Sofala Manica Manica Sofala Tete Zambezia Zambezia

Home , Buzi District, Chibabava District, Chimoio, Dondo District, Manica Province, Nhamatanda District

MOZAMBIQUE: CENTRAL REGION MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19 (Tropical Cyclone Eloise Aftermath) Data collection period: 25 - 29 January 2021

19,505 IDP households 93,392 IDPs 73 resettlement sites 8,755 households affected by 64 sites affected by Cyclone Eloise in the resettlement sites Cyclone Eloise From 25 to 29 January 2021, in close coordination with the Mozambique’s National Institute for Disaster Management and Risk Reduction (INGD), International Organization for Migration (IOM)’s Displacement Tracking Matrix (DTM) teams conducted multi-sectoral location assessments (MSLA) in resettlement sites hosting internally displaced persons (IDPs) in the four provinces affected by Cyclone Idai (March 2019) and floods (between December 2019 and February 2020). The assessments were carried out in the immediate aftermath of Tropical Cyclone Eloise1, which hit the central region of 8,755 Mozambique on 23 January 2021. The families most affected districts were Buzi, Dondo Nhamatanda, and Chibabava in Sofala 45% province. of families living in resettlement sites The results from the assessment show that were a ected there is no significant displacement into the 6,790 resettlement sites, however, 8,755 families 270 in the resettlement sites had their tents 1,695 families a ected families a ected in Zambezia and shelters destroyed/partially destroyed families a ected in Sofala in Manica as a result of Tropical Cyclone Eloise. Caseload of families affected by Cyclone Eloise in the resettlement sites

Resettlement Sites in the Central Region of Mozambique Barue Macossa MocubelaCheringoma Derre Mocuba Landinho Maganja Da Costa ZambeziaGorongosa Mussaia Gogodane BrigodoMucoaRonda Vanduzi NicoadalaDigudiua Munguissa Namitangurini Namacurra Parreirão Mopeia Muanza2 Tete

Cidade de Chimoio Metuchira Zambezia Gondola 2

Nhamatanda Ndedja_1 Manica Manica Savane Macate Sofala 7 Abril - Cura Mutua 1 Sofala Dondo

Mandruzi

Number of families by site Machonjova Cidade da Beira Sussundenga Nhamacunta 1,000 Maxiquiri alto 3 Muawa 500 Zibuia Geromi Maxiquiri 2 Mussocosa 100 Chicuaxa 10 Mutassa Matarara Macarate Maxiquiri alto/Maxiquiri 1 Zichão Mucombe MaximedjeMuconja Ngurue Chibue ChingemidjiBandua 2019 Estaquinha sedeBegaja Aected site Magueba Mdhala Inhajou 2019 Bandua sede Muchai Gudza Macocoe Site Magaro Chibabava Buzi Machacuari Province boundary Muchambanha 0 15 30 60 km Mossurize 1 District boundary

1 For more details about the impact of Tropical Cyclone Eloise in resettlement sites, please consult Flash Report 16 at: https://displacement.iom.int/ reports/mozambique-%E2%80%93-flash-report-16-tropical-cyclone-eloise-january-2021?close=true Vanduzi CatandicaBarue Macossa Cheringoma Nguawala Inhaminga Mavonde Nhamadze 8,755 Matsinho Gorongosa Niassa Machipanda Vanduzi Vanduzi Gorongosa Shelters affected

ManicaManica Cafumpe Muanza Nampula Messica Muanza Gondola Cidade De Chimoio Amatongas 64 Galinha Cidade De Chimoio Gondola Tete Sites affected

Zembe Zambezia Nhamatanda Muoha Nhamatanda Inchope Macate Macate Tica 5,292 Mafambisse Latrines damaged Dondo Rotanda Dondo Marromeu Manica Cheringoma Vanduzi Gorongosa Sussundenga Sofala Manica SofalaMuanza Sussundenga Cidade Da Beira Gondola Dondo 8 Sussundenga Cidade Da Beira Cidade Da Beira Buzi Water points Buzi Chibabava Mossurize damaged Dombe

Buzi 0 70 140 280 km 6 Goonda Inhambane Health centres Number of families aected by site Estaquinha Aected resettlement site 1,000 Aected district partially destroyed ChibabavaNot aected resettlement site Sofala Gaza Chibabava Area of impact Dacata Mossurize National boundary Espungabera Province boundary 100 Storm path 11 100 Muxungue Chitobe District boundary Machaze50 Maputo Schools damaged Espungabera 10 Posto boundary Machanga Divinhe Chiurairue 1

Impact of Tropical Cyclone Eloise on the resettlement sites in the central region of Mozambique MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19 GEOGRAPHIC COVERAGE

Of the 73 sites assessed, 82% are located in Sofala and Manica provinces which represent 83% of the displaced individuals

Table 1: Number of sites and population by province

Province # Sites Total families displaced Total families displaced due to ood Total families Total individuals due to Cyclone Idai Manica 31 4,477 1 20 4,597 2 2,206 Sofala 29 9,981 1 ,340 11,321 54,935 Tete 3 715 - 715 3 ,642 Zambezia 10 1,757 1 ,115 2,872 12,609 Grand Total 73 16,930 2,575 19,505 93,392

25,000 80

70 20,000 60 s d l 15,000 50 o s h e t e i s

40 S

u # o H 10,000 30 #

20 5,000 10

- 0 R5 May R6 June R7 July R8 Aug R9 Sep R10 Oct R11 Nov R12 Dec R13 May R14 July R15 Sep R16 Sep R17 Nov R18 Jan R19 Jan 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2021 2021 Households 9,174 11,577 15,851 16,665 16,889 17,711 17,839 18,556 19,660 19,628 19,575 19,492 19,515 19,479 19,505 Sites 51 50 66 66 66 66 66 71 71 73 73 73 73 73 73 Figure 1: Evolution of the number of displaced households and resettlement sites DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE

53% 47% Children Female Male (0 - 17 years) 49%

2% 1% <1 y 7% 6% Adults 1-5 yr (18 - 59 years) 46% 6-17 yr 17% 16% 18-59 yr 24% 22% Elderly (60+ years) 60+ yr 2% 2% 5%

Figure 2: Population52% by age groups and48% sex Figure 3: Percentage of population by age groups

PHYSICAL ACCESSIBILITY STATUS 3% 4% Of the 73 resettlements sites assessed, 73 per cent (53 sites 5% with 16,148 households) are fully accessible, with 15 per cent 15% (11 sites with 1,187 households) only accessible by boat, 5 per Accessibility Accessible cent only accessible with 4x4 vehicles and 3 per cent accessible Limited access (only by boat) status Limited access (only 4x4 vehicles) only on foot. In contrast with previous assessments, three sites Limited access (only on foot) (961 households) have been reported as not accessible since Not accessible the passage of Eloise cyclone: Chicuaxa, Mdhala and Muconja, 73% all situated in Sofala province. This might be due to the impact of Tropical Storm Chalane and Tropical Cyclone Eloise that hit Figure 4: Accessibility status Sofala province in the last month.

3 MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19 ORIGIN OF DISPLACED FAMILIES

All the families living in the resettlement sites originated from the same districts of their resettlement sites location, as illustrated in the figure below: District of origin District of displacement Resettlement site

25 de Setembro: 163 Bairro da unidade: 266 Chibue: 154 Chibue Mateo: 130 Chiruca: 30 Gudza: 144 Javera: 30 Machacuari: 22 Macocoe: 148 Madibunhana: 196 Magaro: 143 Magueba: 120 Manhama 1: 90 Manhama 2: 263 Manhandure: 97 Matarara: 194 From: Sussundenga: 4,597 Sussundenga: 4,597 Metchisso: 217 Minas Gerais: 142 Muawa: 262 Muchai: 56 Muchambanha: 56 Mucombe: 132 Muoco Chiguendere (Madudo): 72 Mutassa: 36 Ngurue: 138 Nhamississua: 46 Nhanhemba 1: 548 Nhanhemba 2: 260 Tossene Choma: 339 Zibuia: 62 Zichão: 41 Bandua 2019: 872 Bandua sede: 442 Begaja: 210 Chingemidji: 446 Estaquinha sede: 299 Inhajou 2019: 452 From: Buzi: 6,178 Buzi: 6,178 Machonjova: 512 Maximedje: 189 Maxiquiri 2: 266 Maxiquiri alto 3: 155

Maxiquiri alto/Maxiquiri 1: 1,863

Mussocosa: 42 Nhamacunta: 430 Magagade: 175 Ndoro: 200 From: Caia: 992 Caia: 992 Nhacuecha: 215 Tchetcha 1: 218 Tchetcha 2: 184 Chicuaxa: 551 Geromi: 384 From: Chibabava: 1,806 Chibabava: 1,806 Macarate: 461 Mdhala: 160 Muconja: 250 Mandruzi: 372 From: Dondo: 1,349 Dondo: 1,349 Mutua: 694 Savane: 283 7 Abril - Cura: 164 Metuchira: 370 From: Nhamatanda: 996 Nhamatanda: 996 Ndedja_1: 462 From: Cidade De Tete: 565 Cidade De Tete: 565 Matundo - unidade Chimbonde: 565 Nkganzo: 63 From: Mutarara: 150 Mutarara: 150 Panducani: 87 Landinho: 300 From: Maganja Da Costa: 1,397 Maganja Da Costa: 1,397 Mussaia: 671 Parreirão: 426 Brigodo: 481 Gogodane: 38 From: Namacurra: 1,123 Namacurra: 1,123 Mucoa: 125 Munguissa: 209 Ronda: 270 Digudiua: 162 From: Nicoadala: 352 Nicoadala: 352 Namitangurini: 190 Figure 5: District of origin of families in resettlement sites

4 MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19 PRIORITY NEEDS Figure 6: First most urgent needs (top three) Of the 73 resettlement sites assessed, key informants in 51 per cent of the sites (37 sites representing 9,398 households) reported shelter as the most urgent need, followed by food (34%, 25 sites representing 7,364 households), and 5% healthcare (5%, 4 sites representing 1,096 households). 51% 34% According to key informants, the second most urgent needs were shelter (29%, 21 sites), NFI (18%, 13 sites) and healthcare (16%, 12 sites). Finally, key informants reported healthcare (27%, 20 sites), food (21%, 15 sites) and NFI (14%, 10 sites) as third most urgent needs. For the fifth assessment in a row (since September 2020), shelter was the most mentioned first urgent need (51%, compared to 58% in the previous round), which may be linked to the onset of the rainy season. Food remained the second most mentioned first urgent needs with a significant increase compared to the previous round (21% in the previous round). It is noteworthy that healthcare, the third most urgent first need, experienced a significant increase in the percentage of key informants reporting them as second and third most urgent needs.

Health 5% 2 0 1

a n Food 34% 1 9 J

R Shelter 51%

Health 10% 2 0 1

a n Food 21% 1 8 J

R Shelter 58%

Health 7% 2 0

o Food 18%

1 7 N Shelter 64% R

Health 10% 2 0 p

e Food 22%

1 6 S Shelter

R 56%

Water 5% 2 0 p

e Food 40%

1 5 S Shelter

R 44%

Water 10% y 2 0 l Shelter 34% u

1 4 J Food 44% R

Health 24%

a y 2 0 Shelter 27% 3 M

1 Food 49% R Water 15% 2 0 1 9 c

e Shelter 23%

1 2 D Food 51% R

Shelter 17% 2 0 1 9

o Water 18%

1 N Food 56% R

Shelter 13% 2 0 1 9 t

c Water 16%

1 0 O Food R 54%

Shelter 8% 2 0 1 9

p Water 23% e 9 S

R Food 66%

Shelter 11% 2 0 1 9 g Water 13% u 8 A

R Food 54%

Shelter 10% y 2 0 1 9 l Health 15% u 7 J

R Food 66% Figure 7: Top three first urgent needs in resettlement sites by round

5 MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19

SHELTER/NFI

In the 73 resettlement sites assessed, 53 per cent of the IDP households (10,346 households compared to 51% or 9,967 households in the previous round) currently live in emergency shelter whilst 47 per cent (9,149 households compared to 49% or 9,512 households in the previous round) live in permanent shelter. According to key informants, 10 households are currently sleeping outdoors in Mutua and Inhajou 2019 sites in Sofala province.

Permanent shelter Emergency/upgraded emergency shelter

Sussundenga-25 de Setembro Sussundenga-Bairro da unidade Sussundenga-Chibue Sussundenga-Chibue Mateo Number of shelters aected by province in the after of Sussundenga-Chiruca Tropical Cyclone Eloise Sussundenga-Gudza Sussundenga-Javera Temporary structure destroyed or Sussundenga-Machacuari partially destroyed Permanent Province Sussundenga-Macocoe house Upgraded Emergency Sussundenga-Madibunhana Tent shelter shelters Sussundenga-Magaro

M anica Total 4 00 9 59 - 3 36 Sussundenga-Magueba Sussundenga-Manhama 1 Sofala Total 90 5,615 1 ,027 58 Sussundenga-Manhama 2 Zambezia Total 73 88 5 1 04 Sussundenga-Manhandure Grand Total 5 63 6,662 1 ,032 4 98 Sussundenga-Matarara Sussundenga-Metchisso Sussundenga-Minas Gerais Sussundenga-Muawa 92% in emergency/upgraded Shelters Sussundenga-Muchai Manica 4,597 families Sussundenga-Muchambanha 8% in permanent shelters Sussundenga-Mucombe Sussundenga-Muoco Chiguendere (Madudo) Sussundenga-Mutassa Sussundenga-Ngurue Sussundenga-Nhamississua Sussundenga-Nhanhemba 1 Sussundenga-Nhanhemba 2 Sussundenga-Tossene Choma Sussundenga-Zibuia Sussundenga-Zichão Buzi-Bandua 2019 Buzi-Bandua sede Buzi-Begaja Buzi-Chingemidji Buzi-Estaquinha sede Buzi-Inhajou 2019 Buzi-Machonjova Buzi-Maximedje Buzi-Maxiquiri 2 Buzi-Maxiquiri alto 3 Buzi-Maxiquiri alto/Maxiquiri 1 Buzi-Mussocosa Buzi-Nhamacunta Caia-Magagade 41.9% in emergency/upgraded shelters Caia-Ndoro Sofala 11,321 families 57.0% in permanent shelters Caia-Nhacuecha Caia-Tchetcha 1 Less than one per cent living Caia-Tchetcha 2 outside shelter Chibabava-Chicuaxa Chibabava-Geromi Chibabava-Macarate Chibabava-Mdhala Chibabava-Muconja Dondo-Mandruzi Dondo-Mutua Dondo-Savane Nhamatanda-7 Abril - Cura Nhamatanda-Metuchira Nhamatanda-Ndedja_1 84% in emergency/upgraded shelters Cidade De Tete-Matundo - unidade Chimbonde Tete 715 families Mutarara-Nkganzo 16% in permanent shelters Mutarara-Panducani Maganja Da Costa-Landinho Maganja Da Costa-Mussaia Maganja Da Costa-Parreirão Namacurra-Brigodo 27% in emergency/upgraded shelters Namacurra-Gogodane Zambezia 2,872 Namacurra-Mucoa 73% in permanent shelters Namacurra-Munguissa Namacurra-Ronda Nicoadala-Digudiua Nicoadala-Namitangurini 1000 500 500 1000 1500 Permanent shelter Number of families Emergency/upgraded emergency shelter

Figure 8: Number of families living in resettlement by site and shelter type

6 MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19

16,630 16,630 16,021 14,385 13,169 12,371 11,118 9,967 10,346 8,397

6,459 6,584 9,512 9,149 5,170 5,190

1,797 1,855 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 21 71

R11 Nov 2019 R12 Dec 2019 R13 May 2020 R14 July 2020 R15 Sep 2020 R16 Sep 2020 R17 Nov 2020 R18 Jan 2021 R19 Jan 2021

No shelter (outdoors) Emergency/upgraded shelter Permanent shelter Figure 9: Evolution of the number of families living in permanent shelters, emergency shelters and outside The priority Non-Food Items needed but however not accessible on site are: 1) Sleeping items and/or bedding materials in 26 sites; 2) Jerri-can and/or tapped water containers to transport and store water in 23 sites, and 3) shoes and clothes in 11 sites. Lack of economic means to purchase those items was mentioned as the main reason why IDPs are unable to access these NFIs.

WASH

Eighty-four per cent of resettlement sites assessed (61 sites hosting 17,505 households) reported having access to functional latrines on sites, compared to 99 per cent in the previous assessment. The sites reporting a lack of access to functional latrines were situated in Sussundenga district (8 sites) in Manica province, Buzi (1 site), Chibabava (1 site) and Dondo (1 site) districts in Sofala province, and Mutarara district (1 site) in Tete province. Assessment shows that 88 per cent of assessed sites reported the availability of household latrines (used by one to two families), while 19 per cent of the sites reported the presence of communal latrines (used by many families). In 89 per cent of sites (65 sites), key informants reported that latrines are not adapted to persons with disabilities or elderly people, while the remaining 11 per cent reported that latrines adapted to persons with disabilities or people are available but too few to meet the needs. Open defecation is frequently visible in 22 per cent of the sites.

99% 96% 96% 96% 95% 92% 90% 90% 89%

84%

80%

76%

70%

R7 July 2019 R8 Aug 2019 R9 Sep 2019 R10 Oct 2019 R11 Nov 2019 R12 Dec 2019 R13 May 2020 R14 July 2020 R15 Sep 2020 R16 Sep 2020 R17 Nov 2020 R18 Jan 2021 R19 Jan 2021

Figure 10: Evolution of the percentage of sites reporting the presence of functional latrines

Functional bathing spaces are available in 92 per cent of the sites (67 sites with 18,422 households), compared with 99 per cent in the previous round. The sites without bathing spaces were located in Sussundenga district (5 sites) in Manica province and Mutarara district (1 site) in Tete province. Hand-washing stations with soap are available in 44 per cent of the sites (32 sites with 12,238 households), while hand-washing stations without soap are available in 44 per cent of the sites (32 sites with 5,513 households). Non-functioning hand-washing stations are available in four sites (485 households), while five sites reported the complete absence of any hand-washing station (1,269 households).

94% 96% 96% 96% 97% 92% 83% 80% 74% 76% 65% 64%

R7 July 2019 R8 Aug 2019 R9 Sep 2019 R10 Oct 2019 R11 Nov 2019 R12 Dec 2019 R13 May 2020 R14 July 2020 R15 Sep 2020 R16 Sep 2020 R17 Nov 2020 R18 Jan 2021

Figure 11: Evolution of the percentage of sites reporting the presence of functional bathing spaces

7 MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19 Hygiene promotion campaigns have been conducted recently in 84 per cent of the sites, while in 12 per cent of the sites they were held more than two weeks ago. The only sites where these campaigns have not been conducted are Mutua (Dondo district), Metuchira and Ndedja_1 (Nhamatanda district) in Sofala province.

96% 99% 99% 99% 99% 86% 90% 82% 76% 85% 83% 85% 84%

R7 July 2019 R8 Aug 2019 R9 Sep 2019 R10 Oct 2019 R11 Nov 2019 R12 Dec 2019 R13 May 2020 R14 July 2020 R15 Sep 2020 R16 Sep 2020 R17 Nov 2020 R18 Jan 2021 R19 Jan 2021 Figure 12: Evolution of the percentage of sites reporting hygiene promotion campaigns In terms of cleanliness of sites, key informants in 41 per cent of the sites (30 sites) stated that the site was clean, while 55 per cent (40 sites) stated that their site was more of less clean. Only three sites are reported to be very clean. Regarding the drainage system, key informants reported that it is functioning as following: very well in 1 per cent of the sites (1 site), well in 34 per cent (25 sites), more or less functioning in 21 per cent (15 sites), poor in 15 per cent (11 sites), and very poor in 29 per cent (21 sites). The sites reporting poor drainage systems are located in Sussundenga district (5 sites) in Manica province, Dondo(2 sites), Nhamatanda (1 site) and Chibabava (1 site) districts in Sofala province and Namacurra (1 site) and Nicoadala (1 site) districts in Zambezia province; while very poor conditions of the drainage system have been reported in Sussundenga district (16 sites) in Manica province, Chibabava district (4 sites) in Sofala province and Namacurra (1 site) district in Zambezia province.

Regarding water sources, 74 per cent of the assessed sites (58 sites) reported using hand pumps as their main sources of water, followed by 8 per cent using an open well (6 sites) and 8 per cent using other water sources (6 sites). The main problems with water reported by key informants were long waiting times/queues in 11 per cent of the sites, flavour/taste (6%), shortage for human consumption (3%), and long distance (1%). Regarding the time spent in queues for water, key informants reported that on average people do not have to wait in 51 per cent of the cases, while the waiting time is less than 15 minutes in 22 per cent of the sites, between 16 and 30 minutes in 18 per cent of the sites, between 31 and 60 minutes in 5 per cent of the sites and more than 60 minutes in 4 per cent of the sites. Other 8% a n Open wells 8% 1 9 J 2 0 1 R Hand pumps 74%

c Other 8% e Open wells 10% 2 0 1 1 8 D

R Hand pumps 76%

v Small water system 8% o Open wells 13% 2 0 1 7 N

R Hand pumps 73%

p Small water system 10% e Open wells 16% 2 0 1 6 S R Hand pumps 85%

p Small water system 12% e Open wells 14% 2 0 1 5 S R Hand pumps 82% y

l Small water system 10% u Open wells 11% 2 0 1 4 J

R Hand pumps 74% Tanks 4% a y Small water system 13% 2 0 1 3 M

R Hand pumps 69%

c Tanks 6% e Small water system 7% 2 0 1 9 1 2 D

R Hand pumps 73%

v Tanks 6% o Small water system 8% 2 0 1 9 1 N

R Hand pumps 65%

t Rivers 8% c Small water system 9% 2 0 1 9 1 0 O R Hand pumps 67% Open wells 7% p e Small water system 17% 9 S 2 0 1 9 R Hand pumps 52%

g Open wells 8% u Lagoons and waterways 17% 8 A 2 0 1 9 R Hand pumps 45%

y Open wells 6% l u Small water system 15% 7 J 2 0 1 9 R Hand pumps 38% Figure 13: Evolution of main water sources in resettlement sites

8 MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19

FOOD SECURITY

Of the 73 resettlement sites assessed, 44 per cent (as in the previous assessment) reported having access to a functioning market (12,548 households in 32 sites). The remaining sites that reported a lack of access to a functioning market (6,597 households in 41 sites) are located in: Sussundenga district (29 sites) in Manica province; Caia (5 sites), Chibabava (4 sites) and Nhamatanda (1 site) districts in Sofala province; and Mutarara district (2 sites) in Tete province. Long distances and the absence of a market in the area were reported as the main factors for the lack of access to a functioning market. 45% 44% 44% 44% 41%

37% 36% 35% 34% 33%

29% 26% 25%

R7 July 2019 R8 Aug 2019 R9 Sep 2019 R10 Oct 2019 R11 Nov 2019 R12 Dec 2019 R13 May 2020 R14 July 2020 R15 Sep 2020 R16 Sep 2020 R17 Nov 2020 R18 Jan 2021 R19 Jan 2021 Figure 14: Evolution of the percentage of sites reporting access to a functioning market Key informants in 93 per cent of sites (68 sites hosting 19,006 households, compared with 63 sites or 86% in the previous round) reported that the site received food assistance; the remaining 7 sites reporting having never received food assistance are: Javera site located in Manica province; Maxiquiri Alto 3 and 7 Abril - Cura sites in Sofala province; Nkganzo and Panducani sites in Tete province. Of the sites that reported having received food assistance, 43 per cent (8,155 households in 29 sites) received it last week, 28 per cent (5,150 households in 19 sites) received it in the last two weeks, 20 per cent (3,418 households in 14 sites) received it more than two weeks ago, and 9 per cent (2,283 households in 6 sites) received one distribution more than a month ago.

9% 93% 43% 20%

28%

7% More than one month Two weeks - one month No Yes One - two weeks Last 7 days

Figure 15: a) Have people received food from a distribution at this site? b) When was the last food distribution at this site? HEALTH Of the 73 resettlement sites assessed, 37 per cent (11,224 households in 27 sites, down from 28 sites or 38% in the previous round) reported having access to healthcare services on-site, whilst the remaining 63 per cent (8,281 households in 46 sites) reported accessing healthcare off-site. The sites that do not have access to healthcare services on-site are located in: Sussundenga district (26 sites) in Manica province; Caia (4 sites), Chibabava (3 sites), Dondo (2 sites) and Nhamatanda (2 sites) districts in Sofala province; Mutarara district (2 sites) in Tete province; Namacurra (5 site) and Nicoadala (2 sites) districts in Zambezia province. Concerning the time required to reach the nearest health facility, 38 per cent require more than 60 minutes walk, 26 per cent can reach the health facility within 31-60 minutes, 25 per cent within 16-30 minutes and 11 per cent in less than 15 minutes. 85% 83% 74%

45% 41% 41% 36% 38% 37% 32% 33% 27% 18%

R7 July 2019 R8 Aug 2019 R9 Sep 2019 R10 Oct 2019 R11 Nov 2019 R12 Dec 2019 R13 May 2020 R14 July 2020 R15 Sep 2020 R16 Sep 2020 R17 Nov 2020 R18 Jan 2021 R19 Jan 2021 Figure 16: Evolution of the percentage of sites reporting access to healthcare services on-site

9 MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19

More than 60 minutes 38%

63% 31 - 60 minutes 26% of sites access healthcare services o-site 16 - 30 minutes 25% Less than 15 minutes 11%

Figure 17 a). Health care facility locations b). Time spent in reaching the closest health facility

For basic care, key informants in 41 per cent of the sites reported that community workers (APEs) are active on site, while APEs are situated in a nearby village in 8 per cent of the sites, and are present but not active in 2 per cent. In addition, in 48 per cent of the sites, an APE is not available. Regarding the availability of medicines at the site, key informants in 51 per cent of the sites (37 sites with 13,530 households) reported that medicines are of good quality and people can afford them, while in 5 per cent of the cases (6 sites with 1,223 households) the quality of the medicines is considered insufficient. Finally, in 40 per cent of the sites (29 sites with 3,927 households) medicines are not usually available to the majority of the population. EDUCATION

According to key informants, the majority of households can write and read moderately in 16 per cent of the sites (12 sites with 3,547 households), while in 84 per cent of the sites (15,958 households in 61 sites) the majority of the population does not read or write. As in the previous round, the majority of the primary school aged children have access to primary school in all sites. However, as in the previous round, in 45 per cent of the assessed sites the school is not functional. The sites with accessible but non functional primary schools (6,849 households in 33 sites) are located in: Sussundenga district (24 sites) in Manica province; Buzi (2 sites) and Chibabava (4 sites) districts in Sofala province; Maganja da Costa (1 site), Namacurra (1 site) and Nicoadala (1 site) districts in Zambezia province. 91% 89% 85% 91% 83% 85% 76% 77% 76%

53% 51% 49% 53% 48% 48% 49% 51% 38% 34% 38% 34%

RR7 7Ju Jluyl y2 0210919 R8 AuRg8 2 A0u1g9 2019 R9 Sep 2R0199 Sep 201R910 Oct 2019 R11 Nov 2019 R12 Dec 2019 R13 May 2020 R1R4 1Ju3l yM 2a0y2 02020 R15 SeRp1 240 2Ju0ly 2020R16 Sep 20R2105 Sep 2R01270 Nov 2020R16 SeRp1 82 0Ja2n0 2021 R17R 1N9o Jva n2 0220021 Figure 18: Evolution of the percentage of sites reporting access to a secondary school Of the 73 sites assessed, 48 per cent (35 sites with 12,454 households) have access to secondary school, as in the previous round. The sites that do not have access to secondary school are located in: Sussundenga district (27 sites) in Manica province; Caia (5 sites) district in Sofala province; Maganja da Costa (2 sites) and Namacurra (3 sites) districts in Zambezia province. PROTECTION

Of the 73 resettlement sites assessed, 25 per cent (7,285 households in 18 sites, down from 21 sites or 29% in the previous round) reported the presence of a protection desk on-site, representing the lowest level since May 2020. The remaining 71 per cent without protection desks (12,220 households in 55 sites) are located in: Sussudenga district (24 sites) in Manica province; Buzi (9 sites), Caia (5 sites), Chibabava (5 sites) and Nhamatanda (1 site) districts in Sofala province; Cidade de Tete (1 site) and Mutarara (2 sites) districts in Tete province; and Maganja Da Costa (1 site) Namacurra (5 sites) and Nicoadala (2 sites) districts in Zambezia province.

91% 85% 76% 76%

53% 49% 51% 38% 36% 34% 37% 30% 30% 29% 25%

R7 July 2019 R8 Aug 2019 R9 Sep 2019 R13 May 2020 R14 July 2020 R15 Sep 2020 R16 Sep 2020 R17 Nov 2020 R13 May 2020 R14 July 2020 R15 Sep 2020 R16 Sep 2020 R17 Nov 2020 R18 Jan 2021 R19 Jan 2021 Figure 19: Evolution of the percentage of sites reporting the presence of a protection desk on-site

10 MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19 Among the assessed resettlement sites, key informants reported the presence of the following structures allowing people to report on incidents were reported: a safety community committee in 41 per cent of the sites (30 sites with 6,324 households), both police and protection community committees in 36 per cent of the sites (26 sites with 8,738 households) and police in 21 per cent of the sites (15 sites with 4,127 households). The only sites reporting the absence of any structure where people can report incidents were: Muchambanha and Nhanhemba 2 sites both located in Sussundenga district in Manica province.

No 3%

2 0 1 Yes, police 21% a n Yes, both police and protec�on community commi�ees 36% 1 9 J R Yes, safety community commi�ee 41% No 4%

2 0 1 Yes, police 15% a n Yes, both police and protec�on community commi�ees 38% 8 J 1 R Yes, safety community commi�ee 42% No 1% 2 0 Yes, police 14% v o Yes, both police and protec�on community commi�ees 40% 1 7 N R Yes, safety community commi�ee 45% No 4%

2 0 Yes, police 14% p e Yes, both police and protec�on community commi�ees 36% 1 6 S R Yes, safety community commi�ee 47% No 4%

2 0 Yes, police 11% p e Yes, both police and protec�on community commi�ees 36% 1 5 S R Yes, safety community commi�ee 49% No 8% Yes, police 12% y 2 0 l u Yes, both police and protec�on community commi�ees 38% 1 4 J R Yes, safety community commi�ee 41% Unknown 1% No 11%

a y 2 0 Yes, police 7%

1 3 M Yes, both police and protec�on community commi�ees 14% R Yes, safety community commi�ee 66% Figure 20: Evolution of the percentage of sites with structure where people can report incidents

Child protection committees were functioning in 38 per cent of the sites (28 sites hosting 9,769 households), compared with 47 per cent in the previous round. Finally, as in the previous assessment, in 51 per cent of the sites (37 sites, hosting 13,094 households) key informants reported the availability of a mechanism for referral of Gender-Based Violence (GBV) survivors.

91% 63% 85% 60% 55% 56% 56% 55% 76% 51% 51% 47% 38% 53% 36% 49% 51% 30% 27% 38% 34%

R7 RJu7ly J u2l0y1 29019 R8 AugR 280 A1u9g 2019 R9 Sep 20R19 Sep 20R1190 Oct 2019 R11 Nov 2019 R12 Dec 2019 R13 May 2020 R1R4 1Ju3l yM 2a0y2 02020 R15 SeRp1 240 J2u0ly 2020R16 Sep 2R01205 Sep 2R01270 Nov 2020R16 SepR 1280 J2a0n 2021 R17 RN1o9v J a2n0 2021 Figure 21: Evolution of the percentage of sites with mechanism for referral of GBV survivors

11 MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19

LIVELIHOOD 2-3 hours IDP families have access to farmalnd in 93 per cent of 12% the sites (68 sites hosting 18,171 households, down 16% 1-2 hours from 100% in the previous round). The sites without access to farmland are located in Sussundenga Less than 1 hour district (4 sites) in Manica province and Nhamatanda district (1 site) in Sofala province. Households in 72 per cent of the sites can reach farmlands in one-two hours, while 16 per cent require more than two hours to reach farmlands from the site and 12 per cent need less than one hour to reach farmland. 72%

Figure 22: Time taken to reach farmland from the assessed sites

91% 99% 99% 99% 100% 85% 97% 97% 94% 94% 76% 93% 89% 88% 53% 49% 51% 38% 34% 67%

53% R7 July 2019 R8 Aug 2019 R9 Sep 2019 R13 May 2020 R14 July 2020 R15 Sep 2020 R16 Sep 2020 R17 Nov 2020

R7 July 2019 R8 Aug 2019 R9 Sep 2019 R10 Oct 2019 R11 Nov 2019 R12 Dec 2019 R13 May 2020 R14 July 2020 R15 Sep 2020 R16 Sep 2020 R17 Nov 2020 R18 Jan 2021 R19 Jan 2021 Figure 23: Evolution of percentage of sites reporting access to farmland

Of the farmers that have access to farmland, 93 per cent (18,640 households in 68 sites) have received agriculture inputs (seeds and tools); the remaining sites (865 households in 5 sites) that have not received agriculture inputs are: Gudza, Magueba and Minas Gerais sites in Sussundenga district (Manica province); Mandruzi in Dondo district (Sofala province); and Pundacani site in Mutarara district (Tete province).

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Eighty-five per cent of resettlement sites assessed (62 sites with 16,813 households, up from 86% in the previous round) reported that there are volunteers conducting social mobilization activities on site. The 15 per cent of sites (11 sites with 2,692 households) that report a lack of social mobilization volunteers on site are located in: Sussundenga district (1 site) in Manica province; Buzi district (3 sites) in Sofala province; Namacurra (5 sites) and Nicoadala (2 sites) districts in Zambezia province. 93% 85% 90% 86% 89% 86% 85% 79% 79% 79% 82% 84% 61%

R 7 July 2019 R 8 Aug 2019 R 9 Sep 2019 R 10 Oct 2019 R 11 Nov 2019 R 12 Dec 2019 R 13 May 2020 R 14 July 2020 R 15 Sep 2020 R 16 Sep 2020 R 17 Nov 2020 R 18 Jan 2021 R 19 Jan 2021

Figure 24: Evolution of percentage of sites reporting the presence of volunteers conducting social mobilization activities on site

According to key informants, the three most common channels used by humanitarian organizations to reach the communities are: the local government office (65 sites), staff from humanitarian agencies (56 sites) and community leaders or groups (50 sites).

12 MOZAMBIQUE: TROPICAL CYCLONE IDAI AND FLOODS MULTI-SECTORAL LOCATION ASSESSMENT - ROUND 19 METHODOLOGY To ensure a more robust and targeted response for the humanitarian community, DTM provides key information and critical insights into the situation on internally displaced persons (IDPs), affected persons and returning populations across the affected areas. Raw data, data visualisation, dashboard and analysis are also available Specifically, DTM implements four component activities in Mozambique:

1) Daily Monitoring: rapid daily assessments of IDP population numbers (individuals and households) at accommodation centres and resettlement sites. 2) Multi-Sectoral Location Assessment: multi-sector assessment at resettlement sites providing in-depth information on mobility, needs, and vulnerabilities. 3) Baseline Locality Assessment: multi-sector assessment of affected localities to determine the number of affected populations and returnees along with basic shelter and access to service information. 4) Thematic Survey: DTM conducts surveys, including household level assessments, to provide a deeper understanding of the intentions/perceptions of affected population and to understand and analysis, socio-economic characteristics, needs and inform sound planning. DTM surveys are carried out on a sample of the population.

For this assessment, since the passage of cyclone Idai, 2020 floods and disasters, resettlement sites are defined as sites where populations have voluntarily moved after staying in accommodation centres. Since all accommodation centres have formally closed, DTM activities continue in the remaining resettlement sites.

The depiction and use of boundaries, geographic names, and related data shown on maps and included in this report are not warranted to be error free nor do they imply judgment on the legal status of any territory, or any endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries by IOM.

For more information or to report an alert, please contact: [email protected]

DTM information products: http://displacement.iom.int/mozambique

DTM in central Mozambique activities are supported by