
that constraints prevented full implementation of these recommendations it is now imperative that OCHA 
turn these lessons learned into lessons applied. 
(b) The issue of analysis of information produced by the HIC for operational and strategic decision-support 
remains unresolved. While this is a product of the lack of clarity in the relationship between OCHA and 
the HIC it has a direct impact on the coordination function. OCHA needs to take ownership of the HIC 
concept and make full use of its potential. The HIC, when deployed, needs to ensure that it is relevant to 
the coordination and operational requirements of the situation. 
(c) Further, the HIC has not provided clarity on its common service role to the wider humanitarian 
community, nor clarified the mutual expectations and obligations of both the HIC and its stakeholders. 
The HIC needs to produce clear and concise materials which explain its role and function and what it 
needs in order to do its job. Improved outreach programmes to UN agencies and NGOs providing much 
greater clarity on the role of the HIC need to be put into place. This is an urgent priority if the HIC is to 
retain the confidence of its constituents. 
 
1
 1999 – Kosovo 
 2000 - Eritrea, Sierra Leone 
 2001 - Afghanistan 
 2002 – Goma (Democratic Republic of the Congo), occupied Palestinian territory 
 2003 - Iraq, Liberia 
 2004 - Darfur (Sudan) 
2005 – Sumatra (Indonesia), Sri Lanka, Niger, Pakistan. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
4 
(d) OCHA needs to take ownership of the cluster approach and make full use of its potential. The cluster 
approach needs to ensure that it is relevant to the coordination and operational requirements of the 
situation. The cluster approach has not incorporated information management practice as a key element 
of coordination and the implementation of this approach in this specific crisis has revealed new and 
significant challenges to the HIC’s capacity to respond. This needs to be addressed through the ongoing 
humanitarian reform process. 
(e) Sole location at the capital level means that the HIC is disconnected from its key clients and providers. 
The HIC must deploy to the site of the response operation. It must also ensure that the work done in the 
field is synchronized with the development of applications/formats in other field offices and the capital. 
(f) Not all products have to be produced at the HIC. The HIC has options; the Geographic Information 
Support Team has GIS capacity to assist in data integration, cartography and analysis. Better use 
should be made of this and other available resources. 
Coordination is about identifying gaps and avoiding duplication. All humanitarian stakeholders are responsible to 
ensure that information is given in a timely manner. OCHA has a central and unique role to play in providing 
leadership and coordinating the efforts of the international community. The reform of the humanitarian system 
provides a timely window of opportunity to ensure that better information management practice by all 
stakeholders ensures effective coordination. We should not lose this momentum. The necessary measures and 
systems must be put into place before the next natural disaster strikes. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
5 
INTRODUCTION 
1. A review team, consisting of Sarah Telford from the UK Department for International Development, Montse 
Pantaleoni from the European Commission Directorate General for Humanitarian Aid – ECHO, Rhonda 
Davis Stewart from the United States Agency for International Development/Office of US Foreign Disaster 
Assistance and Oliver Lacey-Hall from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs 
visited Pakistan between 7 and 15 February 2006. 
2. Pre-agreed terms of reference highlighted the following areas of enquiry: 
a. a review of the HIC concept since its initial development and the agreed IASC endorsed Terms of 
Reference (Feb 2003) with reference to the HIC Evaluation (USAID/DFID) of 2004 and the Humanitarian 
Response Review (2005); 
b. examination of the extent to which the recommendations of the ECHO-OCHA Joint Monitoring Mission 
to Tsunami affected countries (April 2005) were implemented in the context of the Pakistan HIC 
deployment; 
c. a broad review of the deployment, activities, relationships with stakeholders and proposed transition of 
the Humanitarian Information Centre in Pakistan, through semi-structured stakeholder interviews and a 
review of HIC products and services; 
d. a wider review of the extent to which information management culture has developed in the 
humanitarian community (including Government and donors) in Pakistan, and a related assessment of 
the extent to which the implementation of the Humanitarian Response Review (particularly the “cluster” 
coordination framework) has impacted upon the development of an information management culture in 
humanitarian response. 
3. The methodology adopted for the mission consisted of semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders (see 
Mission Programme at Annex 4) One two-day field trip was undertaken to Muzaffarabad. Due to prevailing 
security restrictions a planned mission to Mansehra and Battagram was cancelled. 
4. A review of the terms of reference during the mission indicated that they required some revision on the basis 
of findings. Thus, this mission report is structured around three key areas. These are (i) the Pakistan 
deployment, (ii) the humanitarian information centre concept, (iii) the information management environment 
and the cluster approach to coordination. 
5. The review team found that the recommendations stemming from the USAID/DFID Evaluation of HICs in 
2004 and the joint ECHO-OCHA mission to HICs in Sri Lanka and Sumatra in 2004 remained only partially 
implemented, with key recommendations not addressed. The Review Team recognised that the absence of 
a Manager at OCHA’s Field Information Support Project in New York between May and November 2005, 
and the pressures for FIS in providing oversight management and support a total of six humanitarian 
information centres during 2005, had diverted attention away from ensuring implementation of the 
recommendations. However, the Review Team fully expects OCHA to now move forward rapidly on the 
implementation of the recommendations from this Review Mission, many of which are not substantially 
different from those identified in the USAID/DFID Evaluation and the joint ECHO/OCHA mission report. 
6. This report aims to identify issues and areas where improvements can be made to future deployments of 
humanitarian information centres. Where corrective actions are applicable to the Pakistan HIC these have 
been addressed through OCHA’s management channels. The recommendations arising from the mission 
findings aim to be realistic. The table at Annex 1 lays out the recommendations, together with identification 
of the concerned action entity and a timeline. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
6 
7. The findings of the review team conclude that the decision to deploy the HIC to Pakistan was correct. While 
not always in a timely manner, the HIC has produced basic coordination tools2
, provided some technical 
support to cluster lead agencies and NGO partners, integrated available government and UN data, provided 
capacity building support for government and other entities, and developed a “MapPak” – a map CD-Rom 
which enables non-GIS computer users to access and generate thematic maps. 
8. Offset against these achievements are a number of systemic, management and operational issues which 
can be applied, in most cases, more broadly to the Humanitarian Information Centre concept. After 13 HIC 
deployments since 1999 the team’s findings revealed that a partial lack of clarity remained on what the HIC 
is supposed to do and who is responsible for providing it with strategic guidance. The 2003 IASC agreed 
concept paper on the HIC (Annex 3), while a useful tool in terms of describing deployment modalities, does 
not sufficiently define the concrete role of the HIC in emergency response nor the respective roles of the HIC 
and OCHA. Further, the document was clearly written in the context of response to complex emergencies. 
This was the third HIC deployment to a natural disaster. It is clear that the modus operandi for natural 
disaster response differs considerably with that applied to complex emergencies. The different timelines and 
pressures between response to natural disasters and complex emergencies and the additional lack of clarity 
in this deployment related to the implementation of the cluster approach to coordination increased the 
challenges faced in Pakistan. 
9. On the basis of the findings of the review team it is clear that a number of steps need to be taken to ensure 
that stakeholders understand the role the HIC plays. Further stakeholders need to better understand their 
role in making the HIC relevant and effective in emergency response. A number of these issues cannot be 
addressed at the start of each emergency, but rather need to be settled away from the emergency arena 
and mainstreamed into OCHA management structures, the inter-agency standing committee processes and 
the humanitarian reform. Finally, expectations need to be better managed both within the HIC and by its 
stakeholders. 
PAKISTAN DEPLOYMENT 
Findings:
ƒ HICs, particularly in a rapid onset disaster, need a Technical Coordinator who is deputy to the HIC Manager. 
These are two full time roles that need to be filled if the HIC response is to be effective. Lack of a Technical 
Coordinator was a key problem in Pakistan. 
ƒ 
ƒ Synergies between MapAction and the HIC were not clear during the first two weeks of the response 
operation while Map Action was in-country providing early mapping support to the UNDAC Team. 
ƒ Deployment of the HIC was timely, with good initial team deployed, but deployment times were too short 
leading to a high turnover of staff. 
ƒ Recruiting and retaining the right staff with appropriate skills and training is difficult for all elements of 
humanitarian response. 
ƒ While the initial staff surge was sufficient the initial start up phase may have benefited from additional staff 
being deployed to meet the overwhelming challenges faced by the HIC. 
ƒ The lack of trained roster candidates led to confusion on roles and responsibilities within the HIC and 
tensions developed over quality versus timeliness. 
ƒ The indecision on the part of the wider United Nations family on where to locate its coordination 
headquarters (initially in Islamabad, then in Muzaffarabad and finally returning to Islamabad) influenced the 
eventual location of the HIC and limited HIC presence in the hubs. The HIC ended up being too far removed 
from the field operation. 
 
2
 Who What Where database, Contact Directory, Maps, standard list of place names. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
7 
ƒ Set-up time was affected by the need to load software once the HIC module had arrived in Pakistan. 
ƒ The introduction of the cluster system further confused how the HIC interacted with the humanitarian 
community. 
ƒ The HIC was seen as too passive in its data gathering and outreach. 
ƒ The humanitarian community was confused about the role of the HIC and the products and services they 
could expect to receive and what data and information inputs they were expected to provide to the HIC. 
ƒ Very little analysis was undertaken of available data collected and processed by the HIC. This is not a new 
phenomenon. There appears to be no entity within the humanitarian system specifically assigned to 
undertake such analysis, which is essential for effective humanitarian coordination. 
ƒ Administrative arrangements for local staff via UNDP, while good, remain an impediment to rapid 
recruitment. Further, contractual conditions for staff hired by OCHA during emergencies remain poor with 
staff generally hired under special service agreements. 
ƒ Lack of administrative support at the beginning of the operation detracted from the HIC Manager’s ability to 
provide guidance of the HIC. 
ƒ Links to other common services (particularly the JLC) worked well later, but would have benefited from co￾location throughout the response operation. 
ƒ The HIC’s role in the initial rapid assessment process is unclear. Well coordinated assessment was also 
lacking in this operation, which is a chronic issue. 
ƒ A lack of procedures and formats for HIC product development weakened the capacity of the HIC to produce 
what was required. 
ƒ A lack of standardized data made it difficult to produce meaningful analysis. 
ƒ Lack of user surveys and other monitoring tools meant that it was difficult to measure the value-added the 
HIC can provide. 
ƒ Reliable maps were unavailable due to political sensitivities and security issues. 
ƒ Standard village lists were difficult to develop due to the mountainous terrain; people are dispersed and 
village boundaries are not clearly defined. 
ƒ The Government-issued list of village and place codes had severe errors leading to loss of trust in 
subsequent lists. This affected the HIC’s credibility and hampered information management efforts. 
ƒ The HIC website was hacked. 
ƒ Internet connectivity between Islamabad and the hubs was variable, sometimes causing delays in data 
transfer. 
ƒ Too much reliance was placed on websites as an information conduit in an environment where connectivity 
in the field was poor. 
ƒ The HIC sometimes relies too much on ‘high tech’ solutions. When a low tech approach can produce a 
timely product the HIC should make use of it. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
8 
Recommendations:
(a) Pre-deployment Preparedness 
ƒ Computer software, data structures, manuals/guidelines/policies/TORs and standard templates need to be 
preloaded on computers. 
ƒ The HIC toolbox needs to be updated and less focused on examples of past products. 
ƒ Basic preparedness needs to improve in terms of product availability (e.g. MapPak, reference maps etc). 
ƒ A file transfer protocol (FTP) server needs to be included in the deployment module rather than relying on 
external ftp servers. This is particularly problematic when connectivity is poor as it often is in the immediate 
aftermath of an emergency. 
ƒ An HIC website should be established by OCHA New York as soon as an HIC is deployed. It should be 
populated from HQs with generic HIC materials. However links to empty parts of the website should be kept 
closed and hidden until data has been populated. 
ƒ A checklist of what is available outside the emergency arena needs to be made available to the HIC which 
covers the role and services of the Geographic Information Support Team (GIST), and technical and 
operational support from FIS New York. 
ƒ FIS needs to better set up linkages and procedures with partners. It should be clear that FIS will set up the 
Web Site, the GIST can provide surge capacity for data preparedness and that the University of Georgia will 
share and integrate the data. 
(b) Deployment 
ƒ Discussions should be held with the Field Coordination Support Section, OCHA Geneva to ensure that IM 
capacity is routinely incorporated into UNDAC Teams. 
ƒ Information management staff deployed as part of the UNDAC team should advise the Humanitarian 
Coordinator on whether deployment of an HIC is warranted. Except in exceptional circumstances OCHA’s 
management systems should await a request from the HC. 
ƒ A standby agreement or MoU needs to be concluded with Map Action to ensure (a) clarity on 
responsibilities, (b) agreement on standards, (c) handover from Map Action to either information 
management staff within the UNDAC Team or HIC if deployed. 
ƒ A product list and delivery timeline needs to be developed. (See Annex 2, which serves as a basis to 
develop this tool). 
ƒ HIC deployments should be primarily field based, with a small team based at the capital level. 
ƒ OCHA should consider “front loading” staff in natural disaster response in order to meet the large variety of 
needs at the onset of the emergency. Retrenchment can take place once the initial ‘rush’ is over. 
(c) Human Resources 
ƒ A minimum of two HIC training courses should be held each year. The training curricula needs to be 
adjusted to ensure that staff clearly understand the realities of emergency work. Training also needs to link 
the specifics of each skill set to the overall role of the HIC. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
9 
ƒ Induction materials need to be developed for deployed staff who may not have received training or for those 
needing a refresher course. 
ƒ Telephone or face-to-face briefings by FIS and Desk staff must be mandatory for all those being deployed. 
ƒ For the HIC it is essential that a well-trained, well-disciplined team of experienced staff are deployed at the 
onset of the establishment of an HIC (i.e. the second “wave” after the initial surge team has completed its 
work) and that they remain in situ for no less than three months, preferably six. 
ƒ Orientation and familiarization with the HIC should be mandatory for national staff. Staff meetings should be 
held on a regular basis at each location. Regular workshops involving all staff (whether capital or field 
based) should be held. 
ƒ A global MoU should be concluded between OCHA and UNDP, highlighting the emergency requirements 
related to recruitment of local staff. 
ƒ An Operations Support Officer must be deployed at the start of any HIC deployment. In cases where OCHA 
Geneva is unable to provide sufficient capacity to service the needs of both the OCHA Office and the HIC, 
FIS should make arrangements to deploy the required support. 
(d) Operational Issues 
ƒ Analysis of HIC generated data needs to be undertaken. The issue of analysis, which has been debated 
since the inception of the HIC concept needs to be addressed institutionally, away from the emergency 
arena, preferably at the IASC Working Group Level. 
ƒ Agreement needs to be reached as soon as possible in each response operation by the proposed local level 
Inter-Cluster Working Group on Information Management with regard to: 
o The boundary of the affected area; 
o The administrative unit to be used for initial assessment purposes; 
o The administrative unit to be used for short- and medium- term planning purposes. 
ƒ Provision of telecommunications support, while exemplary for Islamabad and Muzaffarabad, was not good in 
other hubs. The IAET and OCHA’s communications surge capacity needs to ensure that all field locations 
are provided with connectivity as a matter of priority. 
ƒ Rough analysis of data and orientation products should be made available while work on refining data is 
ongoing. This requires a clear division of labour within the HIC. 
ƒ An online community of practice needs to be established for current and former HIC staff. (FIS/GIST/ITOS 
etc.) 
THE HUMANITARIAN INFORMATION CENTRE CONCEPT 
Findings: 
ƒ The HIC concept is not well understood by its stakeholders. The services it is expected to provide are 
multiple and often unrealistic. 
ƒ The institutional relationship with OCHA is weak and reliant upon goodwill on both sides to make the system 
work. 
ƒ Systems and processes within the HIC are weak. This, combined with high staff turnover, means that the 
processes and systems are reinvented each time staff rotate. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
10 
ƒ Links to external information providers, and particularly the GIST, are unclear and need to be better defined. 
The role of the GIST needs to be improved through reinvigoration of its policy role. 
ƒ The new cluster system provides an opportunity for a more structured information environment. This will 
allow the HIC to thrive and improve its relevance and effectiveness to humanitarian response and also 
improve data management and coordination. 
ƒ The HIC is viewed as a common service but its management by OCHA and related strategic direction are 
confused. 
ƒ The issue of analysis of data requires resolution (see above). 
ƒ Monitoring of the use of the HIC needs to be better institutionalized and more regular. 
Recommendations: 
(a) The relationship with OCHA 
ƒ FIS should draft a terms of reference on the respective roles of OCHA and the HIC to be shared with 
OCHA’s operational managers (i.e. CRD and ESB), which will, inter alia, clarify the relationship while 
maintaining the common service identity of the HIC. 
ƒ OCHA needs to reprofile the emergency response toolbox3
 so that it is a system, rather than a collection of 
separate tools with separate response mechanisms. OCHA needs to put into place a system to make this 
work. (i.e. one stop shop for response tools). 
ƒ Analysis of collected data must be undertaken. The HIC will undertake basic data analysis. Operational and 
strategic analysis needs to be addressed, with OCHA taking the lead and providing the resources for this 
activity. 
ƒ Information management training needs to be mainstreamed into Humanitarian Coordinator, OCHA 
Emergency Field Coordination Training, Civil-Military Coordination Training, UN Disaster Assessment and 
Coordination Team training and others, including future cluster lead agency training. 
(b) Physical location of the HIC 
ƒ The HIC will prioritise deployment to the field, whilst ensuring sufficient backstopping, representation and 
provision of products and services at the capital level. Where possible the HIC should co-locate with OCHA 
and other humanitarian common services in all locations while remaining physically accessible to the wider 
humanitarian community. 
(c) Managing Expectations 
ƒ Expectation management must be addressed through clear initial pre-deployment documentation provided 
to the manager of the emergency response operation (see UNDAC example) to ensure that s/he has a clear 
understanding on what the HIC will be able to provide in terms of support, and what the HIC requires in 
order to fulfill its potential. 
ƒ Outreach materials need to be pre-loaded and printed in order to enable the HIC to publicise its products 
and services once it has established its presence in country. 
 
3
 HIC, UNDAC, CMCoord, USAR, IHP, IAET, JLC, UNHAS, OCHA surge capacity. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
11 
ƒ The HIC is and remains a common coordination support service. Its products are available to the entire 
humanitarian community, in line with the priorities set (See Annex 2). However, in phase 2 and beyond 
priority for customized services will be given to those stakeholders who provide required information and 
data to the HIC. 
ƒ The HIC must aggressively seek out data and act as the driving force for data and information sharing. 
Modalities for this need to be agreed outside the emergency environment with IASC agencies and other 
stakeholders. 
ƒ The HIC must regularly monitor its performance against a set of key indicators and monitoring tools. FIS 
New York should ensure that such surveys are undertaken and the results compiled at Headquarters. 
ƒ In order to ensure essential data collection at the outset of an emergency the HIC should aim to undertake 
primary data collection if required during the first two weeks of the response focusing only on key locations 
and facilities. Concurrently it will focus on secondary data collection. 
ƒ The issue of HIC transition remains contentious. The review team proposes that for natural disaster 
response the lifespan of the HIC should match that of the relief phase, generally no more than six months. 
Thereafter the HIC should hand its data over to the relevant government or UN entity and close down or, if 
requested, maintain a presence, but funded and supported by recovery/reconstruction agencies and donors. 
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT AND THE CLUSTER APPROACH 
Findings: 
ƒ Information management is not given sufficient priority by the humanitarian community and has not been 
addressed in the humanitarian reform agenda. 
ƒ At the most fundamental level a culture of information sharing does not exist among humanitarian actors. 
ƒ Information management expertise is enormously variable within the clusters, agencies, donors and other 
organisations. Within this context common services are unable to support coordination to their full potential. 
ƒ The health of the HIC is a reflection of the state of information sharing and management of a specific 
response. 
Recommendations:
(a) Linkages to the IASC and the Humanitarian Reform Agenda 
ƒ The Inter-Agency Standing Committee should establish an ad hoc IASC Working Group or Task Force on 
information management as a matter of priority and no later than by early April 2006 with terms of reference 
agreed by early May. The Group should have a limited lifespan and clear work plan, with the aim of ensuring 
that IASC members jointly agree on how to address the need to mainstream an information sharing and 
information management culture into humanitarian action. In this process due note should be taken of the 
ongoing humanitarian reform process. 
ƒ On the basis of agreements reached in the proposed ad hoc IASC Working Group on Information 
Management OCHA should formulate draft guidelines on standards and requirements for information 
sharing for (a) cluster lead agencies and other stakeholders at the operational level and (b) for donors to 
share with their implementing partners. 
Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
12 
ƒ The issue of rapid needs assessment needs to be agreed at the IASC level, with IASC agencies agreeing on 
a template format, supported by a robust database, for use in initial rapid assessments at the outset of an 
emergency. It is proposed that the technical (i.e. database) and operational (i.e. resulting template) elements 
of this should be included in the terms of reference of the above-mentioned working group. 
ƒ A best practices in information management in clusters document is to be developed within 9 months by the 
IASC Working Group or Task Force. 
(b) Donor Action 
ƒ Donors should convene a workshop to examine best practices in information management in emergency 
response on the basis of the document produced by the IASC ad hoc Working Group or Task Force on 
Information Management. 
(c) Operational Level 
ƒ A local level inter-cluster information management working group should be established every time an HIC is 
deployed. This should be composed of qualified IM focal points representing their respective clusters and 
should be chaired by the HIC Data Coordinator. It is proposed that generic terms of reference be developed 
by OCHA with support from USAID. 
20th February 2006 
DRAFT - 190206 Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
13 
Annex 1 
Summary of Recommendations - Table and Implementation Timeline 
Area of Enquiry Recommendation Action by Timeline 
1. PAKISTAN DEPLOYMENT 
(a) Pre deployment 
Preparedness 
(i) Computer software, data structures, manuals guidance, policies, terms of 
reference and standard templates to be pre-loaded onto computers. 
FIS New York By end-April 2006 
(ii) The HIC toolbox needs to be updated FIS New York By end-April 2006 
(iii) Basic preparedness needs to improve in terms of product availability 
(development of MapPak, reference maps etc) 
FIS New York/GIST 
(iv) An ftp server needs to be included in the deployment module. FIS New York/DFID For next HIC deployment 
(v) An HIC website should be established by OCHA New York as soon as the HIC 
is deployed. 
FIS and ITS New York. For next HIC deployment 
(b) Deployment (i) Insertion of information management capacity into UNDAC Teams as and 
when required. 
FIS New York and FCSS 
Geneva 
By end-March 2006 
(ii) Procedures put into place for IM staff deployed as part of the UNDAC Team to 
advise HC on HIC deployment. 
FIS New York By end-March 2006 
(iii) Standby agreement or MoU with MapAction to ensure (a) clarity on 
responsibilities, (b) agreement on standards, (c) handover from MapAction to 
either IM staff or HIC if deployed. 
FIS New York By end-2006 
(iv) Development of product list and timeline FIS New York For inclusion in HIC Toolbox (End￾April 2006) 
(v) Inclusion of requirement for the HIC to be deployed to the site of the response 
in SOPs 
FIS New York For inclusion in HIC Toolbox (End￾April 2006). 
(vi) Front loading of staff for natural disaster response when an HIC is deployed 
with retrenchment after the initial “rush” is over. 
Chief AIMB and Chief IAS To be determined 
(c) Human Resources (i) Two HIC training courses to be conducted each year. FIS New York and DFID May and September 2006 
(ii) Training curricula needs to be adjusted. FIS New York Ongoing (continuous improvement 
process). 
(iii) Induction materials to be developed for staff who have not been trained or who 
need refresher 
FIS New York, SDTS 
Geneva (to include in 
OCHA training) 
Ongoing – aim by mid-2006 
(iv) Telephone or face-to-face briefings by FIS and Desk staff prior to deployment. FIS New York, CRD New 
York and Geneva 
Immediate 
(v) Lengthen assignment length to minimum of three months, preferably six FIS New York, FSS Geneva Begin process immediately –
timeline not yet known. 
(vi) Orientation and familiarization with HIC should be mandatory for all national 
staff, with regular staff meetings and regular workshops. 
FIS New York For inclusions in HIC Toolbox 
(End-April 2006) 
(vii) Global MoU to be concluded with UNDP highlighting emergency requirements 
related to the recruitment of national staff 
FIS New York with AO 
Geneva and EO New York 
Begin process immediately – 
timeline not yet known. 
(viii) Admin Officer or Operations Support Officer to be included at the start of every 
deployment with the capacity to service the needs of OCHA and HIC 
AO Geneva Immediate for FIS. To be 
discussed with AO 
DRAFT - 190206 Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
14 
Area of Enquiry Recommendation Action by Timeline 
(d) Operational Issues (i) Agreement to be reached on who does analysis of HIC processed data FIS New York To be determined – depends on 
when the IASC Working Group is 
formed. 
(ii) Review of IAET and OCHA support for IT to OCHA and HIC outside Islamabad. ITS New York/Geneva Following receipt of paper from IT 
staff in Islamabad. 
(iii) Put into place clear division of labour between those working at the front end of 
the emergency on publishing immediately available data and those who are 
working on longer-term data requirements and standards. 
FIS New York For inclusion in the HIC Toolbox 
(End-April 2006). 
THE HUMANITARIAN INFORMATION CENTRE CONCEPT 
(a) Relationship with OCHA (i) FIS New York to draft a terms of reference on the respective roles of OCHA 
and the HIC which will, inter alia, clarify the OCHA/HIC relationship while 
maintaining the common service identity of OCHA 
FIS New York For inclusion in the HIC Toolbox 
(End-April 2006) . 
(ii) OCHA needs to develop a one-stop-shop for emergency tools. OCHA SMT To be determined (if 
recommendation accepted by 
SMT). 
(iii) Operational and strategic analysis needs to be addressed, with OCHA taking 
the lead and providing the resources for this activity. 
OCHA CRD To be determined (if 
recommendation accepted by 
CRD). 
(iv) Information management training needs to be mainstreamed into OCHA’s 
training courses and for Humanitarian Coordinators. 
FIS New York and SDLS 
Geneva 
Ongoing. 
(b) Physical Location of the 
HIC 
(i) HIC to prioritise deployment to the field, co-located with OCHA and other 
common services while remaining accessible to the wider humanitarian 
community 
FIS New York, in 
consultation with CRD, JLC 
and others. 
Immediate 
(c) Managing Expectations (i) Development of clear documentation to be shared with Emergency Response 
Manager on HIC role, function and operational requirements. 
FIS New York For inclusion in the HIC Toolbox 
(End April 2006) 
(ii) Outreach materials to be pre-loaded and printed for immediate dissemination 
upon arrival. 
FIS New York For inclusion in the HIC Toolbox 
(End-April 2006). 
(iii) Limit access to products and services to those who provide data in Phase II To be determined – 
requires inter-agency 
agreement. 
(iv) Improve synergy between HIC as information processor and cluster-lead 
agencies as providers of information 
FIS New York To be determined – depends on 
when the IASC Working Group is 
formed. 
(v) Improvement in ongoing surveying and M and E of HICs FIS New York For inclusion in the HIC Toolbox 
(End-April 2006) 
(vi) Inclusion of primary data-collection activities in HIC TORs for natural disasters. FIS New York For inclusion in the HIC Toolbox 
(End-April 2006) 
DRAFT - 190206 Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
15 
Area of Enquiry Recommendation Action by Timeline 
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT AND THE CLUSTER APPROACH. 
(a) Linkages to the IASC and 
the Humanitarian Reform 
Agenda 
(i) Establishment of an IASC ad hoc Working Group or Task Force on Information 
Management. 
OCHA SMT As soon as possible. 
(ii) Formulation of guidelines, standards and requirements for information sharing 
for (a) cluster lead agencies and other stakeholders at the operational level and 
(b) donors to share with their implementing partners. 
OCHA FIS To be determined – depends on 
when the IASC Working Group is 
formed. 
(iii) Development of common standards (or identifying ways to make current 
systems compatible) for rapid needs assessment 
IASC ad hoc Working 
Group on IM. 
To be determined – depends on 
when the IASC Working Group is 
formed. 
(iv) A best practices in information management in clusters document to be 
formulated within 9 months 
IASC ad hoc Working 
Group on IM. 
To be determined – depends on 
when the IASC Working Group is 
formed. 
(b) Donor Action (i) Workshop for donors to examine best practice in information management. Donors To be determined but no later than 
November 2006. 
(c) Operational Level (i) A local level inter-cluster working group on information management to be 
convened at the start of each emergency response. 
TORs to be developed by 
FIS and USAID 
For inclusion in the HIC Toolbox 
(End April 2006) 
DRAFT - 190206 Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
16 
Annex 2 
Core Products and Timelines for Humanitarian Information Centres5
Timing Core HIC Activities Comments 
Phase 1 – Week 0 – Week 2 KEY ACTIVITIES
ƒ HIC Office established and running smoothly at capital level (inc ftp server), where possible 
co-located with OCHA/UNDAC. 
ƒ HIC sub-offices in all field locations established alongside OCHA offices 
ƒ National staff hired and briefed on roles and responsibilities 
ƒ Orientation provided to all stakeholders on the role of an HIC in emergency response 
ƒ HIC Website established and regularly updated. 
ƒ Establishment of working group on information management with generic ToRs adapted to 
local situation, chaired by Data Coordinator at capital level and by HIC staff at field offices. 
ƒ Links established with relevant government counterparts (census bureau, statistics bureau 
etc – needs definition). 
ƒ HIC staff conduct quick assessment of key locations and facilities to obtain GPS coordinates 
if not conducted by others. 
ƒ All front of house staff able to respond to enquiries related to critical operational information, 
or to redirect enquiries to those who can answer if the information centre cannot. 
ƒ Keep FIS New York focal point informed of developments (phone/email sufficient) 
particularly relating to institutional issues with OCHA (lack of clarity on roles etc) and needs 
to be directed to key partners and, in particular, the GIST. 
DELIVERABLES
ƒ Schedule of Coordination Meetings 
ƒ Who what where database (W3) 
ƒ Contact Directory (all actors) 
ƒ Pre-disaster population numbers broken down by administrative sub-division or urban 
centre. 
ƒ Operations Officer deployed to establish HIC offices and 
recruit national staff. 
ƒ IT support staff deployed either from OCHA HQs or SRSA. 
ƒ Operations Officer to organize workshop for all staff (Capital 
and field) 
ƒ Hic Manager to attend UNDMT, Cluster Heads and Cluster 
Meetings in capital. Replicated in the field. 
ƒ Generic W3 database to be used 
ƒ Generic Contact Directory to be used. 
ƒ GIST and other data support mechanisms to provide if 
available. 
5 This table is based on the “Identification of Target Groups and Information Products” table produced in 2002. 
DRAFT - 190206 Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
17 
Timing Core HIC Activities Comments 
ƒ Rough estimate of affected population (IDPs, Refugees, affected). 
ƒ Assessment repository established (survey of surveys). 
ƒ Reference maps and atlas available from ITOS 
ƒ HIC Kiosk established and providing basic products including generic “What is an HIC 
leaflet”, base data and data collection templates. 
ƒ Ability to give good on-the-spot briefings to humanitarian managers and visitors 
ƒ Briefing pack available with core HIC products and additional information provided by OCHA 
and Cluster Lead agencies. 
ƒ Daily weather forecast (if applicable). 
ƒ GIST and other data support mechanisms to provide if 
available 
ƒ HIC folders (1000) to be included in module. 
Phase II – Week 2 – Week 6 KEY ACTIVITIES 
ƒ Regular internal HIC meetings (involving staff from capital and field) in place. 
ƒ Reorientation of HIC with greater clarity on division of labour. 
ƒ Aggressive outreach to clusters to source data, working closely with other entities that 
require data (e.g. JLC). 
ƒ Continued visibility of HIC through all available sources. 
ƒ Ongoing partnership building with national institutions including universities and others that 
may be able to support HIC development. 
ƒ Weekly report to FIS New York. 
DELIVERABLES 
ƒ Data (even if very rough) made available in form presentable for gap analysis to be 
conducted and support to OCHA/clusters in interpretation of data if needed/viable. 
ƒ Common place codes that serve as unique identifiers of geographical position either 
obtained from Government counterparts or, if not available, put into place by HIC. 
ƒ Set of common sub-national boundaries (4/5 level) administrative boundaries available and 
agreed by information management working group. 
Attend cluster meetings, general coordination meetings and sell. 
Demonstrate how data can be used to inform planning. 
Work with host nation and UNGWIG, to not overlap national 
boundaries development. 
DRAFT - 190206 Joint DFID, ECHO, OCHA, USAID Review Pakistan – Mission Report 
18 
Timing Core HIC Activities Comments 
ƒ Commonly used names of administrative units of towns/settlements (gazetteer) in the 
affected area sourced and available. 
ƒ Establishment of coordination mechanism flow chart. 
ƒ Operational and strategic maps (including those supporting gap analysis) 
ƒ Consolidation of needs assessments in survey or surveys repository. 
ƒ GIST and other data support mechanisms to provide if 
available. 
19 
Annex 3 
IASC Approved Humanitarian Information Centre Concept Paper (February 2003) 
Humanitarian Information Centres (HIC) support the delivery of humanitarian assistance through the 
provision of information products and services. 
Humanitarian Common Service 
1. HICs are a Humanitarian Common Service (HCS), defined by the Inter-Agency Standing Committee 
Working Group (IASC-WG) as a support function to facilitate efforts of IASC organisations and the larger 
humanitarian community, administered by one or more organisation(s) and authorised by an established 
inter-agency process, and in each specific situation requested by the HC/Country Team. 
2. In all likelihood when an HIC is present other HCSs are as well. In this case co-location should be 
undertaken where feasible and activities must be very closely coordinated to ensure no overlaps, 
particularly with the UN Joint Logistics Centre. 
Background 
3. Accurate and timely information is crucial to the effective provision of humanitarian assistance. For 
example, strategic and operational decision making and prioritisation require accurate and timely 
information on the humanitarian situation; Information concerning the needs of affected populations and 
the capacities and locations of humanitarian actors is critical for coordination. Quantifiable information on 
the conditions and needs of affected populations – collected and updated on a regular basis and in a 
consistent format – is required for analysis and the identification of trends. 
4. Developed at field level to meet recognized needs in collaborative information exchange, HICs aim to 
ensure that individuals and organizations at both the operational and strategic level have access to the 
benefits of information management (IM) tools to assess, plan, deliver, coordinate and monitor 
humanitarian assistance. 
5. Nine HICs (until recently, with differing names) have been deployed or developed locally since 1999, 
providing significant lessons learned and creating a body of experience that has defined the current HIC 
minimum standard of products and services. With a single exception, OCHA has taken the lead in 
establishing all HICs, with varying levels of input from other partners. 
Objective of Document 
6. The objective of this concept document is to establish an agreed understanding amongst humanitarian 
partners on the characteristics and activities expected of a Humanitarian Information Centre, as well as 
its deployment, management and accountability structures and mechanisms. 
Management and Accountability 
7. The IASC-WG has endorsed OCHA as the steward of HICs. By this it is meant that OCHA has the 
responsibility, on behalf of and in consultation with its partners, to: 
• continue to develop the concept of the HIC, including training, advocacy, and representing HICs e.g. 
inter-agency or technical meetings; 
• carry out the deployment of new HICs, according to agreed criteria; 
• provide operational support to HICs during the emergency phase. 
8. In the field all HCS report to the Resident or Humanitarian Coordinator (R/HC). In practice, in all previous 
instances, the R/HC has delegated the oversight of the HIC to others; where one exists to the OCHA 
Head of Office. While not prejudging future decisions it is assumed that the many demands placed on an 
R/HC during an emergency will ensure that this practice will continue. 
9. As a rule, a local steering committee will be established as early as possible by the HIC Manager, 
preferably chaired by the R/HC. Membership of the committee should ideally number no more than 10 
20 
members and include the key stakeholders of the country’s humanitarian community, reflecting the 
membership of the IASC plus donors and, where appropriate, the national government. 
10. The steering committee will play the critical role in defining the priorities and strategy for the HIC, 
including approving its workplan. This will be the key mechanism through which partners on the ground 
ensure the HIC’s priorities reflect those of the humanitarian community. Members of the steering 
committee will also be expected to act as advocates in the wider community on issues related to 
information management, including data standards, collection, analysis and dissemination. 
11. OCHA remains accountable for the effective management and performance of HICs due to the risks 
associated with assuming financial responsibility for the projects and the obligations inherent in 
establishing stand-by arrangements. Opportunities for input into the overall direction of the HIC concept 
as well as specific country operations will be made through the local steering committee, the existing 
Geographic Information Support Team (GIST) network and regular reporting to the IASC-WG. 
Deployment
12. Unlike natural disasters, most complex emergencies do not have a fixed ‘start date’, increasing the 
difficulty of implementing rigid deployment procedures. However, experience has helped identify three 
conditions that, when they exist, have made an HIC deployment appropriate: 
• A rapidly changing humanitarian operational environment; 
• A large number of new humanitarian actors entering the operational area; 
• A poor or degraded communications network. 
13. When these conditions come to exist in an emergency environment, or look likely to occur, OCHA will 
engage the Resident or Humanitarian Coordinator (R/HC) and the UN Country Team (UNCT), ensuring 
awareness of the HIC concept and deployment mechanisms. If an HIC request is forthcoming, OCHA 
will engage with donors and other partners – using pre-existing inter-agency mechanisms - to ensure 
that adequate financial, human and other resources exist to support a deployment. 
14. In situations where the need for an HIC is uncertain, OCHA or one of its partners will carry out an 
assessment to determine if a deployment will be necessary. The key components of this assessment will 
be an evaluation of the already existing IM capacity in the country and the requirements of the 
operational partners for HIC type products and services. 
15. OCHA has negotiated standing agreements with donors and other partners for the rapid implementation 
of HICs. An HIC emergency deployment fund is made available to OCHA on an annual basis by OFDA 
and equipment is on stand-by with DFID. However, both of these mechanisms must be approved on a 
case-by-case basis, which necessitates a time delay of at least several days. OCHA has also taken 
advantage of its stand-by partner arrangements (e.g. DFID, SRSA) for emergency staffing deployments 
for HIC start-up. 
16. If an HIC deployment is likely or imminent, OCHA will utilize the network created by the GIST, which 
includes most of the key operational agencies and donors, to solicit input on plans and support for the 
HIC (personnel, financial, equipment, space, data etc.). This mechanism will also be used to keep 
headquarters focal points regularly informed of ongoing activities. 
17. The initial priority activities, size and make-up of the HIC will be set through consultations with partners 
at the headquarters and field level, particularly the R/HC and UNCT. 
 
18. In most cases OCHA’s Field Information Support Project will deploy staff to lead the initial establishment 
of the HIC, incorporating any support available from partner organizations and stand-by arrangements. 
For reasons of financial accountability, OCHA senior management will need to approve the deployment 
plan. 
Characteristics 
19. While all HICs deployed will by necessity (e.g. already existing capacities, physical space, security etc.) 
have some differences, the following characteristics are a minimum expectation of an HIC: 
• A physical space where the humanitarian community can share and access information resources; 
• A provider of information products and services to the humanitarian community; 
21 
• A focal point for data collection and dissemination; 
• An advocate for improved information-sharing and data standardisation in the humanitarian 
community. 
Additionally, an HIC: 
• Is a common resource of the humanitarian community; 
• Is an integral part of the co-ordination structure, seeking to avoid duplicating existing initiatives 
and maximizing resources; 
• Works in full coordination with specialized agencies to support, if required, sector-specific work; 
• Is service-oriented and demand-driven, serving the operational and strategic information needs of 
clients – as defined by them. 
20. The HIC is a resource for the entire humanitarian community and is not the property of any single 
individual or agency. All data and information products are the collective property of the HIC partners – 
not the property of the HIC - under the guidance of the R/HC and the steering committee. 
21. The HIC will not normally be involved in primary data collection; rather it serves as an information 
exchange platform, providing a neutral service for the collation, processing, analysis and dissemination 
of data. The HIC’s role in analysis will usually be limited to processing and presenting data in such a way 
as to make it usable for decision makers, who need to add the relevant context and technical expertise. 
Functions 
22. Based on previous experience, the results of the 2002 Symposium on Best Practices in Humanitarian 
Information Exchange, and the recently completed independent evaluation of HICs, the core functions 
would normally include: 
• Provide a range of information products and services such as GIS, database development, 
website maintenance for dissemination etc. as the context dictates; 
• Promote, and develop where necessary, data standards; 
• Collect, maintain and make available a range of data sets from all sources, processing and 
disseminating this data as appropriate to support humanitarian operations;
• As required and possible, provide technical support and advice to improve the information 
management capacity of the humanitarian community, particularly at the sectoral level; 
• Engage with local actors to support and improve existing information infrastructures, particularly 
government counterparts. 
Post-Emergency Phase 
23. In addition to its close working relationship with all members of the humanitarian community, the HIC 
must engage reconstruction and development actors as early as possible and ensure that all activities 
undertaken will be compatible with future development needs so as to best ease transition, if that is 
required. 
24. While OCHA is responsible for managing HICs on behalf of its partners during the emergency phase, 
most of them endure long beyond pure relief efforts have ended. Of the nine HICs that have been 
created over the past five years OCHA is only currently involved in three; two have closed and four 
continue under different management (local NGO, government or UNDP managed). 
25. From its inception, an HIC’s strategic planning must include development of an exit or transition strategy. 
The strategy will be based on existing needs and capacities in the field, although it is understood that 
financial and other concerns will always play a part. The R/HC and the HIC Manager, in consultation with 
OCHA and the steering committee, are responsible for deciding when and how the project should be 
transitioned or terminated. 
22 
Annex 4 
Joint Review of the HIC and IM Environment in Pakistan 
6th – 16th February 
Mission Programme 
Monday 6th February Islamabad
4.00 Internal Team Meeting Location tbc 
 
Tuesday 7th February Islamabad
 8.00 Attend General Coordination Meeting OCHA Conference Room 
9.30 Internal Team Meeting OCHA Conference Room 
11.30 Planning meeting with Nic Parham and & Melanie 
Mason (Outgoing and incoming HIC Managers) 
OCHA Conference Room 
2.00 Meet Humanitarian Coordinator and Chief, OCHA 
Pakistan 
UNDP - Abu Diek to attend 
3.00 Meet Federal Relief Commission Prime Minister’s Office 
4.00 Meet ERRA (cancelled) ERRA Offices 
Wednesday 8th February Islamabad
8.00 Internal Review Team Meeting OCHA Conference Room 
9.00 Meet OCHA staff OCHA Conference Room 
11.00 Meet HIC staff OCHA Conference Room 
12.30 Lunch 
2.00 Meet World Health Organisation OCHA Conference Room 
4.00 Meet UNJLC – Brian Isbell WFP Afghanistan Office 
6.00 Internal Review Team Meeting OCHA Conference Room 
7.30 Dinner with invited NGOs Cinnamon Restaurant 
Thursday 9th February Battagram / Mansehra
8.00 Internal Review Team Meeting OCHA Conference Room 
9.00 Meet World Food Programme Michael Jones – WFP, 2, St 2, F8/3 
10.30 Meet Andrew MacLeod, former Cluster Coordinator and 
now Recovery Advisor to the RC/HC 
UNDP 
12.30 Lunch 
2.00 Meet Jamie McGoldrick, Deputy Humanitarian 
Coordinator 
OCHA Conference Room 
3.30 Meet Barnaby Jones, Deputy RR UNDP (Operations) OCHA 
5.00 Meet Kirsten Zaat, OCHA Area Coordinator, Mansehra OCHA 
7.00 Internal Review Team Meeting OCHA 
Friday 10th February Muzaffarabad 
8.00 Depart to Muzaffarabad 
 Security Briefing DSS 
10.00 Field Visit to IDP Camps and Camp Management Office 
in Muzaffarabad. 
1.00 Internal Review Team Meeting 
5.00 Meet HIC staff OCHA 
Saturday 11th February Muzaffarabad
10.30 Briefing and discussion on HIC OCHA Office (Nic Parham) 
4.00 Meeting with UNICEF OCHA Office 
5.00 Meeting with UNHCR UNHCR Office 
6:00 Meeting with IOM OCHA Office 
7.00 Meeting with OCHA Staff OCHA Office 
Sunday 12th February Muzaffarabad / Islamabad
9.00 Meet local NGOs UN Camp Meeting Room 
10.30 Meet PakMil - Col Qaiser, Commander of logistics PakMil Base Muzaffarabad 
11.30 Meet ICRC – Andre Paqaet (Head of sub delegation) ICRC office 
23 
12.30 Meeting with SC-UK – Francesca Petrecca UN Camp 
1:30 Lunch 
2.00 Depart for Islamabad Report helipad at 1.45 
3.30 Arrive Islamabad 
 
Monday 13th February Islamabad
 8.00 Internal Review Team Meeting HIC office 
 9.30 Meet shelter cluster coordinator OCHA Conference Room 
 11.00 Internal Review Team Meeting OCHA Conference Room 
12.00 Lunch 
 1.00 Attend Watsan Cluster meeting UNICEF Office 
3.00 Meet with Tim Pitt, Cluster Coordinator OCHA Conference Room 
4.00 Meeting with invited NGOs OCHA Conference Room 
 6.00 Attend Heads of Clusters meeting - observe 
7:30 Dinner with Donors Marriot Hotel 
Tuesday 14th February Islamabad
8.00 Attend General Coordination Meeting – present findings OCHA Conference Room 
9.30 Meet RealTime Evaluation of Clusters members HIC office 
12.00 Internal Review Team Meeting OCHA Conference Room 
3.30 De-brief with HIC staff OCHA Conference Room 
5.00 Draft Report HIC Office 
Wednesday 15th February Islamabad
 8.00 Attend DMT – present findings and dialogue with CT OCHA Conference Room 
9.30 Internal Review Team Meeting (Report Draft) HIC Office 
2.00 De-brief with OCHA and HC, DHC RC/HC Office 
3.30 De-brief with Nic & Melanie HIC Office