Linking Humanitarian Assistance to Government Systems

Shared threat…frequency, intensity & scale of shocks…

Options of Scaling Up in Response to Shocks

SUPER TYPHOON HAIYAN 2013 16M people (3.2M families) adversely affected; 4.1M displaced; 6,300 deaths; 1.1M shelter units damaged; 447 municipalities devastated; 6 regions affected. Haiyan (Yolanda) 2 Disaster Response Operations Monitoring & Information Center, Department of Social Welfare and Development, Philippines

Enabling Factors Piggy-backed on Pantawid Pamilya Pilipino Program (4Ps), the biggest Social Protection program (CCT): Main objective: end inter-generational poverty through health and education : coverage of 3.5M households/17.M pax Financial and administrative systems Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP): with branches 1,673 ATMs and 40 lending centers; Non-banks financial institutions (PSPs) for hard-to-reach areas 9,000 workers nationwide

Challenges faced Underestimation of the financial, time and manpower requirements Validation process took longer; Mobility and access of workers hampered Manual IDP registration/validation system using the Disaster Assistance Family Access Card (DFAC) Humanitarian and development partners are considered standby partners only Procurement of supplies and materials DSWD and WFP failure to anticipate procedural and documentation issues. No clear agreement on documentation requirements. lack of prior communications/agreement Weak communication and socialization

Lessons Learned for CTP Political will of national and local leadership Nature of Assistance: unconditional vs. conditional Coverage: universal coverage vs. focused targeting Amount of Assistance: Internationally accepted vs. Government determined Frequency: One-off vs. several releases/staggered

Snapshot – Cash through Government systems Philippines 500,000 bens Distribution through one safety net (4Ps) Additional targeting around programme Subsequent responses UNICEF also responded through this system Fiji 70,000 bens Distribution through three different safety nets to increase targeting reach Sri Lanka 40,000 bens Distribution through one safety net Vertical expansion of the safety net  Government of Fiji led the overall emergency response In consultation with the NDMO and DSW, WFP targeted 72,000 shock-affected people providing a top-up cash support Cash and vouchers distributed A total of $2.3 million cash transferred in the course of 2 months period Three different safety nets were used, targeting vulnerable families, mothers and children and elderly Enabling factors & Challenges

Key Lessons in Shock-Responsive SP Preparedness Coordination Comms Single Registry Surge staffing M&E Targeting of Outsiders Streamlined Funding

Targeting considerations Households that can be reached through vertical expansion (or piggybacking on the beneficiary database) Households that can easily be reached through horizontal expansion (or piggybacking on non-beneficiary data) Households less easily reached through horizontal expansion (not covered by existing database) Targeting considerations Database including non-beneficiaries (e.g. social registry) National Population Database programme beneficiaries A B C Source: OPM (2015) and Barca (2017)

Getting the balance

Thank You!