More documents

Recommendations

Info

32[2] PROGRESS | sector response United Nations and PartnersMID YEAR REVIEW | Sudan work plan 2012EDUCATION SECTOR FUNDING REQUIREMENTSLEGENDLIBYARevisedRed SeaFundedRED SEANORTHERNNILE$1.31 m$0.71 mCHADWESTDARFUR$12.15 m$5.78 mCENTRALAFRICANREPUBLICNORTH DARFUR$14.71 m$8.10 mSOUTH DARFUR$14.17 m$5.15 m$1.01 m$0.13 mKHARTOUM$0.36 mKASSALA$1.98 m$1.03 m$0.00 mNORTH KORDOFAN$7.90 mEL GEZIRAGEDAREF$4.47 mWHITE SENNARNILE $0.33 m$1.24 m$0.13 m$0.59 mSOUTH KORDOFAN$13.25 mBLUE NILE$8.55 m$2.01 m$3.19 m$2.82 m$0.55 mABYEIREPUBLIC OF SOUTH SUDANERITREAETHIOPIAFOOD SECURITY ANDLIVELIHOODSSummary of updated sector response planLead agency(s)Government leadSector memberorganizationsProjectsFunds requestedFunds requested per prioritylevelFunding to dateContact infoaFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO); World Food Programme (WFP)Ministry of Agriculture/Ministry of Animal Resources (MoA/MoAR)Abo Hadia for Women and Community Development,ACAD, ACO, ADRA, Afag OPD, AHA, ACORD, Agencyfor Al Baraka Society for Agricultural Services, Al Shoroog,Alban, Almaasar, Women and El Fashir Rural Network,Almassar, Alradom, ARC, ARS, ASEB/WB Attamas, AzzaWomen Association, Bord Organization, CIS, CRS, ChildfriendlyCommunities Initiative, CDA, CRLRS, ConcernWorldwide, COOPI, CVA, DRC, DDA, DRA, FAO, FNC,FPDO, FRC, GAA, Future Organization, GFO, GOAL,HAI, Humanitarian Aid & Development, IOM, INTERSOS,Islamic Dawa Organization, ISRA, IRW, IRD, ISRA, JebelMarra Rural Development Project, Kabikabiya, KSCS, KhairatAzoumSociety, KAEDS, Mercy Corps – Scotland, MoA,MoAR, MSEO, Mubadiroon, NDO, NEF,NIDAA, Noon,OMSIMA, Oxfam America, PDNO, Plan Sudan, PODR,PA, PREDO, RI,RISE, Road Organization, Ruhama, RCDO,SAARF, SP, SC-S, SECS, SSD, Social Solidarity Organization,SOS Sahel International, SPCR, SPO, SSRRC/HAC,, SRCS,SAG, Tearfund, Triangle, Turath, UMCOR, URDP, UNDP/DDR Commission, UNICEF, UNDP, UNEP, UNHCR, UnitedNations Mission in Sudan/RRR, UNAMI), VIS, VSF-Germany,WARDS, WCC, WB, WDA, WFP, World Relief, WVI, ZORD,ZOA.60 projects$449.0 million (original)$430.8 million (revised at mid-year)$401.0 million (high)$29.8 million (medium)$268.8 million (60% of requirements)Sabine Schenk, Sabine.Schenk@fao.org; Jimmy Owani,Jimmy.Owani@fao.org; Eric Kenefick, Eric.Kenefick@wfp.org; Hazem Almahdy, Hazem.Almahdy@wfp.org.Categories and disaggregated numbers of affectedpopulation and beneficiariesPeople in needTargeted beneficiariesCategory Female Male Total Female Male TotalIDPs 1,302,220 1,262,976 2,565,196 885,829 810,479 1,696,308Returnees 192,905 193,242 386,147 169,687 152,479 322,166Refugees allSudanNomads/PastoralistsHostcommunities39,313 44,988 84,301 39,313 44,988 84,301758,323 1,025,390 1,783,713 563,465 675,791 1,239,2561,064,010 1,117,440 2,181,450 852,945 903,847 1,756,792Total 3,356,771 3,644,036 7,000,807 2,511,239 2,587,584 5,098,823Changes in needsThe food security and livelihoods situation is expected to besimilar to the first half of the year given the prevailing securitysituation in South Kordofan, Blue Nile, and along theSudan-South Sudan border. The food security situation ofthe population in conflict and drought affected areas is challengingas indicated in the May 2012 FEWSNET food securitybulletin. Food prices have risen by more than 50% over thelast 12 months and household food stocks started dwindling inMarch/April instead of the usual lean period that starts in May/June. According to the Quasi Crop and Food Supply AssessmentMission carried out in December 2011, national cerealproduction was estimated to be less than 50% of the 2010harvest and also lower than the last 5-year average. The soaringfood prices and reduced purchasing power of the affectedpopulation will most likely result in household food deficitsand food insecurity unless there will be a bumper harvest atthe end of the 2012 main summer season.
United Nations and Partners[2] PROGRESS | sector responseMID YEAR REVIEW | Sudan work plan 201233The continuation of conflict in South Kordofan and Blue Nileand the subsequent unlikely return of the IDPs, especially toAbyei, will mean that few households in those areas will beable to cultivate over the next few months thereby reducingtheir own production and increasing their dependence on foodaid. It is expected that the ongoing conflict will continue todrive the need for food assistance along the border, especiallyfor women, children, elderly people and nomadic communitieswho have had problems crossing to South Sudan to grazetheir livestock.The dry spell during the 2011 summer season greatly affectedeastern Sudan, North Darfur and North Kordofan and led tothe early drying up of water points and exhaustion of poorlyestablished pasture. The situation subsequently resulted in aserious livestock feeding gaps in eastern Sudan. Scarcity ofwater has also led to livestock being susceptible to diseasesand spread of parasites due to overcrowding at the fewexist¬ing water points.Many returnees in Darfur have reported a lack of adequatelivelihoods opportunities. Land ownership disputes have alsoarisen, particularly where others have settled on land previouslyowned by returnees. The sector will provide support toIDPs and returnees to meet their basic needs as well as buildtheir self-reliance.Preparedness ActivitiesThe sector will require an additional $2 .7 million to provideseeds, tools, livestock vaccines and drugs to an additional1,113,000 people in case of a worst case scenario.Achievements as of 15 May 2012As of May 2012, the sector had achieved only 11.7% of theplanned livelihoods support targets and 56.9% of the foodassistance targets . In terms of funding, the sector has receivedonly 15.6% of the funding requirements for livelihoods supportand 53.4% of funds required for food assistance. Overall, thesector achieved 21.3% of its planned targets with 45.3% offunds received, most of which was for food assistance. Monitoringmissions by partners have also identified a number ofgender issues relating to FSL interventions that require furtherinvestigation to ensure a more consistent and concertedeffort by the sector to take into account gender issues. Ajoint assessment between the Government and partners wasconducted in South Kordofan. In areas under the control of theGovernment of Sudan in South Kordofan and Blue Nile states,food assistance has been provided in accessible areas by theGovernment and partners through national NGOs and CBOs.Implementation challengesLimited access to some affected areas and beneficiariesin South Kordofan, Blue Nile and some parts of Darfur hasmeant that needs in these areas are not being met. Meanwhile,limited funding received for sector activities has greatlyaffected oper¬ations thereby affecting coverage on needs.Many NNGOs and institutions have technical and logisticalcapacity constraints. The few NNGOs that are operating inareas with access restrictions for international humanitarianagencies have been overwhelmed because the vast majority ofassistance to affected populations has been directed throughthem.It should be noted that the majority of livelihoods activities forthe main growing season normally start in May/June and havetherefore not started by the time of the MYR.These challenges have significantly affected delivery andcapacity to deliver assistance and overall progress towards2012 HWP targets and objectives, particularly in the areas ofenvironmental resources protection and restoration, promotionof energy saving technologies, capacity building ofgovernment line Ministries and national non-government orCBOs.Changes in TargetsNo changes in targets reported.Sector Project RevalidationThe evaluation and prioritization of projects undertaken at thebeginning of the HWP process was considered still to be validat the mid-year point given that only 29% of the 58 projectswere revised by sector actors.Coverage of Needs by Actors not in the Sectoror CAPThe emergency and early recovery needs are mainly beingprovided by humanitarian actors in liaison and collaborationwith Government line ministries (MoA, MoAR and others) whoare not formally included in the CAP.Food security DarfurFood security EastFood secure households (HH), May '09 to Feb '12By state (%, housholds, resident IDPs)North DarfurMay-09Aug-09Nov-09Feb-10May-10Aug-10Nov-10Feb-11May-11Nov-11Feb-12100%80%60%40%20%0%South DarfurMay-09Aug-09Nov-09Feb-10May-10Aug-10Nov-10Feb-11May-11Nov-11Feb-12100%80%60%40%20%0%West DarfurMay-09Aug-09Nov-09Feb-10May-10Aug-10Nov-10Feb-11May-11Nov-11Feb-12100%80%60%40%20%0%Kassala urban ●rural IDPs ●refugeesRed Sea urban ●ruralJun-10Nov -10Feb-11Food secure households, Jun '10 to Feb ‘11By community type (%, households)100%80%60%40%20%0%Source: WFP (2011/2012), Food Security Monitoring System Reports
Page 3 and 4: United Nations and PartnersIntroduc
Page 6: 4Introduction United Nations and Pa
Page 11 and 12: United Nations and PartnersIntroduc
Page 13: United Nations and Partners[1] 2012
Page 16: 14[1] 2011 in review | changes in t
Page 19 and 20: United Nations and Partners[1] 2011
Page 25 and 26: United Nations and Partners[2] prog
Page 27 and 28: United Nations and Partners[2] PROG
Page 31: United Nations and Partners[2] PROG
Page 39: United Nations and Partners[2] PROG
Page 42 and 43: 40[2] PROGRESS | sector response Un
Page 44: 42[2] PROGRESS | sector response Un
Page 53 and 54: United Nations and Partners51MID YE
Page 67 and 68: United Nations and Partners[2] anne
Page 80 and 81: 78[2] [3] NEEDS annexes Analysis an
Page 82 and 83:
80[2] [3] NEEDS annexes Analysis an
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
100[2] [3] NEEDS annexes Analysis a
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112:
110[4] aCRONYMS AnnexES and notes U
show all

Table of contents

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Table of contents

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?