Teams’ Observation Report ─ HOST COMMUNITY STUDY

During the period between 20 January and 16 February 2006, CARDI-NRC’s camp monitoring teams conducted a survey among IDPs residing with host families. The survey has provided a great deal of useful and interesting quantitative data on a variety of issues concerning this group of IDPs. Singkil Two teams worked in Aceh Singkil. The sample size of 66 households were spread over four different sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Subussalam Utara 5 Simpang Kiri Subussalam Selatan 8 Tangga Besi 3 Kilangan 1 Singkil Ujung 4 Rundeng Badar 28 Lae Bersih 12 Penanggalan Penanggalan 5 The following is their observations and findings in the area. Both teams found it difficult to identify IDPs displaced by the tsunami. They believe the reason for this is that: a) there is little or no assistance provided to IDPs in this district. Therefore tsunami IDPs would probably go somewhere else where assistance is more regular. b) Aceh Singkil was not heavily affected by the tsunami, rather it was affected by earthquake(s). The teams identified more conflict IDPs than tsunami IDPs. However the conflict IDPs were not registered by the community leaders in the surveyed areas. Allegedly this was ordered by the Camats.

1 In the areas which the teams surveyed it was discovered that the local communities had provided the IDPs with land on which to build shelters. The local communities hoped this would help the IDPs to establish themselves. Local cases Sub-district: Rundeng The teams identified a group of conflict IDPs. Village: Badar They were displaced from a different area, and were too traumatized to return to their villages of origin. The only assistance they had receive was so-called raskin (cheap, subsidised rice, distributed by the government) Sub-district: Simpang Kiri The teams identified some conflict IDPs, who had Village: Subussalam Selatan been living in this area since 2001. They claim that they had not received any assistance. They

were living in a farmland area, given to them by the land owner. The land owner had given them permission to build shelters on the land. Their shelters were small, only 4x7m. The land owner had paid the expense of building the shelters. The IDPs only earn enough money to buy food. They are too traumatized to return to their villages of origin, and there is nothing left for them there. This village is very far from Subussalam city. Sub-district : Simpang Kiri The teams identified a group of conflict IDPs from Village: Pemancar Trumon village in Aceh Selatan. They have lived in Pemancar since 2004. Now they rent a small house for the monthly sum of IDR 30,000. All household members are unemployed, and the family find it hard to pay the rent. Some of their children had dropped out of school because of financial problems. Sub-district : Simpang Kiri In this location the teams found IDPs from Nias. Village: Subussalam Utara They live under poor circumstances, with no jobs. Location: Darul Ma’firah They wish to return to their village of origin, but do not have the finances to do so. They have nothing left in their place of origin as their house was destroyed by earthquake. The teams found it hard to communicate with these IDPs as they hardly spoke Bahasa Indonesia. This also makes it hard for the IDPs to communicate with their host community. They have not received any assistance in this village or in the village of origin. Aceh Selatan Two teams worked in Aceh Selatan. The sample size of ten households was spread over three sub-districts:

2 No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Sama Dua Ladang Kasik Putih 1 Sawang Riseh Tunong 1 Tapak Tuan Batu Itam 8 The teams did not come across any conflict IDPs, mainly because they did not cover entire villages. The IDP households interviewed by the teams had received assistance if they had registered. The households headed by a minor, to whom the teams spoke, had not received any assistance. Aceh Barat Daya Two teams worked in Aceh Barat Daya. The sample size of 24 households was spread over two sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Cot Mane 3 Geulumpang Payong 4 Susoh Guhang 1 Kuta Tinggi 3 Ladang Neubok 2 Padang Baru 1 Pawoh 5 Blang Pidie Pulau Kayu 4 Ujung Padang 1 The teams discovered that most of the IDP households, whom they spoke with, came from Aceh Barat and Aceh Jaya and had been displaced by the tsunami. Many of them were traumatized from the tsunami experience. The IDPs claimed they did not receive full assistance. Both IDPs and village leaders blamed this on corruption on sub-district level, saying that people on sub- district level would take some of the assistance and distribute it to family and friends, instead of the IDPs. The households headed by minors, whom the teams met, did not receive any assistance. Only IDPs, who had registered with the community leader or Camat, were recognized as IDPs and given assiastance. However in some villages the IDPs living with host families came from other districts. These IDPs received assistance only once. The community leaders and camats only give assistance to IDPs from Aceh Barat Daya.

3 Nagan Raya Two teams worked in Nagan Raya. The sample size of 21 households was spread over one sub-district: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Blang Muko 6 Padang Rubek 4 Kuala Pulo Ie 1 Ujong Fatihah 10 The teams came across some conflict IDPs, in particular in the rural areas, who had not received any assistance except for jadup once or twice. The host community had provided them with land to build shelters. Some of the IDPs had gradually built shelters. IDPs residing with host families had to go back to their village of origin to pick up assistance. Local case Sub-district: Kuala The teams found a tsunami IDP household, Village: Pulo Ie consisting of a single mother and her son, who are living under extremely poor circumstances. Both were unemployed. Even to find money for daily food was a challenge, but they received some donations from neighbours. The host community provided school fees for her son. The household had never received any assistance. Their shelter is a 2x1,5m makeshift shelter. All their daily activities is going on in this shelter. The shelter was provided by the host community, but the land owner wants them to move. She had to move once before in Dec. 2005 for similar reasons. Aceh Tamiang One team worked in Aceh Tamiang. The sample size of ten households was spread over one sub-district: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Buket Panjang II 1 Ie Bintah 2 Manyak Payed Paya Ketenggar 2 Sampaimah 2 Tualang Baru 3

4 The team found it challenging to find IDPs staying in host families in Aceh Tamiang, apparently because the IDPs had returned to their villages of origin or settled in alternative temporary shelters (barracks, tents). Local cases Sub-district: Manyak Payed The team identified an unaccompanied eight Village: Paya Ketenggar months-old infant. The infant was being taken care of by a poor family who appears to have difficulties in taking care of the child. The infant is living under precarious conditions. He has never been registered by any child protection agencies. Assistance was given only once by one of the Red Crosses. Sub-district: Manyak Payed Team identified a single male household, who is Village: Buket Panjang II suffering from depression and tuberculosis. He stays with his brother’s family, who are poor. Bireuen Three teams worked in Bireuen. The sample size of 24 households was spread over three sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Jeumpa Blang Cot Tunong 5 Blang Keutunga 3 Geulumpang Meu Jimjim 1 Juli Cot Mesjid 1 Juli Juli Keude Dua 3 Tamboi Tanjong 2 Juli Meunasah Seutuy 5 Kuta Blang Babah Jurong 3 In Bireun district the IDPs were mostly tsunami victims from . They used to rent houses in their place of origin and did not own land. Most of them are unemployed and do not have money to go back to their place of origin. This is why they are still living with host families, although they realize that they are a burden to the host family. The IDPs had received jadup twice. The conflict IDPs, who were identified, mostly came from Aceh Tengah. They have lived in displacement since 2000, and have never received any assistance. They wish to return to their places of origin, and work as farmers after their houses are rebuilt. However they do not know when their houses will be rebuilt. The teams visited Juli sub-district, which is close to Bireuen City, and which consists of 21 villages. Information from local communities said that both conflict IDPs and tsunami IDPs live in this area. Of 21 villages only 8 villages were visited. Many of the IDPs here have rented houses or returned to their places of origin. Currently there are IDPs in only three of the villages. Based on observations, the teams could conclude with that conflict IDPs generally still stay

5 in the area. The teams found only few tsunami IDPs here. Conflict IDPs in general live under poor circumstances, with or without shelters, as their old houses were destroyed during the conflict in the period 1998-2005. These IDPs are still not able to return to their places of origin, as they do not have the financial capacity to do so. So far there are no organizations providing houses in their places of origin. The majority of the IDPs identified by the teams complained about the lack of assistance. No kind of assistance had ever been distributed to them, neither had there been any housing programs established. They hope that some organizations will establish livelihood programs for them. In fact in all the areas visited the geuchiks asked about the implementation of livelihood programs for local communities, since most of them have lost their livelihoods as a result of the conflict. They hoped that organizations working in the area would not only take care of tsunami victims, but also conflict IDPs in order to avoid competition among them and social disturbances. There appears to be a lot of misunderstanding among the IDPs regarding assistance and assistance distribution. So far mainly tsunami IDPs have received assistance whereas conflict IDPs have received nothing. Therefore there are complaints among the IDPs that the geuchiks are unfair in distributing assistance. Local cases Sub-district: Jeumpa The teams found an IDP household staying with a Village: Blang Cot Tunong host family. The IDP household came from Banda Aceh, and used to be a merchant family. The breadwinner used to have a shop in Banda Aceh which was destroyed in the tsunami. Now he is staying with his parents-in-law’s house. As compensation, he works for his parents-in-law. He was registered for a permanent shelter program in his village of displacement, but so far there has been no realization. The field monitors advised him to go back to Banda Aceh and try to get a shop from IOM, but he refused because he does not have transportation or money for it.

Lhokseumawe One team worked in . The sample size of ten households was spread over two sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Uteun Bayi 6 Padang Sakti 3 Muara Dua Meuria 1 In Lhokseumawe area, the team found several IDPs staying with host families. Often these IDPs have economic problems, and do not have ability to stand

6 alone. They wish to move from the current settlement but since they have no livelihood and no income, they must rely on the host family for income generation. During their displacement, they have received assistance but the distribution was uneven. It did not solve their economic problems. The IDPs are much in need of empowerment and livelihood programs. Aceh Utara Two teams worked in Aceh Utara. The sample size of 33 households was spread over six sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Dewantara Paloh Lada 7 Mns Asan LSB 3 Lhok Sukon Rambot 2 Muara Batu Cot Seurani 3 Meucat 5 Samudera Pie 1 Blang Peuria 2 Cibrek Tunong 1 Syamtalira Aron Keude Teupin Punti 2 Tanjong Mulieng 4 Mns Beunot 1 Syamtalira Bayu Mns Langa 1 Blang Bayu 1 In this district, team found both disaster and conflict IDPs. The IDPs were in need of direct assistance and livelihood assistance. Some village leaders do not know to whom they should report if there are any issues regarding the IDPs. They do not know which NGOs have activities in these areas. The teams believe the NGOs in the area to a large extent need to improve their coordination of their activities with the community leader. Local cases Sub-district: Dewantara The teams found a household consisting of a Village: Paloh Lada mother and her son. She is suffering from severe depressions after she lost her husband and children in the tsunami. Now she is living with her mother and son. The teams believe she is in need of therapy, but she cannot afford this.

Langsa Three teams worked in . The sample size of 16 households was spread over two sub-districts:

7 No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Langsa Barat Paya Bujuk Seuleumak 11 Langsa Timur Sidorejo 5 Most IDPs interviewed in Langsa district were tsunami victims from Banda Aceh, Meulaboh and Sigli. They were tenants in their place of origin, and do not own land. Some of them were not be able to engage in livelihoods similar to their previous livelihoods before being displaced because a lack of capital and opportunity. Some of these IDPs are traumatized and do not wish to return to their places of origin, and the rest of them expressed that they do not believe there is any progress in the reconstruction/rehabilitation of their places of origin. Local cases Sub-district: Langsa Timur The teams identified an IDP family from Village: Sidorejo Meulaboh. They own land in their place of origin but they have no information on the reconstruction progress there. They cannot return because of a lack of funding for transportation. Sub-district: Langsa Barat Two unaccompanied children, siblings of opposite Village: Paya Bujuk sex, were identified there. After the tsunami they Seuleumak were brought to their grandmother. The grandmother was incapable of taking care of them for health reasons, as she is old and has a vision impediment. Then they were brought to Langsa, where they were separated and live with different families. They were never registered in any child protection program.

Aceh Timur Three teams worked in Aceh Timur. The sample size of ten households was spread over two sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Blang Balok 2 Peureulak Keumuning 1 Blang Geulumpang 1 Idi Rayeuk Keutapang Mameh 3 Meunasah Puuk 3 The teams found it very difficult to identify IDPs still staying with host families in this district, mostly because most of them have returned to their places of origin and rent houses there. Generally the IDPs, who were identified, stayed with family and relatives, and were displaced by conflict. Their house in their places of origin had been burned to the ground during the conflict era.

8 In general both the IDPs and the local communities claimed that the attention of the humanitarian community was low in Aceh Timur, expressing that, although Aceh Timur was not affected by the tsunami, it was affected by the flow of IDPs following the tsunami, simply because it was considered safe since it was not affected. Most of these affected areas are on the coast. The area was already a poor area and the flow of IDPs further affected the local economy, as the IDPs were not able to take up their previous livelihoods due to a lack of capital and equipment. IDPs in these sub-districts had been registered by the BRR for housing projects, but they were still waiting for information at the time of the interview. They did not have any information on when the houses will be built. Some of them expressed disbelief and pessimism over the BRR promises for houses. In three villages there had not been any registration for shelter programs. Generally the IDPs, who still stayed with host families at the time of the interview, expressed that they are still in need of assistance, first and foremost housing assistance, as they would like to avoid being a burden to their hosts. In general these IDPs were under heavy psychological pressure to move because they know that they are a burden to their hosts. They also said that they are still in need of food assistance, although food assistance has been reduced. The teams believe that more attention should be paid to shelter programs in this area. The area has received little media exposure, since the tsunami did not affect the area. Pidie Two teams worked in Pidie. The sample size of 20 households was spread over two sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Ulee Birah 7 Indrajaya Lamreuneung 3 Jojo 3 Mutiara Timur Me Tanjong 7 There are few IDPs staying with host families in Pidie. Most of IDPs, whom the teams met, were poor and stayed with poor host families in poor communities. Conflict IDPs in this situation have never received any form of assistance. Some of the IDPs in Mutiara Timur sub-district were displaced by conflict from Aceh Tengah. They have stayed in this area since 2001. Many of them were farmers prior to being displaced, but have been forced to change their livelihood. Some of the IDPs commute between their places of origin and their host community, especially the IDPs from Banda Aceh. Most of the IDPs in host families in Mutiara Timur sub-district appear to come from outside Pidie (like Banda Aceh), but they own houses in Pidie, which are empty, and where they stay ‘in displacement.’

9 In some instances the Geuchik asked some IDPs to move into TLCs in order to make any assistance distribution easier. Former host families reported that they had never received any assistance as long as they hosted IDPs. Most of the host families reported that, after hosting IDPs, they were left with economic problems. In one case a family hosted as many as 20 IDPs in one House. According to the Mutiara Timur sub-district Secretary, there were 2365 IDPs shortly after the tsunami. By the time of the distribution of the last jadup (August 2005), only 1170 IDPs were left. The Secretary estimated that there were 800 IDPs left at the time of the visit. He believes that most of them have returned to their places of origin, some of them have moved to TLCs, and some of them have married into the local community and integrated. Local cases Sub-district: Indrajaya Many of these IDPs expressed dissatisfaction Village: Ulee Birah with not receiving food assistance anymore, and request that this is being reintroduced as most of them are poor. The teams found a minor who stayed with his grandfather. His parents were lost in the tsunami. The minor had not been registered by any organization, let alone child protection program The road connection to this village was poor.

Aceh Barat Two teams worked in Aceh Barat. The sample size of 73 households was spread over three sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Meureubo Mesjid Tuha 10 Blang Berandang 2 Johan Pahlawan Leuhan 8 Beureugang 6 Keude Tanjong 4 Marek 1 Mesjid 1 Meunasah Rayeuk 8 Kaway XVI Padang Mancang 2 Pasi Jeumpa 11 Pasi Kumbang 4 Peunia 5 Sawang Teubee 11

10 The teams faced difficulties in locating the IDPs because most of them were in school age, and when teams arrived in order to survey them they were at school. Some of the village leaders did not have any recent, updated information about IDPs staying with host families in their village. This further complicated the identification of these IDPs. For this reason these IDPs did not receive any assistance. Many of the IDPs stay with poor host families, in poor shelters. Most of the interviewed host families reported that IDPs, who have been staying with them, have left and returned to their places of origin or another gone to live with another host family. Most of the interviewed IDPs were tenants before the tsunami struck. Therefore the have not registered in their places of origin. They have not received any assistance, nor have they been registered for any shelter programs. Many of these IDPs did not own land in their places of origin. None of the interviewed IDPs had received any jadup. Many of the interviewed IDPs have switched livelihood from farming to construction work, due to a lack of capital to start afresh. There are quite a few conflict IDPs in Kaway XVI sub-district, some of whose houses have been burned. Some of them complained about physical violence and intimidation. Aceh Jaya Two teams worked in Aceh Jaya. The sample size of 32 households was spread over three sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Panga Gampong Harapan 5 Pajar 1 Sampoiniet Reuntang 7 Curek 7 Krueng Sabee Ranto Panyang 12 In Aceh Jaya the teams found it easier to find IDPs in general than in several other places, mainly because close to the entire area was affected by the tsunami. Of the households interviewed in Aceh Jaya, most were headed by two adults. The majority of them came from the same sub-district as they were displaced in, but from different villages. Most of the IDPs in Aceh Jaya did not stay with host families for more than four months. Many moved into TLCs or SSCs. In general the host families were poor. Many of the IDPs whom the teams interviewed still own land in their places of origin, and most of them wish to return there.

11 Many of the tsunami IDPs in Aceh Jaya was displaced close to the mountains and the highlands. This is a burden for them as it is far from the coast where they had their livelihood. Therefore many had switched livelihood. Many IDPs were living in villages affected by conflict before tsunami. The roads to some of the IDP settlements were in bad shape, therefore making it difficult for provision of assistance as well as for IDPs to go anywhere. Local cases Sub-district: Krueng Sabee The teams found many conflict IDPs, who had Village: Ranto Panyang been displace in the mountain area, and living under poor circumstances for two years. They had returned to their places of origin one year ago, and then the tsunami hit them and they were displaced again. Sub-district: Panga The teams identified an IDP with a disability Village: Gampong Harapan which prevents him from walking. He only received assistance once, but it was not sufficient.

Aceh Besar One team worked in Aceh Besar. The sample size of 42 households was spread over four sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Deunong 4 Darul Imarah Lamcot 6 Blang Kiree 11 Darul Kamal Lamtadok 11 Darussalam Limpok 7 Krueng Barona Jaya Lam Gapang 3 In general many IDPs were still staying with host families, although most of the IDPs have been returned to their places of origin. The IDPs, who remained living with host families, did so for the following reasons: 1. Houses are yet to be rebuild/rehabilitated, and are uninhabitable; 2. Trauma; 3. Lack of livelihood in the places of origin; 4. They rent out their houses in their places of origin, and have no other place to go. In Aceh Besar the majority of IDPs displaced by the tsunami came from Pulo Aceh. They face difficulties in finding employment in Aceh Besar, where the main livelihood is farming, whereas they used to be fishermen in their places of origin.

12 The IDPs in general expressed that they feel that they were a burden to their hosts. The IDPs clearly expressed a need for land and shelter as soon as possible. They also were in need of some kind of livelihood program. Banda Aceh Two teams worked in Banda Aceh. The sample size of 64 households was spread over six sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Ateuk Jawo 4 Baiturrahman Neusu Jaya 5 Geuceu Kayee Jato 1 Banda Raya Lam Lagang 1 Bandar Baru 3 Kuta Alam Kota Baru 5 Blangcut 1 Lam Dom 6 Lueng Bata Lueng Bata 5 Panteriek 12 Sukadamai 1 Pineung 2 Syiah Kuala Lamgugob 3 Ie Masen Ulee Kareng 2 Ilie 2 Ulee Kareng Lamglumpang 5 Pango Deah 1 Pango Raya 5 The teams working in Banda Aceh probably faced the most difficulty in locating IDPs staying with host families. The main reason for this appeared to be that the IDPs were working in government offices or as entrepreneurs at the time the survey was conducted. The teams only found tsunami IDPs in Banda Aceh. Reasons for why the IDPs still were staying with host families were: 1. Still awaiting completion of shelters in their places of origin 2. Trauma 3. Places of origin were totally destroyed The teams identified one five-year-old who was suffering from paralysis. The parents were poor and poorly educated, and their economy did not allow for him to be admitted in hospital. The teams have observed several similar cases, and therefore they suggest to all competent humanitarian organizations to assess the situation in Banda Aceh.

13 Aceh Tengah Two teams worked in Aceh Tengah. The sample size of 11 households was spread over five sub-districts: No. of Sub-district Village households interviewed Bebesen Bebesen 1 Kebayakan Paya Tumpi 2 Kute Panang Kute Panang 2 Pegasing Bies Penantanan 1 Silih Nara Burni Bius 5 Aceh Tengah was unaffected by the tsunami, so some IDPs here were IDPs who came from the tsunami-affected areas, although they were not numerous. Actually in some areas the teams found tsunami IDPs who did not stay with host families anymore, because they had built houses on their own land in the area. Some of them came from Banda Aceh. The teams had problems locating the IDPs. Allegedly the reason for this was that the IDPs had moved away from the host families in order not to burden them. Most of the remaining IDPs staying with host families work as farmers from morning until evening, and the teams faced problems meeting them. Furthermore the road condition made the task even harder These IDPs were still staying with their host families because their houses have not finished yet. They will move back to their places of origin when they get shelters. Many of the tsunami IDPs here had not received any assistance. If there was any distribution of assistance it was unequal at the best. This was explained registration problems in the village of origin, or that the IDPs did not have an explanation letter from the Geuchik, Aceh Tengah is conflict-affected area. There were some conflict IDPs who came from outside Aceh Tengah, and some of them still moves continuously from one village to another village. In Burni Bius village, Silih Nara sub-district, the IDPs came from Teupin Mane village, Juli sub-district, Bireun, close to five years ago. They never received any assistance except some houses given by DINSOS in land which they borrowed from government. They expressed hopes that livelihood programs would be started in the area soon. At the time of visit they were earning their living from doing daily odd jobs. Other IDPs who originated from inside Aceh Tengah have normally been able to buy land themselves. The host families in general expressed that they would host IDPs again, as far as they would host family and relatives, because the poor access to assistance in this area makes the IDPs extremely vulnerable.

14 Local cases Sub-district: Silih Nara Geuchik refused to accept IDPs from other Village: Wih Pesam villages without an explanation letter from the geuchik in the village of origin.

15