Read the full report - Danish Refugee Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

8 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCIL2. Targeting of beneficiariesCash-based assistance can be most sustainable when identifying:Individuals with spending power,Productive individuals inside a household,In the winter, targeting those with the highest level of debts,Instead of targeting the most vulnerable who will be unable to sustain themselves, hence creatingdependency on cash rather than cash as a means to an end. Similarly, the research finds that womenkeep the money in the household, but they have little purchasing power. As such, targeting women toincrease household consumption might not be efficient, all the more as income is redistributed insidethe household. However, as women and children have been identified as particularly exposed tohealth problems, providing vouchers or grants conditioned to visiting health facilities cash reach thedouble objective of allowing women to step out of their compounds and settlements, and positivelyimpact the health situation of households. Furthermore, targeting extremely vulnerable individualsunable to sustain themselves – elderly, disabled, widows, children heads of households, for instance– outside immediate relief situations, creates further dependency on assistance, and disturbstraditional mechanisms of redistribution. In all cases, involving the community in the elaboration ofcriteria by having community representatives and members check and validate each of them,explaining what the objectives are and the rationale behind the criteria, making them public in thecamp, is essential to mitigate potential tensions and misappropriation of assistance.3. Determining the size of the grantGiven the high degree of assistance provided in the KIS, specific attention will have to be provided tothe type of assistance offered and received by households, to assess the preferred objective of thegrant and tailor its size accordingly. Cash grants can be calculated to be smaller and complementaryto existing assistance, or come as a helping hand after other forms of assistance to cover otherneeds – such as small-scale investments as working capital, repayment of debts, access to healthcare and education, improving the consumption basket, to name a few.There is no one-size-fits-all approach, as grants can vary according to the size of the household.Typically, grants should be calculated on the basis of actual needs – either based on averagemonthly incomes or on the average food consumption, in close cooperation with NGOs in a nearbyarea to avoid conflict and competition between programs.4. Securing cash distributionThere are four main mechanisms for delivering cash assistance in Afghanistan: Hawala, vouchers,mobile cash transfers and direct distribution. Given the accessibility of the KIS, handing out moneydirectly through NGO staff or implementing partner might be considered as a viable option. Alongwith the use of the Hawala system, direct cash transfer is the current preferred way of transferringmoney by NGOs implementing cash transfers in Afghanistan. Vouchers are theoretically more difficultto divert – and require the elaboration of adequate identification papers to further mitigate this risk –and can be redeemed by the beneficiary at his or her convenience.As such, it is recommended that:On a short-term basis, direct distribution and vouchers remain the preferable solution, as KISsites are accessible by the field staff and do not present serious security concerns.On a longer-term basis, developing identification mechanisms to access hawala and M-PAISA services might prove a useful initiative.
CASH PROGRAMME REVIEW FOR IDPs IN KABUL INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS 9III.ConclusionsCan cash-based approaches work in the KIS? The answer is, undoubtedly, yes. Thanks to their urbanlocation, access to functional markets, and good security conditions, cash assistance does notpresent higher risks than other forms of assistance in the KIS.However, to be efficient, it will require a dual strategy:Short-term relief during the winter with cash as a complement to in-kind assistanceLong-term grants as a way out of poverty and to ensure sustainability of training programmes.Such an ambitious dual strategy implies taking into account specific camp situations, engaging withcommunities and making sure that NGO staff and the communities themselves monitor all steps ofimplementation. Today and tomorrow, the volatile nature of security and the uncertainties of theeconomic environment combined with high political and media sensitivity surrounding interventionsin the KIS call for additional caution: objectives should be clear and transparent to limit possibletensions.More than coordinationThis will require – more than coordination – integrated M&E systems. Given the multidimensionalpoverty in the KIS, in other words the interrelatedness of different poverty indicators, cashprogramming will require building partnerships and a coordinated approach. Given the strongpresence of aid agencies in the KIS, a clear repartition of roles will be needed between partners. It iscertainly the time to test cash assistance in the gap and will this specific assistance ‘gap’ despite thehigh levels of aid (mainly food and NFIs) in the KIS. This role can be filled by DRC or by otherstakeholders already involved in small-scale cash programmes. This will have to be the result ofdialogue and consultations among stakeholders to map out an effective way to share responsibilitiesand assign leadership roles. Stakeholders can build on the existing CaLP initiative and createoperational links across sectors – to use cash assistance as a means to help IDP households stepout of cycles of poverty and indebtedness, to increase their access not only to food, but health andeducation services, and providing a stronger sustainability to vocational and other trainingprogrammes currently being implemented.
Page 1 and 2: Cash Programme Review for IDPs in t
Page 3 and 4: CASH PROGRAMME REVIEW FOR IDPs IN K
Page 7: CASH PROGRAMME REVIEW FOR IDPs IN K
Page 25: Car washing, shoepolishing, etc.Str
Page 29: CASH PROGRAMME REVIEW FOR IDPs IN K
Page 32 and 33: 32 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCIL“W
Page 34 and 35: 34 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCILis n
Page 36 and 37: 36 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCILTabl
Page 38 and 39: 38 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCILincr
Page 40 and 41: 40 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCIL2. C
Page 42: 42 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCILSECT
Page 59 and 60:
CASH PROGRAMME REVIEW FOR IDPs IN K
Page 62 and 63:
62 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCILHous
Page 64 and 65:
64 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCIL25.
Page 66 and 67:
66 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCILDisp
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
72 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCILANNE
Page 74:
74 DRC / DANISH REFUGEE COUNCILGene
show all

Read the full report - Danish Refugee Council

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?