CHF Advisory Group - OCHANet

Common Humanitarian Fund South Sudan Advisory BoardMinutes of CHF reserve allocation for the refugee crisis31 July 2012Background• At its meeting of 16 July the CHF Advisory Board (AB) requested UNHCR and OCHA to coordinate the allocationof $10 million for the refugee response. A policy paper, identifying emergency priority activities was jointlydeveloped and shared with partners to solicit applications.• Priorities activities identified included: health and nutrition; water and sanitation and hygiene, and access (accessof supplies to the refugee sites). The policy paper indicated that both refugee and host communities in Unity andUpper Nile states were targeted and prioritized NGOs projects over UN agencies who benefitted from a $20million CERF allocation in mid-July.• The CHF Advisory Board convened on 31 July 2012 to review the proposals submitted for the $10 million CHFreserve allocation. UNHCR Senior Programme Officer briefed the AB on the allocation process and therecommended envelope; the cluster coordinators supported the briefing. UNHCR explained that in order toensure a thorough and transparent review process of the proposals OCHA and UNHCR constituted a PeerReview Team (PRT). The PRT included cluster coordinators and co-coordinators, NGO representatives, UNHCRand the CHF Technical Secretariat (TS).• The PRT consulted and agreed on the following scoring criteria for the projects: 1) appropriateness of proposedactivities; 2) time sensitiveness of activities; 3) cost effectiveness of the proposal; 4) operational capacity ofapplicants including their established presence in the refugee camp/host communities’ locations. Projects werescored against a 3Ws matrix developed by UNHCR.• PRT participants were divided into three sub-groups for the technical review of the proposals: Health and Nutrition, Logistics/Access/Shelter, Water sanitation and hygiene (WASH).• The PRT sub-groups reviewed 16 applications and prioritized 10 projects in the sectors of: Wash ($3,750,000);Logs & Shelter as part of the access response ($3,633,295); Health and Nutrition ($2,616,231).• UNHCR explained that no national NGOs made it through the selection process as there was none with sufficientcapacity already present in the refugee response area with the ability to scale up within the short time-framerequired.1. Review of proposalsHealth and Nutrition (Samaritans Purse, IMC-UK, GOAL)• Three applications were received and endorsed for funding. The selected proposals target 50,000 beneficiaries.Activities focus on the reduction of Moderate Acute Malnutrition, and Severe Acute Malnutrition in Yida, YusufBatil and Gendrassa (new site). UNHCR noted that while Yida is the largest camp, Yusuf Batil has the worstnutrition indicators as it accommodates newest arrivals, many of whom arrive with a poor nutritional status. MSFis likely to open additional OTP in Yida.• Support to a cholera preparedness unit in Gendrassa is also included as the disease is a serious threat.Access (IOM, UNHCR, UNOPS, ACTED)• Six applications were received, of which only four projects were recommended by the PRT for funding: UNOPS(roads, landing strip Maban), IOM (barges), UNHCR (air transport) and ACTED (site preparation).• Applications included transportation costs; the Logistics cluster pointed out that since the cluster’sfunding/capacity for transportation of supplies to the refugee sites is limited applicants were encouraged to

2 of 4adequately budget for their transportation costs.• The ability of UNOPS to implement its proposed project was discussed. The AB agreed to request UNOPS toclarify the specific activities to be undertaken to facilitate access by humanitarian organizations in the Maban areaas well as to confirm its adequate operational capacity in the field location to ensure the swift implementation ofthe project and ability to spend funds within the allotted time frame (8 months).• The Logistics Cluster highlighted the need to ensure that “double dipping” does not occur, that organizationsreceiving CHF funds for transportation of supplies should not go to the Logs Cluster for transport support as theLogistics Cluster is a provider of last resort and is not primary responsible for support to the refugee response.• The significant pressure on the Logs Cluster by the refugee operation was discussed by the AB. The HC agreedto have the Logistics Cluster/UNHCR to present to the next HCT an overview of the logistics challenges andways forward.Water and sanitation and hygiene (ARC, Oxfam, Solidarites)• Six projects were submitted and only three were recommended by the PRT. Only projects with evidence ofoperational capacity/presence/no overlapping of actors were recommended. Recommended projects address keypriority areas in camps of Yida, Yusuf Batil, Jamam, Gendrasa, and the host communities in areas prone todisease outbreaks.• One application was received by a National Non-Governmental Organisation (NNGO). However, since theorganization is not present on the ground the project could not be recommended.• It was noted that Solidarites was asked to scale up and increase its budget by $700,000. UNHCR noted thatSolidarites had confirmed its ability to scale up, Medair had also been approached and remained in stand-by tosupport the scale up as needed.• OCHA underlined the importance of ensuring greater engagement of NNGOs in the CHF. This is particularlyimportant in preparation for the CAP 2013.Action Points:• The AB agreed to the allocation. The CHF TS was tasked to contact UNOPS torequest clarification on activities to be implemented, its operational capacity andinform the AB accordingly.• Process Allocation Letters and Fund Transfer Request• OCHA was tasked to consult with DFID, ECHO and UNHCR to present optionson how best address the issue of transportation of supplies to refugee sites.• The AB requested that feedback be given to the NNGO as to why it was notrecommended.2. Funding update and a possible second standard allocationDiscussion/DecisionFollow-up:CHF TSCHF TSOCHAUNHCR• OCHA informed that there are $9.4 million in the CHF account. A contribution of $8.6 million from the Netherlandsis expected to be deposited this week.• Following the approval of the $10 million envelope for the refugee response and the UNFPA proposal approvedby email by the AB for a total amount of $450,100, and allocation fees for NGOs for a total amount of $487,000, apositive balance of $7.05 million is anticipated (with the approval of UNDP project the new balance is $6.1million).• The UK will advance its 2013 CHF contribution of 16 million GBP for the CHF 2012. Additional funds (amountTBC) are expected from Norway. This would enable a second standard allocation of an approximately $30million.Action Points:OCHA to propose time frames for a second round CHF allocation a soon as the CAP timeline is available.3. Recruitment of UNVs for the Monitoring and Reporting FrameworkDiscussion/Decision• The meeting of the Advisory Board held on 11 June agreed to use the CHF second round standard allocation tocover the costs of UNV Monitoring Specialists ($856,000) to be recruited by UNDP as well as the costs of theOCHA component of the CHF Technical Secretariat ($670,428).• The interview of the UNV has started with so far 3 out of the 8 UNVS identified. Ensuring the deployment of staffis urgent and OCHA proposed to the AB to use CHF reserve to enable the prompt recruitment of staff.• As far as the OCHA component of the CHF Technical Secretariat is concerned, OCHA noted that thedisbursement of funds is not as urgent as for the UNV. Furthermore, OCHA is seeking more guidance fromOCHA HQs on the issue of funding for CHF Managing Units. This topic will be subject of a separate discussionafter the Cost Plan of OCHA South Sudan is approved by HQ.

4 of 4Project Code Project Title ProjectDurationN/A ARCIOM SSD-12/CSS/4 6053UNHCROxfam SSD-12/WS/46333/5120SOLIDARITESINTERNATIONALSSD-12/WS/46424ARC WASHIntervention inMaban CountyWASH clusterHumanitarianCommon TransportServices in theRepublic of SouthSudan LogisticsClusterLogistical supportfor refugeeemergencyresponse in Unityand Upper Nilesstates LogisticsClusterProvision of Water,Sanitation andHygiene Promotionto Refugees inMaban County –WASH clusterEmergencyresponse toimprove access tosafe water andappropriatesanitation facilities,for refugeepopulation in Yida,awareness on keyhygiene2012 ProjectBudget (US$)SecuredFunding(US$)/ Source6 months N/A n/a –not inthe CAP5 months 6,635,855 $3,499,005(CHF),625,000(Unearmarked)$969,420(CERF)CHFFundingRequest(US$)Indirectcosts(%)Target Areas(State andCounty)AdvisoryBoardrecommendationcommunity atGendarassa$736,165 30% Bunj host $250,000community,Maban,Upper Nile$507,103 8% Upper Nile $507,1036 months 131,804,955 5,247,401 $1,026,665 7% Unity Stateand UpperNile State$1,026,6655 months6 monthsTotal5,187,8433,115,757$ 990,001 –current CHFgrant for thisCAP project(utilised forreturneeresponse);Isle 2,722,000 of Man,State OFDA, ofJersey, ECHO, Sida,Oxfam UNICEF, Noviband CHF, internal HCR,OGB SI funds$6.84msecured forthe currentrefugeeresponsefrom ECHO,UNHCR,$1,700,000$1,000,0009%19%Upper NileState, MabanCounty,Jamam andGendrassacampsYida refugeecamp, UnityStateBatil andGendrassacamps$1,800,000$1,700,000$ 9,999,526Balance in CHF account after the refugee and the allocation to UNDPA: Balance before these allocations 17,457,889B: Amount of the refugee allocation 9,999,526C: Fees for UNDP as PUNO for NGOs 487,603D: UNDP project for UNV recruitment 856,000E: New Balance (A-B-C-D) $6,114,760