in Zimbabwe - OCHANet

More documents

Recommendations

Info

the global position. IOM is the third largest CERF recipient in Zimbabwe, whereas it is the sixth largest recipient of CERF funding globally 27 . Section 1.4 Zimbabwe Emergency Response Fund Table 6 below shows donor contributions to the ERF as well as grants to UN agencies (listed individually) and NGOs (shown as a total). Table 6: Zimbabwe Emergency Response Fund: Contributions and Grants (in US$) Donor Contributions 2009 2010 Denmark 849,607 3,914,473.45 Ireland 647,668 Italy 858,369 Norway 2,115,901 717,537.75 Switzerland 251,256 Total Contribution 4,772,801 4,632,011.20 Grants 2009 2010 International NGOs 2,555,175 2,268,632 National NGOs 795,811 1,467,944 Total to NGOs 3,350,986 3,736,576 IOM 200,000 200,000 UNFPA 200,000 UNHCR 69,984 Total to UN agencies/IOM 469,984 200,000 Section 2.1 Value added of the CERF: UN agency perspectives Table 7 below compares CERF funding to UN agencies and IOM in 2011 from the first UFE round and Rapid Response grants with other humanitarian funding received between 1 st January and 15 th August 2011. It does not include funding from the second UFE round because the grants to individual agencies had not been finalised. UNICEF responded to the request for funding information with details of individual grants, shown in the adjoining table. Table 7: CERF funding in context: 2011 funding (in US$) Agency CERF funding Other humanitarian funding CERF as % of total hum funding IOM 2,056,178 8,013,713 20.4% UNFPA 897,231 0 100.0% UNHCR 250,001 1,597,582 13.5% UNICEF 4,894,354 6,269,717 43.8% WFP 897,221 54,900,000 1.6% 27 For a list of CERF funding by agency globally, see http://ochaonline.un.org/cerf/CERFFigures/AgenciesreceivingCERFfunds/tabid/1802/language/en‐US/Default.aspx www.p2pt.org.uk Review of Value Added of CERF in Zimbabwe Page | 27
Section 3.1 Allocation process Table 8: Proposed Allocation of CERF Second Under-Funded Grant to Zimbabwe Priority Cluster Agency Project details; location Project amount Priority total IOM • Provision of temporary shelter to arriving vulnerable asylum seekers/refugees • Registration, information and counseling on safe migration and asylum/refugee procedures, rights and obligations • Provision of cooked food to asylum seekers/refugees as required • Provision of initial health screening, minor treatments and/or referrals • Provision of protection counseling to asylum seekers/refugees as required • Provision of voluntary transport of asylum seekers from Beitbridge detention facility to Tongogara Refugee Camp Location: Nyamapanda Border Post $500,000 $2,000,000 Protection, multi-sector, IDPs Multi-Sector UNHCR • Reception of new arrivals and eventual integration into community • Improvement/repair of reception facilities including temporary housing and WASH facilities at Waterfalls Refugee Camp. • Provision of transport assistance to asylum seekers/refugees from detention centers in Zimbabwe (apart from Nyamapanda and Beitbridge) to Tongogara Refugee Camp. • Provision of life saving food – including both initial supplies at reception and inclusion in regular monthly food distribution as required • Provision of life saving health services including initial health screening and/or follow-up treatment/services based upon border assessments • Provision of Non-food Items (e.g., blankets, kitchen sets, sleeping mats, sanitary materials, etc.) as required • For school aged children, provision of uniforms, school supplies and school fees as required Location: Tongogara Refugee Camp. $500,000 Protection IOM Emergency Relocation/Resettlement of internally displaced communities, Emergency Response to internal displacement Location: Peri-urban communities around Bulawayo (Trenance and Killarney squatter settlements). Countrywide- retain the capacity to respond to up to 1,000 cases of new displacement within 72 hours. $500,000 www.p2pt.org.uk Review of Value Added of CERF in Zimbabwe Page | 28
Page 1 and 2: Independent Review of the Value Add
Page 3 and 4: SECTION 6: SUPPORT TO HUMANITARIAN
Page 5 and 6: agreements with partners and disbur
Page 7 and 8: Section 1: Introduction The CERF Se
Page 9 and 10: even though this may not be the cas
Page 11 and 12: 1.4 Zimbabwe Emergency Response Fun
Page 13 and 14: 2.1 UN agency perspectives This sec
Page 15 and 16: WFP indirect costs. Allows partners
Page 17 and 18: outlines what each Cluster requeste
Page 19 and 20: than usual to prepare proposals 22
Page 21 and 22: CERF’s first UFE allocation in 20
Page 23 and 24: 4.1 Timeliness of the CERF Secretar
Page 25 and 26: This section begins by covering the
Page 27 and 28: Section 6: Support to Humanitarian
Page 29: Annex 1: Supporting Evidence Sectio
Page 33 and 34: Section 4.1 Timeliness of the CERF
Page 35 and 36: Section 3.2 Timeliness of Onward Fu
Page 37 and 38: Proposal submitted: 17 Feb 11 Final
Page 39 and 40: UNICEF Grant 11‐CEF‐008B: Fundi
Page 41 and 42: International 8 June 2011 $23,796.6
Page 43 and 44: Project budget: US$2,000,000. Amoun
Page 45 and 46: 16 June 2011 $4,993.00 11 July 2011
Page 47 and 48: Section 3.3 No‐Cost Extensions (N
Page 49 and 50: Annex 2: Methodology This annex bri
Page 51 and 52: 23 Response capacity is strengthene
Page 53 and 54: 3. Key issues The critical overridi
Page 55: 7. Deliverables The main output wil

in Zimbabwe - OCHANet

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?