Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 2 Next »

 Field examples


Support robust Humanitarian WASH advocacy

Identify concerns, and contribute to HC and HCT messaging and action

As many concerns can comes from the field, it is important to define an advocacy strategy endorsed by the SAG, in which priority advocacy themes are defined, based on local context and WASH strategic objective. Usually WCC is not in direct contact with the HC and the HCT, but can report pressing issues to the inter-cluster coordinator and/or the UNICEF representative, who can group concerns from various clusters. 

Undertake advocacy actions   

Some advocacy actions can be solved directly by the WCC, who must build strong partnership with WASH-relevant ministries and other public institution, and with donors. Other concerns can be addressed to the HC, who is in contact with higher level of governmental officials, military authorities, UN peacekeepers and donors.

It is important to avoid partners to feel that advocacy is the mere responsibility of the WASH Coordination Platform. Partners can also play an important role, and undertake advocacy action themselves at country, regional or global level, provided that they are agreed by other partner and the coordination platform.

Having no direct authority on the partners, advocacy is also the main tool of the WCC when it comes to address issues reported during monitoring. When noticing quality issues or lack of reporting friom one partners, WCC can report the issue first to the partner program staff, then at high level if no action are taken: partner main office, HQ, or donors.

  • No labels