Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund Myanmar

Credit: ADRA Myanmar

Annual Report 2012 Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Note from the Humanitarian Coordinator

The Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund (HMSF) is In 2012, the HMSF demonstrated that it is an essential the Emergency Response Fund for Myanmar. The HMSF humanitarian funding tool that addresses urgent needs of provides rapid and flexible funding to address the urgent displaced people in remote areas in Myanmar where humanitarian needs of people in insecure areas, including access remains limited for the international community. those internally displaced. This in-country funding During the reporting period, the HMSF supported five mechanism facilitates the coordination of emergency projects implemented by five international non- response activities, strengthens partnerships, and governmental organisations (INGO) in partnership with complements existing funding channels in Myanmar. It five CBOs. enables humanitarian partners to meet the short-term emergency needs of vulnerable communities. The HMSF The establishment of partnerships between INGOs and is not intended to support activities that are outside the CBOs proved to be a successful strategy, enabling the scope of the humanitarian response or which could be HMSF to reach a wider number of beneficiaries and to better addressed through development channels. develop the capacity of local organisations. The international community’s determination to support Through the implementation of HMSF-funded projects, humanitarian operations in Myanmar has led to various around 35,000 people received assistance in 2012. creative initiatives to ensure those most in need are assisted. The HMSF represents an innovative approach to Project activities impacted the life of beneficiaries by: targeting populations otherwise inaccessible to improving access to safe and clean water; improving international agencies and organisations. Priority has hygiene conditions and awareness; providing basic health been given to vulnerable groups living in ceasefire areas, assistance and medicines; providing shelter and basic mixed administration areas, and relocation sites. Support non-food items (NFIs); continuing educational programs is also provided to the communities that host the and activities and improving learning environments; displaced populations. delivering food supplies; increasing food production, livelihood opportunities, and improving farming Since its inception in 2007, the HMSF has successfully techniques; and by enhancing capacities of communities addressed key humanitarian needs, increased local through trainings. capacities, and built partnerships with independent civil society groups through planning and implementing This Annual Report is an opportunity to thank humanitarian projects. The HMSF strives to strengthen contributing donors and all humanitarian partners for civil society by building the capacity of community- their engagement and continual support to the HMSF. It based organisations (CBOs) and faith-based groups to is with their commitment and through coordinated efforts conduct needs assessment and analysis, and to develop that it has been possible to address urgent humanitarian their project design and strategic planning skills. needs of the people in Myanmar. Increased interaction and consultation among stakeholders, including communities and their leaders, can lead to improvements beyond the villages themselves, and is seen as an important outcome of the Fund. Ashok Nigam Humanitarian Coordinator Myanmar

1

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Executive Summary

Humanitarian Overview have been displaced following the resurgence of the conflict between Government forces and the Kachin Myanmar is confronted with frequent natural disasters, Independence Organisation/Kachin Independence Army complex ethnic conflicts, an isolated economy, chronic (KIO/KIA) only since June 2011. The majority of the poverty and limited basic services. Following the Internally Displaced People (IDPs) - an estimated 47,000 November 2010 general election, a new Government was people-are displaced in hard-to-reach areas. formed in April 2011. Since then, Myanmar has undertaken broad yet fragile reforms, progressing in Despite on-going peace negotiations, partners estimated economic development and democratisation and taking that life-saving assistance would be required in Kachin initial steps towards peace with various ethnic groups. and northern Shan States even if the situation were to normalize in the near future. In July 2012, the The international community has responded to Government restricted UN and international NGO access developments in Myanmar with increased interest. The to IDPs in non-government controlled areas for security United States, the European Union and Western countries reasons, forcing the UN and the INGOs to coordinate have suspended sanctions against Myanmar and have their responses from Kachin’s capital city Myitkyina and increased investments. Bhamo. Local faith-based organisations remain the foundation of the response, particularly in hard to reach Long and tightly restricted humanitarian access has areas where faith-based groups continue to have access to resulted in only a few organisations being able to provide all camps and IDP locations, including in Government services to vulnerable populations. Direct presence of controlled areas. However, given the protracted nature of international organisations is minimal as international the conflict and limited number of actors, their capacities NGOs and donors had to rely mostly on the current are stretched. Additional support to develop human presence and level of access of the organisations already resources and to build capacity is needed. active in those regions. This has also led to limited availability of detailed, first-hand and reliable A planning exercise was conducted in 2012 by the UN information on the humanitarian needs of the local and NGOs, identifying priority sectors for immediate population. intervention, including food aid, NFIs, shelter and camp coordination/management, health and nutrition, WASH Border areas have been the theatre of conflict and and protection. The Kachin Response Plan requires USD insecurity, population movements, and widespread 35.8 million for 85,000 IDPS to support humanitarian vulnerability for the past 50 years. Conflict in east needs from March 2012 until February 2013. Myanmar has led to widespread population displacement and generated a large number of refugees. The United Rakhine State Response Nations estimates that up to 400,000 people remained internally displaced in the rural areas of south-eastern The communal violence between Rakhine and Myanmar. ‘Rohingya’ started in June 2012 and reignited in late October. The violence displaced over 125,000 people in Humanitarian vulnerabilities in the east of Myanmar 10 townships, with an estimated additional 10,000 include a range of chronic and acute health problems and unregistered IDPs. Many more in isolated villages have poor nutritional status; lack of safe drinking water and lost access to basic services and livelihoods. sanitation; poor access to schooling (especially beyond primary level); particular vulnerabilities faced by Communal tensions have long existed in Rakhine. children and women (including sexual and gender-based Tensions cross a number of issues, defined in both ethnic violence (SGBV) and human trafficking); and access to and religious terms as well as citizenship rights, livelihood opportunities. Most of the landmines are demographic trends, land rights and the on-going work of concentrated in the areas along the South-Eastern border, humanitarian aid and development actors. The inter- further impacting livelihoods and the population’s access dynamics between communities (the Burmese, Rakhine to services. and ‘Rohingya’) related to the causes and response to the conflict, coupled with multiple stakeholders in each Kachin State Response group adds complexity to the situation. Urgent needs include shelter, food, health services, and safe drinking Along the North-East border, across Kachin State and water, and hygiene and sanitation facilities. northern parts of the Shan State, over 85,000 persons

2

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Moreover, the provision of adequate land to build camps Further, in November 2012 the HMSF expanded its is needed. In the current situation, the risk for disease to geographical scope to enable partners working in spread within and outside the camps is high unless Rakhine State to respond to the emergency from the people are relocated. In several camps in Sittwe, the beginning of 2013 onwards. capital of Rakhine State, more land should be allocated to reduce overcrowding, and shelters, latrines, and basic The HMSF has managed a total donor contribution of services (including temporary learning spaces) are USD 7.1 million since 2007. In 2012, AusAID joined the urgently required. Safe and sanitary conditions are United Kingdom’s Department for International necessary as it is likely that the IDPs will reside in these Development (DFID) and the Swedish International camps for an extended period of time. Many people are Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) in support of living in makeshift shelters after having being turned out the Fund. from host families who can no longer support them. The HMSF continued to complement existing and

limited funding resources such as the CERF in Kachin There is a critical shortage of adequate shelter, and a lack State. The project implemented by Solidarités of capacity among partners to implement – even if funds ("Emergency shelter and hygiene kits distribution for the were made available. Some solutions, including the use affected populations in Southern Kachin State") provided of contractors and private companies, are being explored, additional support to the CERF, complementary to a but there is reluctance due to unresolved inter-communal project implemented with UNICEF. tensions. Restriction on access and freedom of movement of IDPs and non-IDPs is affecting livelihoods and access Partnership between international and national NGOs and to basic services, such as healthcare and education. among local partners has also been a successful practice. Education has yet to resume for the majority of International NGOs facilitated channelling of funds to ‘Rohingya’ children living in camps as the former local partners, and at the same time offered capacity teachers were mostly from the Rakhine community. building and accounting services. Partnership among Health care remains insufficient, with inadequate local partners enabled the Fund to reach additional provision of basic health services in affected townships. beneficiaries in other locations through better Access to mobile clinics, and to services supporting coordinated efforts. vaccination, nutrition, and surveillance, already poor prior to the crisis, has worsened. Resistance by the Rakhine community, particularly in Myebon and, have led to threats against health workers.

The funding requested in the Rakhine Response Plan was revised upwards following the escalation of violence in October 2012 to $68 million to meet the needs of the 115,000 displaced through June 2013.

The Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund

Since 2007, the HMSF has provided humanitarian assistance to approximately 226,000 beneficiaries in 206 locations. In 2012, the HMSF reached almost 35,000 beneficiaries. Target areas have been mostly in Kayin and Kachin States, since the HMSF expanded its support to the Kachin emergency in 2012. Funding was provided to three additional projects, supporting humanitarian partners with the capacity to reach people in need in areas in Kachin under the Government administration and hard to reached areas.

3

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

4

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Information on Contributors The HMSF has managed a total of USD 7.1 million in Since 2011, Fund allocations to projects have increased donor contributions since 2007 from DFID, Sida and with USD 1.4 million allocated in 2011 and USD 1.2 AusAID. million in 2012. DFID was the Fund’s first donor In 2012 donor income was USD 1,047,200. and has provided a total of GBP 1.2 As of 1 January 2012, the net available million (approx. USD 2.3 million) balance of the HMSF was USD 2,350,144. since 2007. Sida joined the HMSF Total funds allocated to projects during at the end of 2009, contributing a 2012 amounted to USD 1,209,862. total of SEK 26 million (approx. The net available balance as of 31 USD 3.8 million) in two tranches December 2012 is USD 2,226,202. (2009 and 2011). In December 2012, AusAID contributed AUD 1 Current HMSF donors have expressed their million (approx. USD 1,047,200). commitment to continue supporting the Fund, primarily because of its unique Fund allocations to projects approach to meeting urgent humanitarian between 2007 and 2010 were less needs in the areas where access is an issue than USD 1 million annually (USD 509,265 in 2007, USD 794,460 in Chart 1: HMSF Donors 2007-2012 for international organisations. While other 2008, USD 612,092 in 2009, and donors have shown interest in supporting USD 297,881 in 2010). the HMSF, further engagement to raise additional funds is necessary in 2013.

Fund Overview Fund allocations to projects between 2007 and 2010 were (one project in 2007, two projects in 2008, one project in less than USD 1 million annually (USD 509,265 in 2007, 2009 and one project in 2010). Between 2011 and 2012 USD 794,460 in 2008, USD 612,092 in 2009, and USD the HMSF supported 11 projects (six in 2011 and five in 297,881 in 2010). Since 2011, Fund allocations to 2012). projects have increased with USD 1.4 million in 2011 This increase of projects per annum has been possible as and USD 1.2 million in 2012. a result of enhanced efforts in identification of partners, There has also been a corresponding increase in the partner interest, increased publicizing of and advocacy number of projects. From 2007 until 2010 only five for the Fund and increased awareness of the Fund facility projects were funded, only one to two projects per year itself.

Summary of HMSF Allocations in 2012 Requested for 2012 Carry over from 2011 Amount received in 2012 Total available in 2012 in USD in USD in USD in USD 0 2,350,144 1,047,200 3,397,344

HMSF funds allocated in 2012 by partner type in USD HMSF funds allocated in 2012 by project type in USD UN Agencies 0 Emergency response 1,209,862 International NGOs1 1,209,862 Preparedness 0 National NGOs 0 Innovative (if any) 0 Total 1,209,862 Total 1,209,862

1All but one international NGO implements through local partners.

5

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Results of HMSF Projects

Overview of 2012 projects

1. Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA): Social Assistance, Infrastructure and Livelihood II (SAIL II)

Implementing Sectors Budget in USD Geographic Area agencies Water and Sanitation, 599,906 Adventist Development and Relief 13 villages located in two Townships Agriculture/Livelihoods, Agency (ADRA) Myanmar (Myawaddy and Hlaingbwe Health and Nutrition Townships) in Karen State Outputs ■ Total number of beneficiaries: 1,549 households (estimated 6,196 people) ■ Project results: Agriculture/Livelihoods: A total of 1,549 households received farming tools, 858 farming households received high yield paddy, and 687 farming households received green gram seeds and fertilizers. 13 seed banks were established in each project village. A total of 1,150 households received compost preparation materials, and 1,423 households received home garden seedlings and implements. 13 agriculture management committee members were trained in bookkeeping as well as record keeping. 347 beneficiaries including 46 agriculture extensionists and broader community (home- garden-low cost farming) were trained in low cost farming technique and establishment of home garden techniques. 45 Trainers of Trainers (TOTs) were trained in Sloping Agricultural Land Technology (SALT) model plots established in the mountainous area and 32 TOTs were trained for System of Rice Intensification (SRI) technique training in lowland area. 44 members of the different village development committee members received management of a seed bank and bookkeeping training. Water and Sanitation: Community water systems were rehabilitated and expanded through water management committees in 13 villages; 21 wells were renovated in 7 villages, 8 new wells were constructed in 4 villages, 6 pipe line water systems have been established using gravity flow system. 1,549 households received water containers (40 gallons) to store water in a safe environment. Introduced hygiene practices and prevented infectious diseases for school children by building a school latrine in Htee Mu Hta village and distributed latrine pan and pipe to 272 households where the usage of a household latrine was not in practice. A training package on hygiene and sanitation transformation was tailored and implemented according to local context, reaching 75 per cent of targeted households: 26 hygiene and sanitation training were conducted in 13 villages. In addition, 51 trainees/ per leaders were identified in 13 villages and trained as trainers in personal hygiene and safe domestic water usage and waste management. ■ Cross-cutting issues: Cross-cutting issues including HIV/AIDS, gender awareness, and protection were addressed in all trainings and community meetings, and were coordinated with other stakeholders in the region. ■ Challenges during implementation: Heavy rains, floods, and armed-clashes in the project area slowed down project implementation. On some occasions, ADRA's project staff had to be withdrawn from the villages for security reasons but were able to resume their duties afterwards. ■ Added value: The project was able to increase agricultural production and access to livelihood sources as well as to contribute to improved access to adequate drinking water and improved basic sanitation in these villages. Activities of the SAIL II project have been the only humanitarian assistance of its kind in the area. The current ceasefire negotiations between the Myanmar Government and the Karen National Union could open up more opportunities in assisting internally displaced person. Funds provided under grants schemes such as the HMSF will continue to of utmost importance, bringing relief and assistance for communities in need.

6

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

2. Consortium of Dutch NGO’s: Humanitarian Assistance for communities affected by protracted conflict and relocation in Thandaunggyi Township, Kayin State, Myanmar

Implementing Sectors Budget in USD Geographic Area agencies Water and Sanitation, 150,000 Consortium of Dutch NGOs (CDN) Ward 1 and 3, Thandaunggyi Town Education partnering with Myanmar Heart and 5 villages in Ywar Gyi Village Development Organisation (MHDO) tract. Kayin State, Thandaunggyi Township. Outputs ■ Total number of beneficiaries: 599 students (317 male and 282 female) including 391 students from internally displaced households and 208 from host households plus 1,150 people received hygiene training ■ Gender consideration: 599 students (317 male and 282 female) ■ Project results: Water and Sanitation: 599 students (317 male and 282 female) including 391 students from IDP households and 208 from host households, from 8 schools in 7 villages, and members of their households in 9 villages in Thandaunggyi Township, Kayin State, benefited from improved access to water by upgrading the gravity flow water systems setup and spring sources. A total of 1,150 people received hygiene training and improved their knowledge on health and hygiene and how to put their knowledge into practice. 29 latrines and 8 numbers of 5,000 gallons rain water collection tanks were constructed in 7 targeted villages where 599 students and 32 teachers benefited to altogether for the hygienic purpose. 2 zinc sheets for roofing, and the latrine pan and plastic pipe were provided to 253 beneficiary households in 7 target villages. Health and hygiene awareness sessions were conducted in the schools and a hygiene kit was provided to each student. 8 Rainwater Harvesting Tanks were constructed for 8 schools in 7 target villages for sufficient safe drinking water. 7 steel water tanks (500L) and 21 filtration pots were provided to 7 schools. 3 gravity flow systems were setup in 4 villages in the targeted villages and upgraded two spring sources. 450 fibre containers (160 litres sized) and 130 rills (100 meters per rill) of flexible fibre pipes were provided to 4 target villages for more water storage facility. Household from targeted villages received better access to safe drinking water and increased the capacity for storage of water from spring sources. 2 sets of water pumping engine and pipes were provided to 2 schools in 2 villages. Education: A total of 599 students from 8 schools in 7 villages received a package of books and stationeries and were now able to attend the school regularly. Seven schools received 5 blackboards, 15 sets of desks and benches for students, and 3 sets of table and chair for teachers for each and one school received 2 blackboards, 20 numbers of benches, and one set of table and chair. The ceiling for a school at Thu Htay Kone village was installed. ■ Cross-cutting issues: Gender mainstreaming is the main cross-cutting issue addressed by the project. In all of the community meetings that were held, a majority of participants were women, who actively participated. A gender awareness training was organized and conducted at Taungoo, at the Taungoo-Thantaung Bwe Mo Bwar Association assembly hall where 28 villagers from 7 villages and 8 government staff were trained on gender awareness. ■ Added value: A significant improvement in quality and quantity of sanitation facilities was observed. Some behaviour change on personal hygiene was noticed. Provision of stationery to students helps reduce the education expenses resulting in their regular attendance to school.

7

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

3. Solidarités International: Emergency shelter and hygiene kits distribution for the affected populations in Southern Kachin State

Implementing Sectors Budget in USD Geographic Area agencies Emergency Shelter 115,291 Solidarités International in partnership Momauk, Mansi and Shwegu and Non Food Items with Local Development Organisation Townships, Kachin State, (NFI) (LDO) Myanmar Outputs ■ Total number of beneficiaries:1,797 Households (8,539 people) ■ Gender consideration: 1,197 households (5,315 people) received Hygiene Kits, more than 50 per cent of this targeted population are female (2,894 people) 600 households received Shelter Kits, more than 50 per cent are female (1,188 out of 2,184 people) 3,294 people participated in hygiene promotion sessions, the majority of the beneficiaries targeted for hygiene promotion are female (1,876 persons) ■ Project results: Water and Sanitation: 1,197 hygiene kits were distributed through the local partner LDO in the 6 camps targeted along the Chinese border areas (1 kit distributed per household). Conducted hygiene promotion sessions (disease transmission, hand washing, food cleaning, safe water, latrine usage and latrine cleaning) reaching an average of 65 per cent of beneficiaries (3,294 people) in these 6 camps. Shelter and NFI: 600 mobile shelter kits were distributed to IDPs living in the forest in 9 locations (6 in Shwegu Township, 2 in Mansi Township and 1 in Myitkyina Township). ■ Challenges during implementation: SI had to face considerable implementation constraints in the frame of this programme, deriving mainly from the fact that it took place in Non-Government controlled areas where access is difficult and the security situation volatile. ■ Added value: In the frame of this HMSF project, the involvement of the local partner LDO proved fundamental to reach areas where SI could not directly implement activities (due to access and/or security constraints).

8

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

4. Save the Children International: Humanitarian Assistance to Children and their Families displaced by the Conflict in Kachin and Northern Shan

Implementing Sectors Budget in USD Geographic Area agencies Child Protection, 399,059 Save the Children International (SCI) in Kachin State, Bhamo District Education, Water and partnership with Wun Pawng Ninghtoi (Bhamo, Mmauk, and Mansi Sanitation (WPN) and Karuna Myanmar Social townships); Shan State, Muse Services (KMSS) District (Namkham township) Outputs ■ Total number of beneficiaries: 9,954 IDPs affected by the conflict in Kachin and Northern Shan State (both in Government and non-Government controlled areas) including under 18 years children (5,821 in total 16 camps). Children under 5 years: 1,800 (953 boys and 847 girls) Children 5-18 years: 4,021 (2,008 male and 2,013 female) Adult >18 years: 4,133 (1,401 male and 2,732 female) ■ Project results: Child Protection: A total of 11 Child Friendly Spaces (CFS) have been constructed and are running activities for 2,600 children in camps of Mai Ja Yang (5), Man Wyn Gyi (2) and Namkham (4). 11 Child Groups (CGs) (children aged 15-17) and 11 Child Protection Groups (CPG) (community adults) have also been established in conjunction with CFS with continued support from SCI Child Protection staff. CGs have been instrumental in the initiation of camp rules development.100 per cent of cases received by SCI and WPN were responded to and resolutions sought in conjunction with the CPGs and camp management committees. Assisted by camp leaders, the CGs have developed the specific Child Safeguarding Policies for their own camps with specific considerations of the conditions and concerns they identified. 29 CFS volunteers were trained in facilitation of CFS activities and protection issues, with additional community members receiving follow up training. More households than initially proposed were reached with complementary food rations due to the dynamic and changing nature of the camp population. Food security and livelihood: Tools and seeds for 1,000 households were provided to successfully enable the households to grow a variety of vegetable crops. The set up and management support for the committee provided greater access to these farms for the wider camp population. A total of 7984 IDPs in 5 IDP camps have received food rations to complement the basic ones distributed by WFP or by other implementing partners. All households (1,579) received potatoes, garlic, dry fish and vegetables. 435 households have been reached through the construction of latrines, hand washing facilities and bathing spaces in Namkham and Mai Ja Yang. Water and Sanitation: 435 households have been reached through the construction of latrines, hand washing facilities and bathing spaces in Namkham and Mai Ja Yang. 287 households were reached through WASH sector interventions. The construction of 3 cement water tanks was undertaken to improve access to water for 179 IDP households in the particular camps as well as to support the hygiene promotion activities. 37 latrines and 8 bathing spaces designated for women and girls were constructed in 4 camps. 1,866 households were provided with hygiene materials to improve hygiene practice. WPN constructed 2 new water cement tanks with the technical oversight for design from SCI WASH staff. These water tanks are for the provision of water for hygiene and domestic purposes. 1000 meters of water pipe were also provided in order to ensure access to water and water supply to bathing spaces. Education: 11 early childhood care and development (ECCD) centres have been completed in IDP camps in Namkham township and in Mai Ja Yang. In total, 734 children attended and received ECCD services.126 community’s members and caregivers attended the toy making training to allow the ECCD volunteers and communities to make the activities and ECCD supplies more sustainable. 1,870 student kits were distributed to primary school students. 1,000 blankets, instead of warm clothing, were provided to school pupils and their families in the camps. ■ Challenges during the implementation: Further capacity building of staff is required as most WPN staff lack NGO experience. The nature of work in a conflict area limited the capacity building provided. Recruitment remains a challenge as it is difficult to find the skills and experience necessary among those willing to work in a conflict area. Administration: Filing systems need to be improved. Organizing the participants in camps was a challenge for community workers as the residents of the camps came from different part of the Kachin state, which has experienced violations and abuses, has

9

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

lived under different local authorities, and have been traumatized by 20 months of conflict. ■ Added value: CPGs have demonstrated that they are able to handle child protection concerns in their camps with camp committees and staff included in the decision making process. After interaction with the CFS, children have increased confidence to socialise with children from different areas and speaking different dialects (in one camp, people from 15 different areas are present). Playing with children in the CFS has reduced their fear of others and their negotiation and communication skills have increased. Children attending the CFS have expressed their happiness at having toys to play with, and they are now playing less in the roads, streams or other dangerous places.

5. OXFAM: Emergency Shelter response to conflict-induced displacement in Kachin State

Sectors Budget in USD Implementing Geographic Area agencies Shelter and NFI, 229,772 Oxfam and Kachin Kachin State, townships of Myitkyina and Waingmaw, Capacity Building Baptist Convention 8 camps (7 in government-controlled areas and 1 in (KBC) Kachin Independence Organisation (KIO) -controlled areas) and Northern Shan State, 1 camp (due to changes in needs assessed at field level the activities were conducted in 5 camps in Myitkyina and Waingmaw, and 1 camp in KIO controlled area). Outputs ■ Total number of beneficiaries: 350 IDP Households ■ Gender consideration: ■ Project results: Shelter: Constructed 395 units of shelters in Myitkyina and Waing Maw Townships. 175 units of shelter have been constructed in government controlled areas and 220 units of shelter in KIO controlled/hard to reach area. Therefore the ratio of shelters constructed under this project is 56 per cent in KIO-controlled areas and 44 per cent in government- controlled areas. KBC has implemented shelter construction in the targeted camps based on the results of coordination with camp management committees and UN agencies, international NGOs and national NGOs. Coordination s well as capacity building: Effective coordination has taken place between KBC and other stakeholders such as UNHCR, KMSS, Shalom, Metta and local authorities from both sides as well as on-going capacity-building in areas such as humanitarian standards and principles, Code of Conduct, camp management and coordination. Trainings have been provided to KBC staff and volunteers as well as to camp management committees. ■ Challenges during implementation: The price of construction materials in KIO-controlled areas is higher than that in the government-controlled area, as they need to be bought and transported from China. Materials (zinc sheets, plywood, and other iron materials) were procured in China and delivered to camps in border areas because of access problems from government-controlled area. Suppliers in the local market on the China border were not familiar with logistics procedures such as quotations and tender processes, so closer monitoring and support to logistics procedures was needed and this also led to some short delays in procurement whilst getting the necessary paperwork. ■ Cross-cutting Issues and Engagement in Coordination Mechanisms: Formed camp committees in each targeted camp in order to address protection of IDPs and their dignity, and security as well as to prioritize disabled persons and women- headed households. ■ Added value: Participation of local partners, communities, local suppliers and listening to their voices on issues around programme design, including in areas such as on shelter design and local materials, should continue by the international community as this initiative was highly beneficial and well-received by the local community and community groups, and can serve as good practice for all humanitarian actors in terms of transparency and accountability.

10

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Summary and analysis of achievements Beneficiaries • Areas that are accessible by very few international organisations; The overall number of beneficiaries of the HMSF since • Areas that are accessible to local staff of certain 2007 is approximately 226,000 people in 206 locations. organisations; In 2012, 28,454 beneficiaries were targeted and 26,649 • Areas where only national staff of CBOs have people were reached by five HMSF projects. access; • Areas where only community members have access; The number of beneficiaries covered by the Fund in • Areas of ceasefire; 2012constitutes around 15 per cent of the total number • Areas with mixed administration; that were reached since its inception. In Kachin State, a • Relocation sites; total of 18,917 people were targeted by three projects and 17,129 reached (Beneficiaries targeted in Government Chart 2: Beneficiaries targeted in 2012, by project areas were 5,395 people (31 per cent) and in hard to reach areas 11,734 people (69 per cent)). In Kayin state, two HMSF projects targeted 9,537 people and reached 9,520people in Kayin State.

Impact on beneficiaries’ lives In 2012, through the HMSF, 26,649 people received basic humanitarian assistance in areas where access is limited. It supported: • Improved access to safe and clean water and hygiene situation through latrine construction, hygiene awareness trainings; • Availability of medicine and basic health care assistance by medical staff; • Provision of shelter and basic NFIs; • Continuation of education through distribution of educational materials, and improvement of learning environment; • Access to food: increased food production, livelihood opportunities, improve farming Chart 3: Beneficiaries reached in 2012, by techniques (farm tools, seeds and fertilizer, received geographical area training on agricultural techniques), establish seed bank, carry out home gardens activities, and compost pits;

Geographical expansion The HMSF focused its activities mainly in south-eastern Myanmar (Kayin, Mon, Bago and Tanintharyi Regions/States) but also in Northern border areas (Shan State and Kachin State). In 2012 the HMSF expanded its geographical scope to and Rakhine State to enable partners working this area to respond to the emergency.

HMSF projects are implemented in hard-to-reach areas where access is challenging, including:

11

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Sectoral Allocation Chart 4: HMSF 2012 Sectors covered by projects Projects implemented in Kachin State: • Solidarités International (SI) in partnership with Local Development Organisation (LDO). Health • Save the Children (SCI) - in partnership with Nutrition 7% WPN and Karuna Myanmar Social Services 7% WASH (KMSS). Food 29% • OXFAM in partnership with Kachin Baptist 7% Convention (KBC). Projects implemented in Kayin State: Protection • Consortium of Dutch NGOs (CDN) in 14% partnership with Myanmar Heart Development Organisation (MHDO). • Education ADRA Myanmar, implemented directly. Shelter 22% In 2012, HMSF resources also complemented other 14% sources of funding. In OXFAM’s HMSF-10 project, OXFAM, in collaboration with KBC, provided additional shelter response to complement resources from local partners who were the first to respond to the needs of the All HMSF projects funded to date have been multi- displaced population in remote areas. sectoral. In 2012, HMSF projects’ covered emergency needs in eight sectors: education, food security, health, At the end of 2011, the Advisory Board, in response to livelihoods, nutrition, shelter and non-food items, the situation in Kachin State, agreed to prioritize the protection and water sanitation and hygiene (WASH). HMSF limited balance to respond to the needs of the Kachin IDPs. The Advisory Board encouraged WASH and education activities were the primary partnership among local NGOs was encouraged, in order activities implemented through HMSF projects in 2012, to maximize resources and access opportunities, and to followed by shelter/NFIs, and protection. Health, food, reach more beneficiaries with the same intervention in nutrition and livelihood activities were included to a different locations under the same project. A partnership lesser degree in the projects. between two CBOs (KMSS, KBC) and one NNGO The HMSF has expanded its approach to provide (Shalom Foundation) provided assistance to almost 14,000 people in different locations. humanitarian assistance in a wider number of sectors. Because KMSS had experience with the HMSF At first, from 2007 until 2010, the HMSF provided procedures and guidelines, it was enabled to overcome assistance in four priority sectors of intervention, banking restrictions, and channel funds to other local including education, health, livelihood and WASH. In partners (Shalom and KBC). Implementation and 2011 sectoral coverage increased up to seven sectors and monitoring were coordinated among partners to ensure in 2012 to all eight sectors. accountability to the Fund. To report on project implementation, partners provided inputs to KMSS which consolidated and produced final report. Implementing partners: strengthening partnerships The HMSF is available for INGOS, NNGOs, CBOs, and In 2012, partnership between local and international FBOs. In 2012 partnership between INGOs and local NGOs was promoted by providing grants to intermediary partners was strengthened. Five INGOs received HMSF organisations which will in turn offer capacity building funding and worked together with local partners and accounting services to national NGOs. This (NNGOs, CBOs and FBOs) whom had humanitarian partnership promotes knowledge and respect of access, and reached beneficiaries in remote areas where humanitarian principles, and provides exposure to best INGOS have limited or no access. Only one INGO, practices for hard-to-reach areas where humanitarian ADRA, directly implemented an HMSF-funded project. access is limited will also continue during this year. Partnerships among INGOs and Local partners were as follows:

12

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Complementarily of funds between Shwegu and border camps in Kachin State. The HMSF-funded project implemented by Solidarities The HMSF contributed to the emergency response and consisted of distribution of hygiene kits and mobile complemented CERF funding in Kachin. Its flexibility shelter kits in six border area IDP camps and five IDP allowed Solidarities International through the HMSF-08 locations near Shwegu. Solidarités identified one local project to provide additional support to the CERF project partner LDO, to support the implementation of CERF implemented with UNICEF which focused mainly on and HMSF project. WASH needs in IDP camps in the geographic areas

Project Monitoring HMSF implementing partners follow their internal visits are being explored. In 2013 the HMSF will have a monitoring systems to provide continuous monitoring of national officer to support monitoring of projects as project activities. The partners review the progress possible. against the objectives and indicators included in the Field visits for monitoring project implementation are project agreement. The logical framework, which conducted by implementing partners. The costs for constitutes a summary of the objectives, results, project monitoring and field visits are therefore included indicators and activities, is used as the main reference in the proposals and budget. point for reporting and monitoring progress. Partners also develop further concepts to assure HMSF partners reported on project progress, challenges, continuous monitoring: financial situation and particular issues encountered during the implementation trough the submission of ADRA was able to establish 13 water management interim reports. The reports also include essential committees which were trained to monitor the information on the conflict situation that impacts directly community water systems at the end of the project. The on project activities. partner was able to also facilitate the drafting of village sanitation and hygiene promotion and monitoring plans Most partners submitted mandatory reports on time. The by the water management committee. quality of the documents has significantly improved over previous years primarily due to technical support CDN was able establish school water and sanitation provided to local partners by international NGOs. committees which also act as the oversight body for the provision of monitoring and management support to OCHA engages and trains HMSF partners to enhance HMSF funded project beneficiaries. Implementation of reporting and quality of information gathering, including findings and recommendations made in previous gender disaggregation of needs, response and monitoring. monitoring visits also helped to assist the community to The HMSF attaches great importance to the provision of better plan and implement the project activities in a capacity building of the communities assisted. OCHA proper and timely manner. has engaged various international organisations and promoted trainings to support capacity building for Save the Children organized a three-day monitoring and implementing partners as well. evaluation (M&E) training for its staff and partners in Yangon where programme specific M&E tools were Due to the politically sensitive environment in which developed, and registration and case management were HMSF projects are implemented, on-site monitoring by discussed. Tools, data collection techniques and OCHA international staff and Advisory Board members frameworks for reporting were developed. remains a challenge. Alternative ways to undertake field

13

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Gender Consideration Cross-cutting issues, including gender, protection, during November and December 2012 where IDPs environmental and HIV/AIDS awareness, were addressed perceptions of safety and dignity were emphasized. The by all HMSF projects: report will be officially launched in March 2013, and both Oxfam and KBC will benefit from adapting their ADRA and CDN, for example, addressed gender programmes based on the learning from this report and mainstreaming in all of their trainings and community from other studies. meetings. All community committees were formed assuring gender balance. Generally, in some of the project areas reached by HMSF-funded projects, the number of women and girls CDN and Solidarités reported that the majority of the is higher than that of men and boys due to the conflict participants in all community meetings were women. and women carried out the overall economic and social Furthermore, SC was able to form CPGs with more responsibility of a single-parent family. female participants. Constructing eight bathing spaces for Even after the completion of the project, ADRA women and girls provides a gender segregated space in continues to coordinate with other stakeholders in the which women can bathe in a dignified manner. region on protection, gender and human trafficking Oxfam and KBC formed camp committees in each issues. targeted camp in order to address protection of IDPs and Gender considerations have been introduced in trainings their dignity, and security as well as the prioritization of and workshops conducted on health, social rights and disabled persons and women-headed households for child rights under HMSF projects. However, the gender beneficiary identification. The partners ensured the active equality concept requires further efforts to be participation of women and particularly women-headed mainstreamed and regularized in the HMSF project households in the discussion to express their voice in implementation processes to fully apply the gender particular needs. Furthermore, a Protection Study was marker in 2013. carried out jointly by the five main national NGOs (including KBC) in camps in both Government Controlled Areas and Non-Government Controlled Areas

14

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Conclusion OCHA is advocating for an expansion of the scope and potential to open access to new areas for these existing mandate of the HMSF to all conflict- and natural development-oriented funds. disaster-affected areas as a funding mechanisms to ensure The HMSF alignment to the Global ERF Guidelines is in rapid response to urgent needs. The Advisory Board is process. OCHA has shared the Global ERF Guidelines inclined to accept the idea of expanding the facility to all with the HC, the Advisory Board, cluster/sector leads, conflict areas. However, further support from all partners and fund applicants at the national and field stakeholders of the HMSF is necessary to be able to level. OCHA has identified a number of priority areas of cover all conflict and natural-disaster affected people work to fully accomplish the goal to align with the countrywide. Initial steps have been taken as the decision Global ERF Guidelines in 2013: taken by the HC and the Advisory Board to expand the HMSF to address needs in Rakhine State, even if all 1) Establish a Review Board with for an independent these areas are under Government control, in view of the technical project review process, advising the HC on acute nature of the emergency. project approval, and a separate Advisory Board, as the steering body to provide strategic advice to the In 2013, the engagement with donors to commit HC. additional funding to the HMSF is a priority considering 2) Set up of a Long Term Agreement (LTA) with an progressive increase of expenditures per year over the audit firm for HMSF projects. last two years. The number of projects funded in 2013 is 3) Promoting and systematize stronger involvement of likely to be higher than in any previous year. Nine sector/cluster leads. partners working in Rakhine and Kachin states have 4) Implementing a monitoring and reporting strategy. contacted OCHA to submit project proposals in 2013. In 5) Provide updates to the Financial Tracking System this regard it is expected that 40 per cent of the balance upon project approval. for 2013 projects will be allocated during the first 6) Systematically apply the Gender Marker to all trimester of the year. submitted projects. 7) Revision of the HMSF Guidelines to be in line with Due to the political and economic changes occurring in the Global ERF Guidelines. Myanmar over the last two years, and after the visit of the Emergency Relief Coordinator Valerie Amos to In advancing on the action points, in 2012 OCHA started Myanmar in 2012, the HMSF has become more visible liaising with UNDP and requested support for the and partners have increased their interest in accessing procurement of an audit firm. UNDP signed on OCHA’s HMSF funding. In 2012 a press release about a donor’s behalf an LTA with an audit firm for a duration of 12 contribution was possible for the first time. The increased months which gives the possibility to audit up to 15 HMF openness of the Fund will lead to further outreach and projects in 2013. developments in public information in 2013. Further, Cluster/sector leads have been engaged and Increased staff capacity to manage the HMSF should be project proposals are submitted to OCHA after supported in 2013. During the last two years one consultations done by the applicant with sector leads and international staff has been managing the HMSF while the field. The process will be further streamlined within performing additional humanitarian financing the finalization of the HMSF Guidelines. responsibilities. Dedicated staff only for HMSF is New HMSF allocations and donor’s contributions started necessary to ensure accomplishment of having the HMSF to be reported to FTS for the first time during 2012. fully aligned with the Global ERF Guidelines. All necessary actions are being taken to make the HMSF The HMSF complements the CERF and has the potential ready to respond to the growing humanitarian needs in to complement other in-country funds which target Myanmar in an efficient and effective manner, longer term initiatives. The HMSF further has the committed to be accountable to the affected population.

15

Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund – Myanmar Annual Report 2012

Acronym Glossary

AB Advisory Board ADRA Adventist Development and Relief Agency AusAID Australian Agency for International Development CBO Community-Based Organisation CDN Consortium of Dutch NGOs CERF Central Emergency Response Fund CFS Child Friendly Space CG Child Group CPG Child Protection Group DFID Department for International Development ECCD Early Childhood Care and Development ERF Emergency Response Fund FBO Faith-Based Organisation HC Humanitarian Coordinator HMSF Humanitarian Multi-Stakeholder Fund for Myanmar IDP Internally Displaced Person INGO International Non-Governmental Organisation KBC Kachin Baptist Convention KIA Kachin Independence Army KIO Kachin Independence Organisation KMSS Karuna Myanmar Social Services LDO Local Development Organisation M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MHDO Myanmar Heart Development Organisation NFI Non-Food Item NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NNGO National Non-Governmental Organisation OCHA Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs RC Resident Coordinator SCI Save the Children International SI Solidarités International Sida Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency TOT Trainer of Trainers UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees WASH Water Sanitation and Hygiene WFP World Food Programme WPN Wun Pawng Ninghtoi (NNGO)

16