Afghanistan - Common Humanitarian Fund

Afghanistan - Common Humanitarian Fund Strategy Paper - 2015 First Standard Allocation ALLOCATION STRATEGY PAPER FIRST STANDARD ALLOCATION (March 2015) The Common Humanitarian Fund (CHF) for Afghanistan was established in January 2014 under the leadership of the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC). The objectives of the Afghanistan CHF are to promote needs-based assistance in accordance with humanitarian principles, to respond to the most urgent needs, and strengthen coordination and leadership through priority clusters and the HC. The total amount of funding available from the CHF Afghanistan under the 2015 First Standard Allocation is US$22 million. This strategy paper outlines the sectors and activities eligible for funding under this allocation based on general rounds of consultation held from early January 2015 onwards with different stakeholders, and on priorities outlined in strategy papers submitted by each Cluster. The CHF Advisory Board (AB) met on 24 February 2015 to review the most pressing humanitarian needs in Afghanistan under each sector and their alignment with the Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) 2015, as well as overall funding requirements, and made a decision on the envelopes available for funding. The Allocation Strategy Within the framework of the HRP and sector specific priorities, the main strategic objectives of this First Standard Allocation 2015 will be the following: 1. Maximize the impact of funds already committed by the CHF under projects funded throughout 2014 where lifesaving results and gains can be sustained; 2. Ensure adequate response capacity is available within sectors in case of increased conflict and natural disasters in 2015 through the procurement and pre-positioning of emergency supplies; 3. Provision of life-saving humanitarian assistance to vulnerable populations affected by conflict, massdisplacement and cross-border movements; 4. Support to the collection of high quality, accurate and relevant evidence to inform and support effective humanitarian response and enable ethical and accountable use of limited resources. The emerging returnees crisis and ongoing refugees response is a priority of the 1 st CHF Standard Allocation in 2015 and should be considered across all envelopes. While the dedicated Multi-Sector (Refugees & Returnees) envelope is aiming at addressing immediate needs of the vulnerable population, funding allocated for the respective envelopes of Health, WASH and Nutrition is intended to also cover longer term needs of refugees and returnees. Prioritization of support to NGOs through this Standard Allocation is sought. Where NGOs are dependent upon UN agencies for pipeline supplies, allocations to respective UN agencies is supported. Ultimately the determination of whether NGO or UN agencies are supported through this allocation will be determined by the comparative advantage of each organization to deliver the articulated response. Protection principles and activities should be mainstreamed into the overall humanitarian response and throughout all projects funded under this Allocation. 1 The recommended Gender Marker 2 is 2A or 2B for proposed projects to ensure that women/girls and men/boys will benefit equally or that they will advance gender equality in another way. A gender and age analysis should be included in the projects needs assessments and reflected in one or more activities and outcomes. The recommended Environment Marker 3 is A, A+ or B+ for all projects. Each project should identify its potential impact on the local environment and include tailor-made measures to mitigate any potential negative environment impact. Support to coordination systems such as the funding of Cluster Coordinators and Cluster Co-Coordinators will not be funded through this Allocation. 1 Protection mainstreaming guidance can be found in Annex IV and on http://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/en/areas ofresponsibility/protection mainstreaming.html; 2 Gender Marker Tip Sheets for individual Clusters are included in the IASC Gender Marker Tip Sheet Package accessible on https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/coordination/gencap/document/iasc-gm-tipsheets; 3 Environment Marker guidance and further information is accessible on http://www.humanitarianresponse.info/topics/environment; Coordination Saves Lives The mission of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) is to mobilize and coordinate effective and principled humanitarian action in partnership with national and international actors. http://afg.humanitarianresponse.info/

CHF Strategy Paper - First Standard Allocation 2015 2 Funding Situation The total amount of funding available from the CHF Afghanistan under the 2015 First Standard Allocation is US$22 million, or about 5.4% of the humanitarian funding requested under the 2015 HRP. A Reserve envelope of US$ 2-3 million will be maintained outside of the Standard Allocation envelope to enable a response to unforeseen emergencies. In the event of a large scale emergency, alternative sources of funding can be activated such as the Flash Appeal mechanism and CERF, under the leadership of the Humanitarian Coordinator. As of 28 February 2015 the Afghanistan HRP is 12% funded, with the Clusters reporting the following funding received compared to the requested resources: Rank 1 2 Cluster FOOD SECURITY AND AGRICULTURE COORDINATION AND SUPPORT SERVICES Original requirements USD Total resources available USD Unmet requirements % Covered 92,000,000 34,998,846 57,001,154 38% 11,500,000 2,963,323 8,536,677 26% 3 CLUSTER NOT YET SPECIFIED 0 10,879,994-10,879,994 0% 4 EMERGENCY SHELTER AND NFIs 40,000,000 0 40,000,000 0% 5 HEALTH 38,800,000 0 38,800,000 0% 6 LOGISTICS/ UNHAS Flights 17,000,000 0 17,000,000 0% 7 MULTI-SECTOR (Refugees & Returnees) 62,800,000 0 62,800,000 0% 8 NUTRITION 78,000,000 0 78,000,000 0% 9 PROTECTION 40,000,000 0 40,000,000 0% 10 WATER,SANITATION AND HYGIENE 25,300,000 0 25,300,000 0% Grand Total: 405,400,000 48,842,163 356,557,837 12% CHF First Standard Allocation Envelopes Envelopes Amount in USD % of Overall Amount 1. HEALTH 6,600,000 30% 2. MULTI-SECTOR (Refugees & Returnees) 5,000,000 23% 3. NUTRITION 4,850,000 22% 4. WASH 4,850,000 22% 5. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT (HEALTH and NUTRITION) 700,000 3% TOTAL 22,000,000 100% United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Coordination Saves Lives http://afg.humanitarianresponse.info/

CHF Strategy Paper - First Standard Allocation 2015 3 Allocation Envelopes and Specific Priorities Allocation Envelope 1 Cluster Associated SRP Strategic Priorities Supporting the provision of life-saving health care services in contested and under-served areas HEALTH 1. Excess morbidity and mortality reduced 2. Conflict related deaths and impairment reduced 3. Timely response to affected populations Amount and % of Allocation $6.6 Million 30% of total Afghanistan s population, estimated to be approximately 27 million, suffers from some of the worst health indicators in the world, brought about in part by more than 30 years of war and insecurity. Yet there is evidence that significant, rapid progress has been made since 2003, due to greatly expanded aid flows. Innovative service delivery strategies implemented by the Ministry of Public Health (MoPH), with the support of its partners, were introduced to channel large external assistance. They include the implementation of the Basic Package of Health Services (BPHS) and the Essential Package for Hospital Services (EPHS). Afghanistan however is not a post-conflict country. The conflict in Afghanistan has killed and injured an estimated 43,953 civilian children, women and men in 2014 (Jan-Dec 2014 Health Management Information System (HMIS) report). It is also estimated that there is at least a 27% increase in the number of weapon wounded and killed cases in 2014 as compared to 2013. Furthermore, nearly 105,800 people have fled their homes to escape the conflict, amidst an increase in fighting in Northern Helmand and other provinces (HNO 2015). The ongoing insecurity is affecting more than 50% of the country thus increasing vulnerability and impacting community resilience. There has been a serious neglect of the role that continued war in most parts of Afghanistan plays, affecting the economy, rule of law, justice and public service delivery. Furthermore, Afghanistan has a difficult terrain and climate. Despite the visible urbanisation trend, Afghanistan remains a rural and traditional society with a largely agricultural economy affected by numerous natural disasters each year. As per recent MoPH reports, BPHS is covering around 65% of the population, while the remaining 35% are living mainly in insecure areas or areas with difficult terrain. The current package provided is only addressing the basic minimum needs. Furthermore, only limited resources are allocated for the provision of basic health care during emergencies. Recently, the MoPH has revised the BPHS package to include nutrition, mental health and emergency services, while per capita expenditure remained the same (around $5 per capita). Hence, an expansion was not backed up by additional funding under the current System Enhancing for Health Actions in Transition (SEHAT) contract. While this is now being revised under the SEHAT 2 project, it is not expected to cover all the needs of the population. Health Strategic Priorities: (1) Response to the health needs of vulnerable population in areas affected by mass displacement of population and cross-border movements (IDPs, returnees and refugees), which are putting pressure on an already stretched health care system. (1) Eligible provinces: Badakhshan, Badghis, Farah, Faryab, Ghazni, Helmand, Kabul, Kandahar, Khost, Nangarhar, Nuristan, Paktia, Paktika, and Uruzgan; (2) Provision of life-saving trauma services in areas of active fighting with a high number of civilian casualties targeted by the mass casualty management programme and where no other provider is delivering these services. (2) Eligible provinces: Farah, Faryab, Ghazni, Helmand, Kabul, Kapisa, Khost, Kunar, Laghman, Logar, Nangarhar, Paktia, Paktika, Uruzgan, and Wardak; (3) Respond to public health threats of international consequences (PHIC) in line with international health regulations and health security requirements among displaced and vulnerable populations. Eligible Programme Areas: Enhance access to First Aid Trauma Posts (FATPs) and referral services at community level; triage, stabilisation and referral services at the facility level; and provision of trauma services at hospital level, including provision of relevant supplies. Establishment of static health facilities in remote, insecure (conflict areas) and unserved areas (white areas); and mobile health clinics serving vulnerable population including IDPs, returnees and refugees. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Coordination Saves Lives http://afg.humanitarianresponse.info/

CHF Strategy Paper - First Standard Allocation 2015 4 Identification, assessment and response to public health threats in emergency settings through Emergency Preparedness and Response (EPR) provincial committees. Allocation Envelope 2 Cluster Associated SRP Strategic Priorities Ensuring timely provision of life-saving assistance to refugees and Afghan returnees in Southeast Afghanistan MULTI-SECTOR (Refugees & Returnees) 3. Timely response to affected populations Amount and % of Allocation $5 Million 22.73% of total In mid-june 2014, following military operations in North Waziristan Agency (NWA), Pakistan, refugees and undocumented Afghan returnees began crossing into southeastern Afghanistan. As of January 2015, there are an estimated 285,000 refugees and almost 10,000 undocumented Afghan returnees in Khost and Paktika provinces. The military operation was expected to last from June to September, however Afghanistan has witnessed a continued increase of individuals from NWA seeking refuge in Afghanistan. Given that military operations have expanded and the substantial destruction of infrastructure and property, it is expected that the current refugee crisis will continue. Based on focus group discussions held with refugees, undocumented Afghan returnees and host communities, shelter, protection, WASH, food, livelihoods, health, mine action and support for host communities remain urgent priorities. As of early 2015, a significant increase in the return of undocumented Afghans from Pakistan has been witnessed with 36,027 individuals returning, many citing police and local authority harassment in Pakistan as the reason for their return. Additionally, 2,418 individual Afghans have also been deported. Contingency planning is in place to meet the needs of the most vulnerable of the returnees and to anticipate upon a continued large scale rate of return not considered during the development of the Afghanistan 2015 HRP. Refugees & Returnees Strategic Priorities: Ensure refugees and undocumented Afghans receive timely assistance in the areas of shelter/nfis, protection, food assistance and camp management. Eligible provinces: Khost and Paktika for the refugee response, and provinces receiving high numbers of undocumented Afghan returnees requiring immediate assistance at the border and point of return. 4 Eligible Programme Areas: Procurement and distribution of emergency shelter, shelter materials, NFIs and food to most vulnerable refugees and undocumented returnees in Khost and Paktika provinces, and those provinces likely to receive significant numbers of undocumented Afghan returnees. Support to protection activities linked to the prevention of violence against women and children (refugees and returnees). Ensure a safe and stable environment within Gulan camp with support for additional infrastructure as well as the expansion of mine clearance activities as required. Support to Quick Impact Projects (QUIPs) in host communities focusing on water resources and environmental projects to reduce potential conflict and prevent secondary displacement of refugees and undocumented returnees. Improved information management and displacement tracking (refugees and returnees) 4 IOM to provide specific provinces heavily impacted by large scale return. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Coordination Saves Lives http://afg.humanitarianresponse.info/

CHF Strategy Paper - First Standard Allocation 2015 5 Allocation Envelope 3 Cluster Associated SRP Strategic Priorities Ensuring access to IMAM through provision of essential nutrition services and supplies NUTRITION 1. Excess morbidity and mortality reduced Amount and % of Allocation $4.85 Million 22.7% of total The analysis of humanitarian needs by the Nutrition Cluster is primarily informed by 2013 National Nutrition Survey (NNS2013), as well as the combined multi-cluster need and vulnerability index 5. According to NNS2013 malnutrition prevalence estimates, approximately 1.2 million children under five-years of age require treatment for acute malnutrition annually. Of these children, approximately 500,000 will require treatment for Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM) and 700,000 will need treatment for moderate acute malnutrition (MAM). Around 10 per cent of SAM cases present with medical complications, amounting to approximately 50,000 acutely malnourished children requiring specialised inpatient care. In 2015, as per the SRP the nutrition cluster will focus on the top 17 provinces with Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM) rates above 3%. An analysis of key vulnerability indicators shows that there is a close association of high prevalence of malnutrition with insecurity, morbidity of key diseases, poor vaccination coverage, poor hygiene and sanitation practices as well as presence of conflict induced displaced; further compounding the response. Although the revised BPHS package includes the provision of nutrition services, the response to malnutrition remains constricted in part by partner s capacities, available resources and accessibility to services. Furthermore, no nutrition supplies are being provided to BPHS partners through SEHAT mechanisms. The majority of supplies continue to be provided to NGO partners following procurement and delivery by UNICEF and WFP. Nutrition Strategic Priorities: Ensure timely and quality treatment of acutely malnourished in provinces where the emergency nutrition thresholds have been broken and where nutrition interventions are ongoing in response to the crisis. Eligible Provinces: Badakhshan, Ghazni, Khost (IDPs), Laghman, Nimroz, Paktya, Samangan, Wardak, and Zabul; Eligible Programme Areas: Enhance access to IMAM services through maintenance/expansion of nutrition services and enhanced community screening and referral in high priority provinces. Procurement and pre-positioning of essential nutrition supplies, including RUSF, RUTF and fortified milk, and equipment allowing for an effective and timely response to Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM) in support of current CHF funded services and possible expansion in high priority areas only. 5 The Overall Needs and Vulnerability Index of the Afghanistan HRP 2015 can be accessed in Annex III. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Coordination Saves Lives http://afg.humanitarianresponse.info/

CHF Strategy Paper - First Standard Allocation 2015 6 Allocation Envelope 4 Cluster Associated SRP Strategic Priorities Contributing to the reduction of excess child morbidity and acute malnutrition incidence WASH 1. Excess morbidity and mortality reduced 3. Timely response to affected populations Amount and % of Allocation $4.85 Million 22.7% of total The principal objective of the WASH Cluster under the 2014-2015 Strategic Response Plan is to contribute to the reduction of excess child morbidity and acute malnutrition prevalence through the timely provision of WASH services to populations affected by natural disasters and conflicts. Particular service delivery efforts include improving capacity for emergency response to extreme events, and advocating for increased presence of WASH partners in under-served provinces. The timely provision of safe drinking water, sanitation and hygiene services directly after the onset of a humanitarian crisis is essential to prevent disease outbreaks that would otherwise quickly exacerbate the emergency situation. Emergency WASH services further contribute to resilient bodies and minds by enabling women and girls to maintain their basic personal hygiene, privacy and dignity. To this aim the timely procurement and pre-positioning of essential supplies is key to an effective response. Given the high malnutrition prevalence of children under-five in Afghanistan any humanitarian situation is likely to result in a rapid deterioration of the health and nutritional status of young children when basic WASH services are absent. WASH and particularly sanitation and hand-washing are now increasingly recognised as key interventions to combat malnutrition. Combining WASH and nutrition interventions in emergency situations is therefore essential to maximise their synergistic effect on improving the health and nutritional status of young children. WASH Strategic Priorities: (1) Ensure provision of WASH services in areas where the emergency nutrition thresholds have been broken and where nutrition interventions are ongoing in response to the crisis. (1) Eligible Provinces: Badakhshan, Badghis, Farah, Faryab, Ghazni, Helmand, Kabul, Kandahar Khost, Nangarhar, Nuristan, Paktia, Paktika, and Uruzgan; (2) Response to the WASH needs of vulnerable populations in areas affected by mass displacement of population and cross-border movements (IDPs, returnees and refugees) putting pressure on available resources within host communities; and areas affected by ongoing conflict. (2) Eligible Provinces: Helmand, Kandahar, Khost, Kunar, Nangarhar, and Paktia; Eligible Programme Areas: Provision of access to safe water and appropriate sanitation facilities supported by hygiene promotion activities in areas where the emergency nutrition thresholds have been broken and where nutrition interventions are ongoing in response to the crisis and in areas affected by mass displacement of population, cross-border movements and ongoing conflict. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Coordination Saves Lives http://afg.humanitarianresponse.info/

CHF Strategy Paper - First Standard Allocation 2015 7 Allocation Envelope 5 Cluster Associated SRP Strategic Priorities Amount and % of Allocation Improving information management (IM) and strategic assessments in priority areas NUTRITION & HEALTH 1. Excess morbidity and mortality reduced $0.7 Million 3.2% of total High quality, accurate and reliable data for evidence-based planning remains a challenge due to limited real time country-wide field assessments. This is partly due to restricted physical access, erratic population movements, insecurity and limited partner capacity and resources. As a result, the analysis of needs and gaps for the Humanitarian Needs Overview of the HRP 2015 relied heavily on secondary data which are out of date and are not necessarily reflective of the humanitarian situation. For example, Crude Mortality Rate and accurate population figures are not available. Furthermore, a lack of data at local and district levels remains a key impediment to planning humanitarian action. Systematic assessments and monitoring is essential to enable comparison of results and understand changes in needs over time. Good quality data is vital to inform and support effective humanitarian response and enable ethical and accountable use of limited resources. As such, funding under this envelope intends to help strengthen information collection and analysis throughout the humanitarian programme cycle. However, given the context in Afghanistan and the limited capacity in country of common standards and methodologies for data collection and technical expertise, funding under this CHF envelope intends to build upon the achievements made in 2014. Investment in the IM tools and capacity of one sector is expected to be mutually beneficial to the humanitarian community at large. Agencies must ensure transparency and broad dissemination of results to relevant stakeholders and actors, and commit to producing timely reports that contribute to a comprehensive evidence base able to inform effective and accountable decision making. IM Strategies Priorities: (1) Undertake nutrition assessments to gain a better understanding of needs and gaps in nutrition response allowing for better-targeted and appropriate humanitarian interventions. (1) Eligible Provinces: Badakhshan, Badghis, Bamyan, Farah, Ghor, Ghazni, Herat, Laghman, Nimroz, Samangan, Wardak, and Zabul; (2) Carry out a survey of health facilities allowing for a validation of functionality, assessment as to the level of services being provided and estimation of population coverage to feed into the BPHS and EPHS planning process and the joint health system review. (2) Eligible Provinces: Badakhshan, Badghis, Bamyan, Daikundi, Faryab, Ghor, Herat, Kunduz, Kapisa, Parwan, Uruzgan, and Zabul; Eligible Programme Areas: Conduct SMART, SQUEAC and RNA assessments in high priority provinces while enhancing the capacity of nutrition actors. Expand the Health Facility Functionality Survey to an additional 12 provinces. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Coordination Saves Lives http://afg.humanitarianresponse.info/

CHF Strategy Paper - First Standard Allocation 2015 8 Guidance for the Submission of Project Proposals 1. Only eligible NGOs recommended by OCHA s Humanitarian Financing Unit (HFU) following the successful completion of the Due Diligence process can apply for funding. 2. Projects must be in line with the allocation envelope objectives, geographical priorities and target groups, and must demonstrate complementarity and coordination with the prioritised cluster. 3. Organisations wishing to apply under more than one envelope / Cluster (i.e. WASH and Nutrition), are requested to submit separate concept notes for the respective Cluster, with distinct logical frameworks and budgets, highlighting possible complementarity of the proposed activities. Support costs should be split proportionally. 4. Direct implementation of CHF-funded projects by the recipient organisation, rather than through an implementing partner organisation, is preferred (where this is not possible, justification to be provided, including clarity on transactional costs). 5. Pass-through arrangements - where organisations simply pass on funding to their implementing partner organisation without providing any meaningful guidance, coordination, capacity building, technical advice, monitoring and evaluation capacities or any other function of additional value - are not eligible for funding. 6. The project duration can be up to 12 months. 7. The recommended minimum amount for proposals to be submitted for CHF funding is US$250,000. Where the budget is lower, the Cluster will have to provide a justification. This may be the case for proposals submitted by national NGOs in areas where access is limited. 8. Organisations must use the CHF online grants management system (GMS) for the submission of concept notes (https://chfafghanistan.unocha.org). Specifications for the Selection of Project Proposals In addition to the objectives, geographical priorities and target groups outlined in the Allocation Strategy Paper, the Strategic Review Committees will use the following criteria to score the submitted concept notes: 1. Monitoring and Reporting: Projects demonstrating clear linkages between their monitoring methodology and geographic/thematic requirements will be favourably weighted. 2. Innovative approaches to work: the use of innovative methodologies or modalities for aid delivery, which are relevant to the beneficiary group, geographic specificities or thematic context. 3. Value for Money: Projects that can demonstrate a high degree of cost effectiveness (i.e.: maximum outcome and beneficiary reach for every dollar invested) relative to the project budget will be prioritised. 4. Crosscutting Issues: Projects demonstrating significant attention to addressing protection issues, the impact on the environment and gender considerations as mainstreamed components of aid delivery will be favourably weighted. 5. Coordination: Strategic Review Committees will review participation of proposing partners in national and regional coordination forums. Strong participation is encouraged. 6. Accountability to Affected Populations: Proposals that demonstrate strong linkages with beneficiary communities, feedback mechanisms, etc. will be favourably weighted. 7. Beneficiary prioritisation and selection: Project beneficiaries are selected based on strict criteria in line with the Cluster parameters. 8. Assessments: Project proposals are based on recent assessments and data and gaps are clearly spelled out and justified. 9. Exit Strategy: It is encouraged that project proposals are allowing for an exit strategy for the proposed activities or considering other funding sources to sustain the intervention after the CHF funding expires. 10. Linkages to government mechanisms: Partner are encouraged to show how their proposal links with or complements Government systems where appropriate, or does not duplicate established mechanisms, and how it links to systems such as for information management. Timeline and Procedure This CHF Allocation Strategy is published by the HC on Sunday, 1 March 2015. From this day, eligible humanitarian organisations with projects aligned to the allocation envelopes have 14 days, i.e. until Sunday 15 March 2015, to submit project concept notes through the CHF online grants management system (GMS), accessible at https://chfafghanistan.unocha.org. Only after the approval by the CHF Advisory Board, successful applicant organisations will be invited to submit full proposals for subsequent review. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Coordination Saves Lives http://afg.humanitarianresponse.info/

CHF Strategy Paper - First Standard Allocation 2015 9 Sunday, 1 March Sunday, 15 March Tuesday 17 March to Thursday 19 March Tuesday 24 March Wednesday 25 March Thursday 2 April The HC publishes the First Standard Allocation 2015 strategy Deadline for interested organisations to coordinate Project Concept Note submissions with the respective Clusters and submit CHF Concept Notes through the online database GMS Concept Notes submitted are scored by the Strategic Review Committees (SRCs) Clusters defend list of prioritised projects for CHF funding to the CHF Advisory Board outlining the project priorities HC: Decision on Concept Notes finalised Deadline for full-fledged Proposal submission by invited organisations through the GMS Technical Review Committees, partner feedback and finalisation of Project Proposals Monday 6 April to Wednesday 18 April 19 April onwards HC approval and Grant Agreement preparations End of April Disbursement Process Contact Information Interested organisations should liaise with the respective clusters to ensure their proposed intervention is aligned to the HRP 2015 priorities and the guidance provided by this Allocation Strategy paper and is properly coordinated with other stakeholders: Cluster Name E-Mail Nutrition Mr. Leo Matunga and Dr. Zakia lmatunga@unicef.org and maroof@unicef.org Health Dr. Iman Shankit and Dr. Rafiqi shankitii@who.int and rafiqig@afg.emro.who.int WASH Multi-Sector (Refugees and Returnees) Mr. Rolf Luyendijk and Mr. Frederic Patigny Ms. Marguerite A. Nowak rluyendijk@unicef.org and patignyf@who.int nowak@unhcr.org The allocation process will be supported by the Humanitarian Financing Unit (HFU) based in OCHA Afghanistan, Kabul. The HFU can be contacted at: chfafg@un.org or on the CHF Helpline: 079 300 11 39. Complaints Mechanism CHF stakeholders with insufficiently addressed concerns or complaints regarding Afghanistan CHF processes or decisions can at any point in time contact the OCHA Head of Office a.i. (howard1@un.org) or write to chfcomplaints@un.org with these concerns. Complaints will be compiled, reviewed and raised to the Humanitarian Coordinator, who will then take a decision on necessary action(s). The Humanitarian Coordinator will share with the Advisory Board any such concerns or complaints and actions taken thereof. Annexes Annex I: Timeline of the 1 st CHF Standard Allocation 2015 Annex II: Standard Indicators 1 st CHF Standard Allocation 2015 Annex III: Overall Needs and Vulnerability Index HRP 2015 Annex IV: Mainstreaming Protection 1 st CHF Standard Allocation 2015 United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Coordination Saves Lives http://afg.humanitarianresponse.info/

Afghanistan - Common Humanitarian Fund Timeline 2015 First Standard Allocation 1 Sun,1 March HC: Release of Allocation Strategy APRIL MARCH 15 17 19 24 25 2 6 18 19 Sun, 15 March Tue-Thu, 17-19 March Tue, 24 March Wed, 25 March Thu, 2 April Mon-Wed, 6-18 April 19 April Onwards Deadline: Concept Note Submissions by Partners Strategic Review Committees Meetings AB Meeting: Cluster Recommendations HC decision on Concept Notes Finalized Deadline: Project Proposal Submissions Technical Review Committees, Partner Feedback HC approval & Grant Agreement Preparation 30 End of April Disbursement Process Action by HFU Action by Partner

Afghanistan - Common Humanitarian Fund Standard Indicators 1st CHF Standard Allocation 2015 The following table of indicators should guide applying organisations in developing the logical framework in the CHF Grant Management System (GMS). At least one standard indicator must be chosen from the drop down menu. Where possible please adopt all those indicators below that correspond to your planned activities. (Refer to the HRP monitoring framework for further guidance and explanation of these indicators) OUTPUT INDICATORS 1. HEALTH Number of deliveries attended by Skilled Birth Attendant at facility or by CHW at community level Number of Children < 2 vaccinated Number of outbreak alarms investigated within 48 hours from notification % of outbreak alarms investigated within 48 hours from notification Number of FATPs or HFs supported to provide trauma stabilization, treatment and referral services Health professionals receiving training in stabilization and management of war trauma Number of facilities where functionality survey undertaken 2. MULTI-SECTOR (REFUGEES & RETURNEES) Number of families receiving shelter assistance Number of families receiving NFIs assistance Number of families receiving cash assistance Number of deliveries attended by SBA at facility or by CHW at community level Number of Children < 2 vaccinated Number of households provided access to a functioning sanitation facility Number of people in intervention areas provided with access to at least 15lpcd of drinking water Number of people in intervention areas provided with access to a place to wash hands with soap Number of out of school children (5-17) in IDP and conflict affected communities receiving Protection Services Number of GBV survivors who receive GBV response services (health, police, legal and protection) Number of children assisted with Temporary Learning Spaces Number of beneficiaries receiving food assistance 3. NUTRITION Number of children 6-59 months screened Number of IPD & OPD SAM boys and girls 0-59 months discharged cured Number of IPD & OPD SAM boys and girls 0-59 months discharged defaulters Number of IPD & OPD SAM boys and girls 0-59 months discharged deaths Number of OPD MAM boys and girls 0-59 months discharged cured Number of OPD MAM boys and girls 0-59 months discharged defaulters Number of OPD MAM boys and girls 0-59 months discharged deaths Number of boys and girls 6-23 months receiving multiple micronutrient supplementation (MNPs) Number of women with boys and girls aged 0-23 months reached with IYCF promotion messages % of women with boys and girls aged 0-23 months reached with IYCF promotion messages Number of SMART assessments conducted Number of SQUEAC assessments conducted Number of RNA assessments conducted 4. WASH Number of households provided access to a functioning sanitation facility Number of people in intervention areas provided with access to at least 15lpcd of drinking water Number of people in intervention areas provided with access to a place to wash hands with soap

Overall Needs and Vulnerability Index Afghanistan CHAP 2015 22 September 2014 Province Overall Needs Index Conflict Profile Mortality & Morbidity Score Under-5 Mortality CivCas (Conflict) CivCas (Mines/UXOs) Severe Acute Malnutrition Global Acute Malnutrition Acute Diarrhoeal Disease Measles ARI (Pneumonia) Vulnerability Score Kcal intake deficiency (<1,500 Kcal/p/d) Poor Food Consumption Household Hunger Vaccination Coverage Deficit % Deliveries Without SBA Poor Access to Safe Water Poor Hygiene Practices Insecurity Exposure to Mines/UXOs Conflict Induced IDPs Unmet Emergency Needs Natural Disaster Exposure Weight 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 6.0 1.0 1.0 Kunar 4.1 4.8 4.7 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3.6 1 3 1 2 5 3 4 5 2 5 1 3 Nangarhar 3.9 4.9 4.5 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 3.3 1 3 3 1 2 2 1 5 4 5 1 2 Hilmand 3.7 4.9 3.8 2 5 5 5 4 4 3 1 3.7 1 2 1 5 4 2 4 5 4 5 1 3 Wardak 3.7 4.7 3.7 3 4 4 5 5 2 3 3 3.7 1 3 2 4 4 3 2 5 5 5 1 2 Badghis 3.5 3.6 3.1 5 2 2 5 3 3 3 2 4.0 5 3 3 4 5 3 5 4 1 5 1 2 Laghman 3.5 2.8 4.3 1 4 4 5 5 5 4 5 2.6 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 5 2 1 1 3 Paktika 3.4 3.9 4.0 4 5 3 5 3 4 5 2 2.9 1 2 1 1 3 3 5 5 3 3 1 3 Faryab 3.4 4.9 3.2 4 5 5 4 2 1 1 2 3.7 1 1 2 4 4 3 3 5 3 5 4 2 Nuristan 3.4 2.3 3.7 1 2 3 5 5 5 4 4 3.1 4 3 4 5 5 5 5 3 2 2 1 3 Ghazni 3.4 3.7 3.6 4 5 5 5 3 1 3 2 3.2 5 2 1 4 4 3 4 5 5 2 1 3 Kandahar 3.3 4.4 3.5 2 5 5 5 4 1 5 1 3.2 1 3 1 5 2 2 3 5 3 4 1 2 Badakhshan 3.3 2.2 3.5 3 2 2 5 3 4 2 5 3.1 5 5 4 4 5 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 Sar e Pul 3.2 2.8 3.4 4 2 2 4 3 4 2 5 3.0 3 3 1 4 4 4 2 2 1 4 2 2 Ghor 3.1 3.4 2.6 5 2 1 3 3 2 2 3 3.6 1 4 3 5 5 4 5 3 1 5 1 3 Paktya 3.1 3.3 3.8 4 3 3 5 5 4 5 2 2.4 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 4 3 1 2 Kunduz 3.0 3.4 3.1 3 4 2 4 3 2 2 3 3.0 2 1 4 2 3 4 3 4 4 3 1 3 Kabul 3.0 4.3 3.0 3 4 4 4 3 1 3 2 3.1 2 3 1 2 1 2 1 3 5 5 1 2 Uruzgan 3.0 2.5 3.3 2 3 1 5 5 5 2 1 2.8 4 3 1 5 3 5 3 4 1 2 1 1 Khost 3.0 3.2 3.4 4 4 3 5 5 1 5 1 2.6 3 1 1 5 2 2 2 5 3 2 1 2 Farah 3.0 3.9 2.5 5 3 1 4 2 1 3 1 3.5 1 2 2 4 4 3 3 4 2 5 1 4 Balkh 3.0 3.5 2.8 4 2 1 3 3 2 5 4 3.2 1 3 2 1 2 2 4 3 3 5 3 2 Hirat 3.0 4.4 2.9 5 4 4 3 3 1 3 1 3.1 1 2 1 1 1 2 4 4 3 5 1 3 Logar 2.9 2.9 3.5 3 4 1 3 3 5 3 4 2.4 1 3 1 3 1 3 4 4 4 2 1 2 Kapisa 2.8 2.9 3.3 3 3 1 4 3 4 4 3 2.4 1 1 1 2 3 4 2 3 3 3 1 2 Jawzjan 2.7 2.3 3.0 4 1 1 4 3 3 3 5 2.5 1 2 1 1 2 4 2 3 1 3 5 3 Baghlan 2.7 2.5 3.0 3 3 4 4 3 2 1 3 2.5 1 3 3 2 4 4 3 4 4 1 3 3 Zabul 2.7 2.4 3.2 2 3 5 5 3 2 5 1 2.2 3 3 3 5 1 3 1 4 2 1 1 1 Samangan 2.7 1.2 3.4 4 1 3 5 3 4 1 5 2.0 4 3 1 2 3 4 3 1 2 1 2 3 Takhar 2.6 1.3 2.8 3 1 1 4 3 3 3 4 2.4 5 3 3 3 5 2 2 2 2 1 2 4 Nimroz 2.5 1.4 3.1 2 1 3 5 3 5 3 2 2.0 1 3 4 3 1 5 3 2 2 1 1 3 Bamyan 2.4 1.4 2.8 4 1 3 3 2 3 3 5 2.0 3 4 3 1 2 4 3 2 1 1 1 2 Daykundi 2.3 1.2 2.5 4 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 2.1 1 5 2 3 5 5 3 2 1 1 1 2 Parwan 2.2 1.9 2.7 3 2 1 4 3 2 3 3 1.8 1 3 2 2 1 3 1 3 5 1 1 1 Panjsher 2.1 1.1 2.8 3 1 1 4 3 3 3 4 1.5 1 1 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 1 1 4 Indicator Code M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10 V11 V12 The vulnerability score is a weighted average of indicators V1 to V12. Conflict profile: weighted average of indicators M2, M3, V8, V9, V10 Mortality & morbidity score: weighted average of indicators M1 to M8. MICS 2010 2011 UNAMA Sep 13 Aug 14 UNMACCA Sep 13 Aug 14 NNS 2013 NNS 2013 HMIS (MOPH) May 11 Apr 14 HMIS (MOPH) May 11 Apr 14 HMIS (MOPH) May 11 Apr 14 Vulnerability score: weighted average of indicators V1 to V12. NRVA 2012 SFSA 2014 SFSA 2014 NICS 2013 NNS 2013 NRVA 2012 NNS 2013 NNS 2013 Various Sources Sep 11 Aug 14 UNMACCA Aug 2014 UNHCR PMT Sep 11 Aug 14 ES&NFI Aug 2014 WFP Index Scale Reference: 1 Very Low 2 Low 3 Medium 4 High 5 Very High

Afghanistan - Common Humanitarian Fund Mainstreaming protection in sector responses supported by the 2015 First Standard Allocation Based on consolidated practices and tools developed by the Global Protection Cluster 1, the following interventions should be considered as initiative of protection mainstreaming aimed at avoiding causing harm, guarantee equitable access, support participation and empowerment and promote accountability to beneficiaries. It must be noted that all humanitarian actors have an ethical responsibility to incorporate protection principles into their humanitarian response programs. The Protection Cluster can provide further support and advice. 1. Nutrition Cluster In its interventions the Nutrition Cluster will continue to make all possible efforts to move the point of delivery close to the affected population. Beneficiaries, including women and girls, should be consulted to understand needs and preferences for location, design, and methodology of assistance. Activities should promote and help protect the rights of people who have historically been marginalised or discriminated against, including women and girls. Interventions with displaced beneficiaries should not be at the expense of the local host population and assistance should be provided to both groups where possible. Beneficiaries should know that they have a right to equitable and safe assistance. Efforts should be made to make that sure beneficiaries and staff know where to refer or report incidents of rights violations, including by contacting Protection Cluster members. In establishing its locations for service delivery, the Nutrition Cluster may consider to include protective spaces for women and children, adequately staffed with specialized personnel, to provide a safe environment where recreational activities for children, MRE, hygiene promotion and other awareness sessions can take place and where psychosocial support can be obtained. 2. Health Cluster The Health Cluster should make sure that the location of health facilities and routes to reach them are not putting the beneficiaries at risk of violence, especially the risk or threat of gender based violence (GBV), and attacks from armed groups. Services must be accessible to persons with reduced mobility or other impairments. Infrastructures should be equipped with ramps and railings to health facilities so that all individuals can access and use them in safety and dignity. Discussion should be held with groups of persons with disabilities in the community to identify the type of adaptations and a dialogue should be pursued with local actors that represent persons with disabilities. The Cluster should ensure that the health services are respectful and inclusive of cultural and religious practice. The Cluster should recommend separate waiting areas (male/female). The Cluster should also consider advocating with the MoPH the adequate employment of female health staff members with skills and experience working with women and with children. Confidentiality and privacy should be respected in any form of consultation, counseling or personal information sharing (e.g. space arrangements and design to preserve safety and dignity; information sharing protocol to avoid a survivor of abuse exposing them to further trauma). Identifiable information should not be shared unless consent has been given by the beneficiary. The Cluster should ensure that medical facilities are accessible to all and if setting up health facilities for displaced communities, or if implementing mobile clinics interventions, the location should also take into consideration the needs of the hosting communities. Health Cluster members and staff should be able to report and share protection concerns with the protection cluster, including the GBV and Child Protection sub clusters, as those specialized actors may be able to provide assistance. In establishing its locations for service delivery, the Health Cluster may consider to include protective spaces for women and children, adequately staffed with specialized personnel, to provide 1 See http://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/en/areas of responsibility/protection mainstreaming.html

Mainstreaming Protection - CHF First Standard Allocation 2015 3 a safe environment where recreational activities for children, MRE, hygiene promotion and other awareness sessions can take place and where psychosocial support can be obtained. 3. WASH The WASH Cluster should ensure that the location of facilities and routes to them are away from actual or potential threats such as violence, especially the risk or threat of GBV, and attacks from armed groups. Infrastructure adaptations should be put in place so that all individuals can access and use facilities in safety and dignity. Latrines design must preserve the safety and dignity of its users. Latrines should be physically separate for female and male, well lighted, and their design should account for the needs of children. To achieve this, consultations should take place with multiple segments of the community. If women and children are the most likely to be collecting water, WASH intervention should include safe and shaded waiting areas, where possible. Locations of water pumps or water collection points should be discussed with the beneficiaries. If setting up facilities for displaced communities, consultations must be also take place with host communities so as to avoid community tensions possibly leading to violence or harassment. The Cluster shall also analyze coping strategies. Risks must be recognised as soon as possible, and interventions undertaken to help people avoid resorting to negative coping strategies. 4. Mainstreaming protection in assessments (Health and nutrition allocation) The meaningful participation of all segments of a society/ community is fundamental in designing data collection processes. Participation implies inclusion of community members, not only limited to the leaders and most notable representatives of the beneficiary community, but also a broad range of women, men, children of different ages, persons with specific needs (e.g. disabilities and minority groups) to best portray the situation, needs, intentions and challenges of all segments of the population. Surveys and general data collection should also be driven by principles of dignity and respect for the population surveyed, reflected in the questions posed, the approach used and the modalities of interaction. The choice between quantitative and qualitative methods will depend on the thematic of the assessment. The integration of quantitative methodologies with qualitative methods may increase inclusiveness and reach out to various segments of the population (e.g. women, children). In the organization of the assessment teams, specific attention should be devoted to the composition of the team, by attempting to attain an adequate gender balance to facilitate the reach out to women and girls. In the preparation of the assessment teams, specific attention should be devoted to the language skills of the team, to reach out to minority groups. By representing the assistance provider, the enumerators should never take advantage in any way of this position. The assessment should include a Code of Conduct with a Confidentiality Agreement to be signed by the enumerators/ facilitators. Informed consent to take part to the assessment: is to be obtained from the respondent as one of the key aspects to protect sources and encourage a free and frank participation. The sample should include a variety of participants form different segments of the population in order to be adequately representative and to capture the different views, intentions, needs, challenges of the entirety of the population to better shape the assistance programmes. Form a gender perspective, the choice of respondents should not exclude women. It may be appropriate to organize specific meetings with women, to set an environment where women may feel more at ease to fully express their situation, opinions, needs etc. Attention to the age perspective shall also be taken into consideration, by including adolescents and older persons (> 60 years old) in the group of respondents.

Mainstreaming Protection - CHF First Standard Allocation 2015 3 For children, specific settings and interviewing techniques may have to be used, as assessments need to be age appropriate. The inclusion of persons with physical disabilities should be ensured to better capture specific issues and needs. Gender, age and diversity considerations should be included in the choice of indicators, and when tabulating the results, which should be disaggregated. The choice of some questions may bring a specific value in integrating protection principles in the assessment, both as need assessments before intervening as well as for assessments and monitoring during the implementation of programs/ interventions. The following is a non exhaustive list of both quantitative and qualitative questions. Nutrition Wash Health Are there safe spaces for women to breastfeed? Are there any reports or indications that women are stopping or reducing breast feeding? Are there observed/reported cases of unaccompanied infants (0 6 months) who are not being breastfed? Are there any differences in breastfeeding practices for baby girls or baby boys? Are children screened for acute malnutrition and referred to nutrition centres/community management of acute malnutrition sites? How is food distributed within the home between women, girls, boys and men? Within the household has controls over resources? Does this impact on access to food and feeding habits? Has the emergency caused any change in the roles and responsibility in securing food for the family? Are there differences for women, girls, boys and men in terms of access to food? Are there any challenges for women heading household in having access to food? If boys and men are separated from families can they prepare food for themselves? How do elderly women and men have access to food? Does the food basket meet their specific needs? What nutrition interventions were in place before the current emergency? How were they organized? How do school children access meals while in schools? Do households have access to micronutrients sources? Are water points accessible to women? Are water points accessible for children? Have women/ children/ older persons/ persons with disability consulted on the location and type of wash facilities? Are WASH facilities available at schools and protective spaces for children and women? Are water points safe for children? Are water points accessible to older persons and persons with disabilities? Are separate sanitation facilities accessible to women and girls? Are they well lighted? Does the lay out of the sanitation facilities guarantee privacy and protection for women and children? Are latrines safe for children? Have there been any safety incidents involving children? Is the practice of water collection exposing children to hazardous / heavy labour? Is the practice of water collection having an impact on children attendance to school? Are sanitation facilities accessible for older persons and persons with disabilities? Do women/ girls feel safe when they use latrines and sanitation facilities? If not what type of problems do they encounter/ report? Are there any suggestions for improving access and quality of water and sanitation facilities for the emergency affected/ displaced population? Are there items for women and girls available in the hygiene kits? Are there any suggestions for improving the quality of hygiene kits for women and girls? Are health facilities accessible to women and children at convenient times and locations? Are health facilities accessible to older persons and persons with disabilities? Are Reproductive Health services available in the health facilities? Is there a presence of female staff in the health facilities? What is the ratio? Is it sufficient? Are there specialized services and staff for mental health and psychosocial support available at public health facilities? Are there specialized services and trained staff for screening for Gender Based Violence or child violence, abuse and neglect available at public health facilities? Is there a system to refer and report these cases? Do health facilities have spaces where women, children or any other person can report in confidentiality? Does the health staff respect the confidentiality? What are the main obstacles for women and girls to access health facilities (e.g. distance, cost, lack of female staff, cultural restrictions, lack of specialised services...) Do affected population face HIV/AIDS and Sexually Transmitted Infections [STIs] related protection risks? Are cases referred safely and with confidentiality to appropriate HIV services? Have children, women and persons with disabilities participated in making suggestions for improving access and quality of health facilities for the emergency affected/ displaced population? What suggestions have been made, if any? Are health service providers able and trained to detect, respond to and refer protection cases? Are there specialized, age appropriate services for survivors of landmines and ERWs? ***