Humanitarian Response Fund Indonesia

Transcription

1 Humanitarian Response Fund Indonesia Credit: Islamic Relief Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

2 Note from the Humanitarian Coordinator The Humanitarian Response Fund (HRF), previously the Emergency Response Fund (ERF), was first introduced in Indonesia in 2001 to address gaps in humanitarian response. The HRF facilitates quick disbursement of funds to enable NGOs to respond to unmet emergency needs. By providing NGOs with a rapid and flexible funding mechanism, the Fund meets the short-term emergency needs of vulnerable communities. In 2011, the HRF disbursed a little over $1 million to address the lingering needs of vulnerable populations following the Mt. Merapi eruptions, the Mentawai Island earthquake and tsunami, and the Wasior flash floods. Through the HRF, the basic living conditions of populations affected by natural disasters are supported. The Fund s name was changed in 2010 to reflect a wider scope of assistance towards disaster management. The HRF also supports activities that promote durable solutions for displaced persons and targeted communities by meeting humanitarian and early recovery needs, particularly in areas where funding gaps exist. Although it is no longer focused solely on emergency response, the HRF remains aligned with global ERF guidelines. The HRF has contributed to strengthening coordination and partnership between humanitarian actors. The Advisory Board provides policy and strategic guidance for HRF implementation, while oversight and review of proposals fall under the Review Board, whose members are Cluster Coordinators. The Advisory Board and Review Board bring together six UN agencies (UNDP, UNHCR, UNICEF, WFP, FAO, WHO) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. I take this opportunity to thank Board members for their important role in keeping the Fund active and relevant. Additionally, I would like to express appreciation for OCHA s critical administrative as well as monitoring and evaluation functions. The HRF requires that projects are aligned with Government priorities. Proposals are expected to clearly show coordination with the Government of Indonesia. Moreover, projects are expected to develop a reporting relationship with the National Agency for Disaster Management (BNPB) and disaster management agencies at local level. Furthermore, the monitoring and evaluation process incorporates local government opinion of projects. A growing number of national NGOs has been able to access the Fund. In fact, 2011 was the first time that the number of national NGOs benefitting from the HRF surpassed that of international NGOs. OCHA s efforts to popularize the HRF with the general NGO community are commendable and must continue. Let me end by emphasizing the continuing relevance of the HRF in Indonesia. While there was no natural disaster of significant proportions during 2011, the accumulative impact of the numerous small- and medium-scale disasters remains of concern. Some 1,700 such disasters occurred in The Government of Indonesia has demonstrated improved capacity in disaster response preparedness at national level. However, response preparedness at local level continues to need support. The HRF can help to plug the gaps as such capacity continues to be developed. 1

3 Executive Summary No major disaster occurred in National and local government authorities responded sufficiently to small-scale disasters. The HRF, therefore, remained a useful complement to Government efforts to foster early recovery following three medium-scale disasters in The Fund helped fill gaps in the response to the Mt. Merapi eruptions, the Mentawai Island earthquake and tsunami, and the Wasior flash floods. HRF projects particularly addressed priority needs of vulnerable populations affected by these three natural disasters. In total, 11 HRF projects were approved and implemented. Eight of the projects addressed needs arising in the aftermath of the Mt. Merapi eruptions. Major concerns included: vulnerability to cold lava floods, with scientists estimating that up to 150 million cubic metres of volcanic material could be released with rain water; the loss of clean water sources given that the eruptions altered ground water flow in addition to damaging piping and water collection points; and health needs, following disruption of services at community level, including trauma and malnutrition. The remaining projects responded to the shelter, education, protection and hygiene needs of populations affected by the Mentawai tsunami, and provided non-food items to flash flood-affected populations in Wasior. Another project addressed response preparedness needs in several districts that are highly prone to natural disasters. This project followed a recommendation from a Sida evaluation 1 in 2010 that encouraged continued engagement with religions preachers as one way of communicating key messages on Disaster Management and Disaster Risk Reduction to local communities. Seven out of 11 implementing NGOs have their offices in or near HRF project locations. This ensured that projects were relevant and implemented with cultural sensitivity and continued coordination with local government and key stakeholders. In 2011, six out of 11 HRF projects, or 55 per cent, were accessed by national and local NGOs, compared with 19% in National and local NGOs were allocated a total of $524,702 against $499,968 to international NGOs. Project funds ranged from $61,820 to $100,000. All international NGOs partnered with local NGOs in implementing their projects. A total of 16 proposals (15 from national NGOs and one from an international NGO) were declined, mainly due to the fact that their objectives exceeded the mandate and purpose of the HRF. There is, obviously, a need to provide NGOs with better information regarding the HRF. OCHA conducted three sensitization sessions in Jakarta and Yogyakarta to explain the HRF concept, guidelines, eligibility criteria, and application procedures and steps. The national NGOs have encouraged OCHA to expand these sessions beyond the Java Islands to areas where disaster occurrences and community vulnerabilities are high. Finally, it should be noted that in 2011 the Government of Indonesia established the Indonesia Multi-Donor Trust Fund Facility for Disaster Recovery (IMDFF DR). The Trust Fund targets the recovery needs of communities affected by the Mt. Merapi eruption and the tsunami in Mentawai. With $3.3 million from the Government of New Zealand as its first contribution, the IMDFF DR envisaged support towards livelihoods recovery and building community and local government capacity for disaster risk reduction. OCHA liaised closely with the Office of the UN Resident Coordinator, which manages the IMDFF DR, to ensure that HRF projects did not overlap with those of the Trust Fund. 1 The 2010 Evaluation of Sida s Humanitarian Assistance Case Study Report Indonesia. Authors: Tasneem Mowjee and Jane Keylock. 2

4 3

5

6 Information on Contributors The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) was the sole contributor to the HRF in Since 2008, Sida has provided US$8,130,635 to the Fund. Sida Funding to Indonesia HRF Funding (SEK) Funding (US$)* Project Period # of HRF Project 7,500,000 1,115, ,000,000 1,876, ,000,000 2,070, ,000,000 3,068, in in 2012 (up to June) * Source: OCHA Contribution Tracking System since the HRF remained with a balance of some $800,000 at the end of 2011, both parties agreed to extend the agreement until the end of Although Sida does not have an office or a humanitarian representative in Indonesia, OCHA maintains contact with and provides updates to the Embassy of Sweden on humanitarian issues in the country and on HRF implementation. Other donors that have contributed to the HRF over the years are: the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID), the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID), the Kingdom Foundation of Saudi Arabia, and the OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID). The latest Agreement between Sida and OCHA covered only the period 2010 to However, 5

7 Fund Overview The HRF is designed to provide funding to projects for a maximum of six months at a budget ceiling of US$100,000 per project. Summary of ERF Allocations in 2011 Requested for 2011 in US$ Carry over from 2010 in US$ Amount received in 2011 in US$ Total available in 2011 in US$ 2,000, ,8939 2,343,733 3,281,672 Disbursed HRF funds in 2011 by partner type in US$ Disbursed ERF funds in 2011 by project type in US$ UN Agencies 0 Emergency response 928,085 International NGOs 499,968 Preparedness 96,585 National NGOs 524,702 Innovative (if any) 0 Total 1,024,670 Total 1,024,670 Results of HRF Projects per Cluster Overview of Education Cluster Number of projects Budget in US$ Implementing agencies Geographic Area 1 96,585 Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) Banyumas and Banjarnegara districts of Central Java, Banjar District of South Kalimantan and Gorontalo District of Gorontalo Outputs Four series of Disaster Risk Reduction workshops, containing community-based disaster risk reduction in Islamic perspective, disaster risk reduction strategies manual, and preaching material on disaster management were carried out that directly benefitted 720 Muslim scholars and preachers living in disaster-prone areas; host Moslem scholars and preachers taught disaster risk reduction and shared the Islamic perspective on disaster issues. Four disaster response simulation exercises were conducted to enable the Muslim scholars and preachers them gain a better understanding of emergency response management and the importance of disaster preparedness. 3,750 copies of a book on community-based disaster risk reduction in the Islamic perspective were printed and distributed to Muslim organizations at local and national level. 3,750 copies of disaster risk reduction strategies manual were printed and distributed to Muslim organizations at local and national level. 4,000 copies of sermons and preaching material on disaster management were printed and distributed to Muslim organizations at local and national level; in addition, some books were shared with Nahdlatul Ulama networks. This project also inspired OCHA to carry out a study on the Potential Role of the Mosque in Disaster Situations. This study was a collaboration of Nahdlatul Ulama, Islamic Relief and OCHA. 6

8 Overview of Emergency Shelter and NFIs Cluster Number of projects Budget in US$ Implementing agencies Geographic Area 3 299,429 Church World Service, HOPE Worldwide, and Institute for Development and Economic Analysis (IDEA) Outputs Teluk Wondama District of West Papua province, Mentawai Islands District of West Sumatra province, and Sleman District of Yogyakarta province Lists of beneficiaries were finalized through an inclusive process involving local government, community leaders and vulnerable groups. 145 families or 622 people (324 men, 233 women and 65 under-five children) received temporary shelter support (building materials, capacity building to construct safe houses and support in shelter construction). Distributed 201 farming kits, 301 fishing kits, and 501 non-food household kits (including 2,004 bed nets) to a total of 1,003 households (around 4,000 people). 700 raincoats for children and adults, 800 tarpaulins, 300 beds were distributed to households living in temporary shelters who have children or elderly. Distributed tarpaulins to 164 households to prevent rain water leaking into their temporary shelters. Overview of Water Sanitation Hygiene Cluster Number of projects Budget in US$ Implementing agencies Geographic Area 3 261,312 Islamic Relief, Detak Jaringan Rupa (DEJARUP) and Yayasan Kesatuan Pelayanan Kerjasama (Satunama) Magelang District of Central Java Outputs 18 clean water wells were drilled and equipped with jet pumps and electric sources. Furthermore, 18 water management committees were trained to maintain the water facilities with low maintenance costs. This was achieved through good cooperation between the NGO (Islamic Relief) and the private sector (Elnusa). At least 2,854 households (4,605 male, 4,615 female) are beneficiaries of this project. 13 hygiene promotion and hand washing activities were conducted, reaching at least 554 school children (274 girls and 280 boys), and 150 adults (78 women & 72 men). A total of 56 local health post cadres and five persons from district health offices were trained on hygiene promotion. These health facilitators distributed 4,500 leaflets and posters as IEC materials, targeting some 18,000 people. Villagers were supported in rehabilitating damaged water pipes through distribution of 6,000 meters of pipes. The WASH assistance has helped mitigate the potential spread of diseases that commonly occur following disasters. 200 units of liquid waste channel and 80 units of organic and non-organic waste containers were distributed, benefitting 7,035 people who live in temporary shelters. These activities aimed at improving the quality of environmental health and reducing the risk of disease outbreaks within the temporary shelters. Environmentally friendly waste management was facilitated by converting organic waste into organic fertilizer. The organic fertilizer is used in vegetable farming while the non-organic is sold to garbage collectors. Two large permanent water collecting tanks with a capacity of 24,000 litres each were replaced. The tanks are benefitting 831 households or 4,124 people. 7

9 Overview of Early Recovery Cluster Number of projects Budget in US$ Implementing agencies Geographic Area 3 267,358 Arbeiter-Samariter-Bund Deutschland e.v. (ASB), Institute for Promoting Sustainable Livelihood Approach (Inprosula), YAKKUM Emergency Unit Klaten and Magelang districts of Central Java, and Sleman District of Yogyakarta Outputs Equipment, training and technical assistance, and capital support to livelihood groups were provided to a total of 3,648 women and 45 men. Livelihood activities included local food production and marketing and trade of agricultural products. Community groups (who live in temporary sites and villages of origin) were facilitated in mapping disaster risks and in undertaking contingency planning, as well as equipped with basic preparedness tools and skills. Some 120 people were direct beneficiaries of this output. Two district-level contingency plans (in Klaten and Sleman districts) were developed by some 40 officials from local government agencies and non-governmental institutions. The Plans include a livelihoods sector that is considered very crucial by local government and populations. The training material was adapted from the Livestock Emergency Guidelines and Standards. 20 community based cattle-owner groups consisting of 1,650 individuals (majority male) received technical assistance. 858 households or 2,702 persons (2,301 male and 1,320 female) received agricultural inputs and technical assistance in restarting their crop farming, aquaculture and horticultural activities. Food stocks to meet the basic needs before cultivated crops can be harvested were delivered to 858 households or 2,702 people. Two local irrigation supply systems were rehabilitated, each 500 metres in length, to be used for approximately 130 hectares of agricultural land. As a land conservation effort, around 4,500 trees were planted along a river that passes through agricultural land. This output has benefited 831 households or 4,124 people. Quick restocking of agricultural and fisheries ventures for 831 households or 4,124 people was achieved with approximately 50 tons of compost, 1,000 sachets of at least 3 types of vegetable seeds, and 500,000 small fresh-water fish. Two village community planning sessions were facilitated with program activities and implementation processes to accelerate disaster rehabilitation. 8

10 Overview of Nutrition Cluster Number of projects Budget in US$ Implementing agencies Geographic Area 1 99,986 Action Contre La Faim (ACF) Sleman District of Yogyakarta Outputs The project has directly benefitted 175 health cadres, 1,164 under-five children and 464 pregnant, lactating women and caregivers. The cadres were subsequently able to initiate the establishment of 32 mothers support groups, aimed at improving and extending health and nutrition messages through various activities such as breastfeeding counseling, healthy cooking demonstrations, and learning and practices of child care, oral hygiene, nutrition for mothers and elderly, baby massages, and healthy snacks for the family; Regular Nutrition, Mental Health and Psychosocial Support activities were performed, through Posyandu (local integrated health services) activities. In addition, basic general check-up, anthropometric measurement, supplementary feeding and child growth monitoring activities were performed in Posyandu. Monthly coordination meetings with local community leaders (including cadres) for the revitalization of 35 targeted Posyandus were regularly held in all 5 villages. Regular meetings with Puskesmas (community health centre) officials were held to discuss programme progress and activities, and seek further support for Posyandu activities. These activities were maintained after the project closed. A total of 36 targeted posyandus and one puskesmas received standard health equipment, including baby boards, weighing materials, supplementary feeding supplies and equipment, tables, chairs and cupboards. The following Information Education and Communication (IEC) materials were made available to selected beneficiaries: 1,000 integrated booklets on nutrition, psychosocial health, food security and hygiene; 1,225 user-friendly exclusive breastfeeding books; some 200 posters with different health messages; 500 leaflets and 180 t-shirts. The IEC materials were designed to suit beneficiaries profiles and distributed through puskesmas, posyandus, district health office and NGOs. 9

11 Summary and analysis of achievements In general, the HRF has contributed to the response to remaining needs in the period between the end of the emergency response phase and the recovery phase. Although the Government of Indonesia (GoI) ended its emergency response, some humanitarian needs of populations in Wasior, Mentawai, Yogyakarta and Central Java remained. The most crucial needs were identified by NGOs through field assessments and interaction with local government agencies. OCHA further verified with BNBP, BPBDs and key stakeholders before processing project proposals. Under the circumstances, the HRF was able to facilitate timely response to needs. Nevertheless, some NGOs encountered challenges in developing acceptable proposals. In the event of a large-scale disaster, proposal review and approval processes would need to be accelerated. A fast-track funding process at the discretion of the Humanitarian Coordinator and the HRF Board members should be established in order to increase timely response to rapid onset emergencies. Despite its focus on short-term funding, HRF projects have provided the foundation for longer term recovery. The assistance provided to targeted populations has allowed many to regain normalcy and set them on the road to full recovery. Further achievements were identified when OCHA and three Board members (UNDP, UNHCR and UNICEF) visited a few projects. Below are some of the key achievements identified: HRF projects have adopted an innovative approach to accommodate specific circumstances. For example, as targeted communities live in temporary shelters, feeding livestock from a limited land is a challenge. Thus, HRF project introduced a new way of producing fodder for cattle. Linking private sector expertise and capacities with community needs is also an innovative practice that could be exercised by other projects. Another example is to provide portable assistance to beneficiaries living in temporary sites. Appropriate technology is another added value that HRF projects have brought to the community. Collaboration with academic institutions in developing certain products has allowed communities to optimize their limited resources. Some projects have provided post-production support, for example by introducing a marketing strategy to allow targeted communities increase production quality and quantity. Projects assisted in establishing or strengthening market linkages involving civil society, universities, government, and private sector. HRF partners have capacity to strengthen coordination and information sharing with multi- stakeholders, led by Government. This is supported with a proper information system. Furthermore, project experiences are periodically shared with local government authorities so that good practices can be sustained and replicated by them through their disaster recovery programmes. At the community level, existing village committees have played a significant role in applying vulnerability criteria and targeting assistance. The requirements of beneficiary selection have helped community members realize their priority needs. NGOs noted that following project sensitization communities understood the beneficiary selection process and the rationale for gender-sensitive criteria. Community cohesiveness remains strong and some NGOs witnessed stronger relationships developing between beneficiaries and nonbeneficiaries within the same community. Some NGOs applied mechanisms for raising complaints and increased accountability. Exit strategies for each project were identified at the beginning and adjusted as needed during implementation. OCHA has assigned an overall manager and an administration and finance officer to the HRF. UNDP support in monitoring and coordination of projects in Yogyakarta and Central Java has been very useful in tracking HRF project achievement. Support from OCHA headquarters, particularly Donor Relations Section, Funding Coordination Section and Administrative Office, has been excellent and timely. 10

12 Project Monitoring Current elements of HRF monitoring and control include: screening and review of submitted proposals; submission of narrative and financial project reports; and, an independent audit at the end of the project. In 2011, all projects were sufficiently tracked via these processes. Seven of 11 HRF projects (implemented by Islamic Relief, Yayasan Kesatuan Pelayanan Kerjasama, Action Contre La Faim, Arbeiter-Samariter-Bund Deutschland, Institute for Promoting Sustainable Livelihood Approach, Institute for Development and Economic Analysis, and YAKKUM Emergency Unit) were visited by OCHA. The other four projects were not visited due to lack of resources. OCHA and three HRF Board members (UNICEF, UNHCR and UNDP) visited projects in Yogyakarta and Central Java. The missions were briefed by NGOs on the progress of project activities, results achieved and main challenges. The visiting team then met with local leaders and discussed the latest situation and their concerns, recovery efforts by government and other stakeholders, the relevance of HRF assistance, and coordination mechanisms. Additionally, beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries were informally interviewed on their perceptions of the project, their participation in project activities, and gender considerations. The monitoring team was largely satisfied with the projects and shared its report with the Humanitarian Coordinator, other Board members, the Government, and implementing NGOs. In order to avoid duplication, two projects had to change their locations following approval. The duplication did not exist during initial assessment and coordination with local stakeholders, but the relatively drawn out proposal review and approval process allowed other organizations to step in. Consequently, a location change for the HRF proposals was recommended and approved following verification with the population. Feedback from NGOs implementing HRF projects suggests that project durations should be extended for an entire year. In fact, five out of the 11 HRF projects requested no-cost extensions in 2011, noting that: Some projects took longer than initially anticipated in reaching beneficiaries, which in turn impacted on the overall project time frame. Projects that were implemented in remote areas faced logistical constraints due to poor infrastructure and were highly dependent on good weather. One project had to be delayed during election time to ensure that the assistance would not be used for political purposes. All of the requested extensions were approved, considering the non-emergency nature of the projects. However, having learned from this experience, OCHA advised all NGOs submitting project proposals to re-check their work plans and consider all potential factors that could impact on project duration. 11

13 Gender Consideration OCHA remains committed to achieving gender equality in all aspects of humanitarian assistance, including through the HRF. Although no Gender focal point is specifically assigned to the HRF, gender considerations are important in the project review process. Project data, for instance, are required to be disaggregated by sex. NGOs are also encouraged to provide analysis based on sex and age disaggregated data. Since 2010, the Indonesia HRF has incorporated a Gender Marker in the project proposal and report review processes, with preference given to projects that score higher gender grades. Some projects have gender mainstreaming, while others have targeted actions based on gender analysis. Gender is incorporated into project design, implementation and monitoring. Some HRF projects have been able to amply reflect gender sensitivity. In all cases, data has been disaggregated by gender, save for a project in West Papua that was unable to do so due to unavailability of back up data following the loss in a flash flood of the original data; In almost all projects, vulnerable groups such as women, boys, girls and elderly were identified, consulted and included in project activities; HRF projects took into account women s needs and cultural sensitivities. Women and men were represented in decision making process; Women were involved in data and information verification; Beneficiaries selection prioritized womenheaded households, among other vulnerability criteria; Provision of latrine, NFIs, and livelihoods assistance was sensitive to gender and based on analysis of the situation and action plan described in the proposals. Sanitation facilities were constructed separately for women and men with considerations of safety, privacy and easy accessibility during the day and night. Different kinds of livelihood activities met women s and men s recovery needs Livelihoods intervention plans were developed with the full participation of women and femaleheaded households with a view to enhancing their entrepreneurial skills; Women and men were equally represented in project committees for the various kinds of activities, including in monitoring and evaluation. Gender is included in HRF introduction sessions to NGOs, resulting in the mainstreaming of gender into their project management cycle at all stages: planning, assessment, analysis, implementation and reporting. 12

14 Conclusion Despite no major disasters occurring in Indonesia in 2011, the HRF remained useful in complementing GoI efforts in early recovery in the aftermath of medium-scale disasters. The Fund facilitated the filling of gaps as affected populations awaited implementation of GoI action plans for rehabilitation and reconstruction following the Mt. Merapi eruptions, the Mentawai Island earthquake and tsunami, and the Wasior flash floods. HRF projects particularly addressed the priority needs of vulnerable people affected by these disasters. The HRF allowed NGO implementing partners to complement project funding with other sources, thus strengthening project implementation and increasing the impact to targeted beneficiaries. OCHA requested NGOs implementing HRF projects to coordinate, wherever possible, with other organizations at the field level to avoid duplication and to complement the work of other organizations. By aligning their projects, NGOs fostered cooperation amongst themselves, which allowed a more effective response to the needs of affected populations. Capacity building has also been an important component of the HRF projects. Strong coordination and collaboration with local government, other NGOs and communities and their involvement in project activities had a positive result on the projects. The participation of national NGOs, which have strong networks with community leaders and community-based organizations, was a welcome development for the HRF. International NGOs implemented their projects in partnership with local NGOs, which had already been trained on disaster management and emergency response. These partnerships enabled transfer of knowledge to local NGOs, particularly on project implementation. HRF sensitization sessions to international, national and local NGOs have proven highly necessary and should be continued. Monitoring of HRF projects should be conducted in a more systematic manner, including through joint donor/un/ngo monitoring missions, to allow for more coordinated approaches and to reduce unexpected programme results. 13

15 Glossary ACF ASB AusAID BNPB BPBD CWS DEJARUP DFID DRR ERF FAO GBV GoI HRF IDEA IDPs IEC IFRC IMDFF DR INPROSULA NFIs NGOs NU OFID OCHA SATUNAMA Sida UNDP UNHCR UNICEF WASH WFP WHO YEU Action Contre La Faim Arbeiter-Samariter-Bund Deutschland Australian Agency for International Development National Agency for Disaster Management Provincial and District/Municipality Agency for Disaster Management Church World Services Detak Jaringan Rupa - a national NGO United Kingdom Department for International Development Disaster Risk Reduction Emergency Response Fund United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization Gender Based Violence Government of Indonesia Humanitarian Response Fund Institute for Development and Economic Analysis - a national NGO Internally Displaced Persons Information Education and Communication International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent society Indonesia Multi Donor Fund Facility for Disaster Recovery Institute for Promoting Sustainable Livelihood Approach - a national NGO Non-Food Items Non-Government Organizations Nahdlatul Ulama - a national NGO OPEC (The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) Fund for International Development United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Yayasan Kesatuan Pelayanan Kerjasama - a national NGO Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency United Nations Development Programme United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees United Nations Children s Fund Water Sanitation Hygiene World Food Programme World Health Organisation YAKKUM (Yayasan Kristen Untuk Kesehatan Umum) Emergency Unit - a national NGO 14