emergency response fund | central african republic

September 2008 Slide 1

The Emergency Response Fundin the Central African Republic

Humanitarian and Development Partnership Team

Central African Republic

Humanitarian and Development Partnership Team CAR | www.hdptcar.net

September 2008

Source: FTS (2008)

2004 2006

Funding to CAP projects increases from $3m in 2004 to more than $85 by August 2008

2005

Humanitarian funding increases

2007

$9.8m

$69.3m

$2.9m

$23.9m

Humanitarian and Development Partnership Team CAR | www.hdptcar.net Slide 2

$85.4m

Aug 08

HUMANITARIAN CONTEXT

September 2008 Humanitarian and Development Partnership Team CAR

Paoua

Bangui

Kaga-Bandoro

Bambari

Birao

Ndélé

SibutBouar

Bossangoa

Humanitarian presence multiplies – January 2007

Bozoum

500 kmSource: HDPT CAR / Mar 08


Slide 3

September 2008 10/04/23Humanitarian and Development Partnership Team CAR

Paoua

Bangui

Bambari

Birao

Ndélé

SibutBouar

Sam Ouandja

Bossangoa

Humanitarian presence multiplies – September 2008

Bozoum

Bocaranga

500 kmSource: HDPT CAR / Aug 08

Mbrés

Kaga-Bandoro

Kabo

Gordil


September 2008 Slide 5Humanitarian and Development Partnership Team CAR | www.hdptcar.net


Why is the ERF relevant to the context in CAR?

Donor environment: only one humanitarian donor with presence in country. ERF

provides an opportunity for donors to engage in CAR with little administrative investment

through a well structured mechanism which insures accountability, inclusiveness, and

relevance

The pattern of the crisis, mainly a protection crisis, does not allow for exhaustive, clear-

cut sector needs assessments and the design of typical humanitarian response projects..

The flexibility of the ERF responds to this context.

CAR is a land-locked, ill-equipped country with a poor road network and beneficiaries are

spread all over the north. This means high programme set-up costs with low cost

effectiveness. The ERF is crucial to cover start-up costs.

1

2

3

The design of the ERF in CAR responds to a specific context


Two major objectives for the Emergency Response Fund

Enable NGOs and UN agencies to respond

quickly and effectively to worsening situation by:

Making funds available to cover start-up costs

Making funds available in cases of rapidly changing circumstances and humanitarian needs where gaps need to be filled and other donor mechanisms are unavailable

Making funds available for priority, underfunded CAP projects

Ensure humanitarian needs are addressed in

collaborative spirit, fostering understanding and

coordination within and between clusters and

humanitarian organisations

Respond to needs, support coordination

ERF OBJECTIVES

1

2

A

B

Support start-up, cover gaps

C



ERF objectives in line with CAP strategic priorities

Enhance the protection of people affected by violence in the north of CAR by

(a)stepping up the presence of humanitarian organisations amongst affected communities,

(b)using a human-rights based approach in all sectors, and

(c)extending the geographical coverage of ongoing protections projects.

Provide timely and adequate emergency assistance to people who are deprived of their

rights – while effectively incorporating gender aspects and HIV/AIDS prevention and

response – especially in the following sectors: education, health, food security,, and water,

sanitation, and hygiene.

Ensure coherence and complementarities between humanitarian assistance, early

recovery, and development programmes by reinforcing national and communal capacities.

Strategic objectives for humanitarian action in 2008

ERF OBJECTIVES

1

2


3


A simple funding mechanism

ERF supports projects in CAR in all humanitarian sectors

HC, supported by cluster leads and OCHA, manages ERF, UNDP administers ERF

No funding ceiling, but grants expected up to $300,000 to be used within 26 weeks

International NGOs accredited with Government of CAR and UN agencies may submit

project proposals to respective cluster or, via OCHA, to the ERF Advisory Board

Project proposals follow same one-page format used in the CAP

Project proposal selection occurs continuously

HC will only consider proposals based on recommendation of relevant cluster (or the

Advisory Board for cross-cluster projects)

Simple, standardized design to allow rapid response

ERF MECHANISM

1

2

3

4

5

6

7



Clearly defined roles and responsibilities

NGOs and UN agencies– Discuss proposals within cluster and, cluster lead sends endorsed projects to HC

– Send final, standardized report to UNDP and HC within two months of project’s end

Humanitarian Coordinator, supported by OCHA– Oversees work of clusters and Advisory Board, ensuring projects are first vetted by them

– Makes final selection, forwards proposal to UNDP for disbursement

– Ensures projects receiving ERF grants are included in CAP

– Ensures NGOs and UN agencies monitor activities (supported by clusters)

– Reviews ERF each quarter with support from OCHA and Advisory Board

UNDP– Disburses funds within 5 working days of signature, monitors use via financial statements sent to HC

Advisory Board– Review cross-cluster proposals and review ERF quarterly

Overall coordination of projects is ensured by clusters, Advisory Board and HC

ERF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

A

B

C

D



ERF Flowchart: project cycle from submission to approval

Submits project

Calls Advisory Board meeting (multisector, coordination, security projects)

NGO / UN

Cluster

HC

OCHA

Cluster lead consults members on single sector projects

Advisory Board

Considers multisector, coordination, security projects

Recommends project

Rejects project

Recommends project

Rejects project

Makes final decision

May appeal to HC if project rejected

Informs NGO of HC decision> next slide


ERF PROJECT SELECTION


ERF Flowchart: project cycle from approval to final report

Approves project

Informs NGO/UN agency of HC decision

Drafts contract

Submits work plan and signed contract (with bank details)

Completes work plan and signs contract

Disburses 1st tranche

Submits int. financial and progress report*

Disburses 2nd tranche project > $100

Submits final report

Supports drafting of work plan, reports, etc.

Submits intermediary financial report

Disburses 3rd tranche project > $200

HC

UNDP

NGO / UN

OCHA


ERF PROJECT ADMINISTRATION

September 2008

Sweden

United Kingdom

Netherlands

Norway

$1.1m

$2.7m

$2.2m

ERF contributions by donor

ERF now 4th channel of humanitarian funding in CAR

• Total funds received

$12,029,057

• Total funds engaged

$10,454,197 for 66 projects

NGOs: 66%, UN: 34%

• Rejected or withdrawn projects

11 projects at a value of $2,489,795

Funding and project status as of August 2008

Ireland

$4.0m

EMERGENCY RESPONSE FUND

$1.9m


Bangui

Kaga-Bandoro

Birao

Ndélé

Sam Ouandja

Bossangoa

UNDSS

Bocaranga

500 kmSource: HDPT CAR / Feb 08

UNHAS

Bozoum

Bouar

Ouanda-Djallé

Ngaound.Paoua

IPHD

THE ERF AT WORK


Projects funded by the ERF since April 2007

September 2008 Slide 14Humanitarian and Development Partnership Team CAR | www.hdptcar.net Photo: Pierre Holtz for OCHA

ERF AT WORK

Displaced people in Kabo now haveaccess to safedrinking water

September 2008 Slide 15Humanitarian and Development Partnership Team CAR | www.hdptcar.net Photo: Pierre Holtz for OCHA

ERF AT WORK

Medicines aredelivered to thehospital inNgaoundayein the farnorthwest

September 2008 Slide 16Humanitarian and Development Partnership Team CAR | www.hdptcar.net

LESSONS LEARNT

One year ERF in CAR – key lessons learnt

HC plays central role, which requires specific training skills, in-depth knowledge of

financial rules and sustained dedication

Inclusiveness of the ERF mechanism requires a strong commitment from all

stakeholders ( HC, clusters, Advisory Board, OCHA, UNDP, donors, etc.). If one fails, the

whole mechanism is blocked.

Consultations of stakeholders for the design of ERF objectives, scope and rules and

dissemination of all supporting material, including FAQs, through the HDPT intranet

helped bringing about an overall consensus, which in turn convinced donors.

ERF perceived as NGO-oriented, which cannot directly access the CERF

More donors have engaged in CAR thanks to the opportunity without substituting routine

bilateral funding.

ERF eases NGO implementation and programme start-up. It enhances NGO access to

bilateral medium-term funding, allowing them to better balance support and programme

costs in their proposals.

1

2

3

4

5

6

emergency response fund | central african republic

Economy & Finance