1. 1st Round Sector Defense Sector:Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)
Sudan CHF 2012
1st Round Sector Defense
Sector:Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)
Jan 18th , 2012

2. CHF Sector Priorities:
Sustain life-saving WASH services for vulnerable among the IDPs (New and existing), returnees and affected people
Expand life-saving WASH services for vulnerable among the IDPs (New and existing), returnees and affected people.

3. CHF Geographical priorities:
Darfur states (Chronic emergency) and Three Protocol Areas (New Conflict)
Eastern States, White Nile, Sinnar, Khartoum and North Kordofan – Returnees, Flood, drought and disease outbreak areas
River Nile, Gezeira and Northern States Flood, drought and disease outbreak areas

4. Describe the sector strategy for addressing the priorities
Chronic Emergency
Continue supporting sustained access to WASH services in critical IDP locations
Emphasis on sustainability of WASH services - possible handover of O&M to communities
Create conducive environment for IDPs on returning or resettlement
New Conflict in Protocol areas/ Returnees
Ensure minimum requirement of WASH services in high influx locations
Support for increased capacity to deal with WASH related conflict emergency
Drought/Flood
Maintain emergency prepared and response at National/Area levels
Capacity development and Coordination:
Support for increased capacity for addressing emergencies especially emergency preparedness and response
Strengthen coordination, collaboration and monitoring among partners for addressing gaps and duplications and maintaining established WASH policy and standards.

5. WASH Sector HWP 2012 Requirements (Total Requirements: US $93,983,722)

6. Targeted beneficiary population and potential partners
Description
Chronic Emergency Darfur
New Conflict Protocol Areas
Returnees WN/KRT
Flood/ Drought E/C/N states
Total
Affected population
2,000,000
1,120,000
100,000
752,000
3,972,000
Target population as per recomm. projects
1,577,000
600,000
29,000
220,000
2,426,000
Target population with CHF ceiling of USD 8 M
650,000
250,000
10,000
90,000
1,000,000
Potential Partners 33 12 7 4 47
Total submitted projects 10 3 44
Total Recomm projects 13 2 17
TRG recommended amount (US$)
5,600,000
(70%)
1,200,000
(15%)
(12.5%)
200,000
(2.5%)
8,000,000
Returnees: UNICEF, WHO, ADRA, ARC, INTERSOS, VIS, IOM; Flood/drought: (UNICEF, WHO, IAS, ZOA)

7. Why is CHF funding critical right now to meet these sector priorities?
Immediate life-saving response necessary for IDPs from New conflict in Blue Nile and South Kordofan as well as need for returnees
WASH essential interventions should be done before the rainy season (June) to avoid difficulties in access.
Support for new IDPs and O&M in established IDP locations in Darfur crucial in the next 6 months as overall funding has substantially reduced for 2012.
Due to early preparedness and response, no AWD cases have been reported since 2009, which used to be a major concern in the previous years (in 2006 more than 7,400 cases with 273 deaths reported whereas, 2,299 and 335 cases respectively were reported in 2007 and 2008 with 111 and 16 deaths respectively)
Sector coordination in Khartoum and field level has become crucial whereas allocation for coordination staff reduced. Without CHF funding required coordination personnel could not be maintained and coordination among 47 partners will be hampered, which is key for addressing critical gaps.
While funding for WASH sector decreased substantially since South Sudan separation emergency needs substantially increased due to new conflict in Blue Nile and South Kordofan as well as need for returnees, which are very crucial for survival of affected population
Considering very high number of sector partners involved in WASH sector humanitarian support, sector coordination in Khartoum and field level has become crucial whereas allocation for coordination staff reduced. Without CHF funding required coordination personnel could not be maintained and coordination among 47 partners will be hampered, which is key for addressing critical gaps.

8. How were value for money and low indirect costs ensured?
A through line-by-line review of the proposed project sheets was conducted by TRG such as:
In line with WASH sector policy and standards,
direct and indirect cost comparison as much as possible
Timely delivery of services
Even though overall rating was lower for some submission, project sheets were considered from among the best for areas where available partners were limited or representation was low.
Partner capacity based on past performance to provide high value for money was taken into consideration while making recommendations
Gaps and duplications were avoided

9. Total Recommended Sector Envelope: USD 8 million
Summary of TRG-endorsed proposals
Planning figures
Total Recommended Sector Envelope: USD 8 million
Total requested amount : USD19.3 M
Total TRG-recommended amount: USD 8 M (41%)
Total projects: 17
Budget breakdown of recommended projects
UN Agencies M (45%) including US$ 1 M core pipeline for UNICEF
INGOs M (47%)
NNGOs 0.6 M (8%)

10. Summary of TRG endorsed proposals
Organization name
Type
Location
Requested Amount
Recommended Amount
ADRA_WN
INGO
White Nile
308,752
200,000
BLADY SUDAN
NNGO
Darfur
425,000
FPDO
Darfur/ Protocol Areas
328,240
IAS
Darfur/Protocol Areas/ Eastern Sudan
998,400
700,000
IOM UN
Protocol Areas
2,130,049
800,000
MC Scotland -SD
1,603,660
450,000
NMIAD
361,600
Oxfam - Darfur
3,155,055
520,000
Plan International
497,550
SCS
2,100,000
TGH
528,038
370,000
UMCOR
627,478
340,000
UNICEF
4,000,000
2,390,000
WHO
Darfur/ Protocol Areas/ Eastern States
876,677
380,000
World Relief
483,329
World Vision - BN
376,624
World Vision-SD
505,044

11. Average Annual Allocation Amount: US $ 8.4 millions
Summary of TRG-endorsed proposals
Total Recommended Sector Envelope versus historical trend or basis for envelope
The planning envelope: US $ 8,000,000
Average Annual Allocation Amount: US $ 8.4 millions

12. Approach to determining project allocation amounts
Using agreed upon criteria all 44 projects sheets were reviewed by TRG and scored
A minimum amount of USD 200,000 was set for each of the recommended projects for efficiency and effectiveness. The remaining amount from $8 million was allocated by adding 10% of the HWP amount to $200,000 and the figures were then rounded up. USD 523,000 was deducted from UNICEF allocation as sector lead to achieve a net allocation of $8 million.
Inclusion of National NGOs and Area priority were considered
Three additional National NGOs with highest score were further considered.
Two projects submitted by IOM and ADRA for returnees included

13. A figure of $8 Million was assumed as the WASH envelope in the allocations made by the TRG. If any possibility of higher envelope, the TRG suggests to include additional proposals (project sheets) as per the ranking established.
Thank you