1 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 Table of Contents

Awardee Name and Host Country Haiti

Award Number AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Project Name Response Submission Date (11/6/2017)

Reporting Fiscal Year FY 2017

Awardee HQ Contact Name Sue Gloor

Awardee HQ Contact Address 151 Ellis St NE, Atlanta, GA 30303

Awardee HQ Contact Telephone Number 404.979.9119

Awardee HQ Contact Email Address [email protected]

Host Country Office Contact Name Laura Sewell

Host Country Office Contact Telephone Number 509.4896.6337

Host Country Office Contact Email Address [email protected]

1 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 Table of Contents

A List of Acronyms ...... 3 B. Narrative ...... 4 Project Activities and Results ...... 4 Project Summary ...... 4 Project Outputs ...... 4 Programming Performance ...... 5 Market Analysis ...... 8 Cross-cutting Elements ...... 9 Challenges, Successes, Lessons Learned ...... 10 C. Success Story ...... 14 D. Indicator List ...... 14 E. Technical Sectors Tracking Table ...... 15 F. Assessment, Evaluation, and Study Reports ...... 15 G. Unique and Director Participants ...... 15

2 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 A List of Acronyms

ACTED Agence d’Aide à la Coopération Technique et au Développement

ANKAD Ansamn Nap Kanpe Ak Diyite

ASEC Section Communal Assembly Assemblée de la Section Communale

CARE-Haïti Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere-Haiti

CASEC Conseil d'Administration de la Section Communale

CCC Committee of Commnal Coordination Comité de Coordination Communale

CFW Cash For Work

CRS Catholic Relief Services

CNSA Coordination National de la Securite Alimentaire

FH Food for the Hungry

FONKOZE Fondasyon Kole Zepòl

MAST Ministry of Social Affair and labor Ministère des Affaires Sociales et du Travail

MFI Microfinance Institution Institution de Microfinance

USAID U.S Agency for International Development

3 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 B. Narrative

Project Activities and Results

Project Summary In response to the impact (deadly flooding and mudslides and causing catastrophic damage to houses, infrastructure, crops, and water and sanitation systems) of Hurricane Mathew, a Category 4 hurricane that made landfall in Haiti on October 4, 2016, CARE coordinated with partners Catholic Relief Services (CRS), Mercy Corps, Food for the Hungry, and ACTED to implement a six-month cash-based response across 18 communes in the Grande Anse, South, and Nippes Departments. CARE’s Food for Peace funded response aimed to increase access to food and other basic goods/services across 18 communes through two main components: 1) one cycle of cash transfers for 102,748 households; 2) two cycles (10 days/each) of cash-for- work (CFW) transfers for 19,265 households. CARE and its partners implemented the project activities alongside three microfinance institutions - Fonkoze, the Le Levier Federation, and SogeExpress; collectively, these actors are referred to as the “Ansamn Nap Kanpe Ak Diyite” (“Recovering Together with Dignity”) (ANKAD) Consortium.

The cash transfer amount per beneficiary household was set at 4,000 Haitian Gourdes (the approximate equivalent of $60/month); this amount was calculated based on the standard set by the World Food Program (WFP) and represented approximately 60% of the average monthly food basket. A report published in December 2016 by the Government of Haiti’s National Food Security Coordinator (CNSA) indicated that two in five households were food insecure, with a risk of becoming severely food insecure by June 2017 in the event of insufficient external support. Throughout the life of the project, a direct cash-based response remained the most appropriate strategy to provide emergency assistance to households that did not have reliable support in the wake of the hurricane and were facing food shortages in the following months due to shortages of seeds and other resources for planting in the winter and spring seasons.

Project Outputs

Table 2: Emergency Food Assistance Projects – Annual reporting indicators progress against targets Total number of project 102,748 The consortium was unable to reach participants targeted the remaining 1,870 beneficiaries as some had left the area, and others Total number of project 100,938 did not present themselves on participants reached payment days nor during catch-up distributions, despite the many Male: N/A awareness-raising activities Female: N/A conducted to ensure that beneficiaries were aware of payment dates.

Actual average cost per Cash 141USD Calculated by dividing the total 4 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 project participant Voucher project costs [direct and indirect LRP costs] by the total number of actual Title II project participants (without double counting) Title II Average cost per project Cash: 16.66 USD participant per month Voucher LRP Title II

Programming Performance Outcome 1.1: Access to food, water and other basic services/goods is improved through the provision of a cash transfer to 102,748 households Target: 102,748 Achievement: 100,938

Indicator 1.1.1: Number of households using cash to access food Target: 80% or approximately 82,198 households Achievement: 46% or approximately 46,431 households

Beneficiary identification and selection: Together with USAID and WFP, the projected selected 18 communes for intervention that were considered severely food insecure following Hurricane Matthew according to the rapid assessment conducted by the CNSA. From November 2016 to January 2017, the ANKAD Consortium worked with local authorities and community leaders to form Commune Coordination Committees (CCC). The CCCs conducted a census of all residents in the selected communes. An analysis of the lists was then conducted by ANKAD members, where the vulnerability of households was assessed based on a specified vulnerability criteria; specifically households that: had experienced a death within the household; were female- headed; contained a pregnant or lactating woman; contained a person with a disability or an elderly person; whose house was partially or fully destroyed by the hurricane (where houses that were fully destroyed were considered more vulnerable than those that were partially destroyed). Each criterium was assigned a number of points; using this system, households with the highest number of points were considered the most vulnerable and were therefore included in the cash transfer list. ANKAD partners then selected the 80% of the population that was considered most vulnerable to receive unconditional cash transfers.

Meetings were held with communities prior to beneficiary selection and voucher distributions to explain the beneficiary selection process, cash distribution procedures, the schedule for payment days, and complaints mechanisms including the complaints hotline number.

Cash distributions: The ANKAD Consortium fully completed direct cash transfer activities between January and June 2017, as follows:

5 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 CARE: CARE was assigned four of the 18 targeted communes: Chambellan, rural Jérémie, Moron, and Roseaux, totaling 25,803 households. Overall, CARE reached 25,254 beneficiaries, or 98% of its targeted households; 3,842 in Chambellan, 9,664 in rural Jérémie, 4,808 in Moron, and 6,940 in Roseaux.

CRS: CRS was assigned four of the 18 targeted communes: Roche-à-Bateau, Coteaux, Chantal, and urban Jérémie, totaling 24,901 households. Overall, CRS reached 24,540 beneficiaries or 99% of its targeted households; 2,861 in Roche-à-Bateau, 3,544 in Coteaux, 5,451 in Chantal, and 12,684 in urban Jérémie.

ACTED: ACTED was assigned five of the 18 targeted communes: Ile-à-Vache, Port-à-Piment, Abricots, Les Irois, and Dame Marie, totaling 21,078 households. ACTED reached a total of 20,758 households or 98% of its targeted households; 2,244 in Ile-à-Vache, 2,950 in Port-à- Piment, 5,684 in Abricots, 3,783 in Les Irois, and 6,097 in Dame Marie

Food for the Hungry: Food for the Hungry conducted cash transfers in the communes of Chardonnières, Les Anglais, and Tiburon, with a target of 11,901 households. Food for the Hungry reached 11,851 households, or 99% of its targeted households; 3,816 in Chardonnières, 4,284 in Les Anglais, and 3,751 in Tiburon

Mercy Corps: Mercy Corps targeted 19,067 beneficiaries in the communes of Petit Trou de Nippes, Cavaillon, and Maniche. From January 16 to March 12, 2017, Mercy Corps reached 18,535 (97%) households: 5,505 in Petit Trou de Nippes, 8,906 in Cavaillon, and 4,124 in Maniche.

The targeted number of beneficiaries for Phase 1 was 102,748 households. Between January and June 2017, the ANKAD Consortium reached 100,938 or 98% of the targeted households. The consortium was unable to reach the remaining 1,870 beneficiary households as some had left the area, and others did not present themselves on payment days nor during catch-up distributions, despite the many awareness-raising activities conducted to ensure that beneficiaries were aware of payment dates.

Outcome 1.2: Improve community physical and social assets through community directed public works (physical and non-physical) and cash transfers

Indicator1.2.1: Percentage of households receiving cash transfers on time and in appropriate amounts Target: 19,265 Achievement: 19,296

Indicator1.2.2: Number of labor days invested by individuals participating in cash-for-work activities (social and public works) Target: 20 days Achievement: 20 days

Indicator1.2.3: Number of individuals participating in cash-for-work Target: 19,265 6 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 Achievement: 19,307

Beneficiary identification and selection: CFW activities targeted the most vulnerable households of the population across the 18 targeted communes. Beneficiaries were selected from the list of households who benefited from Phase 1; 19,265 households (15% of the total population of the targeted communes) were selected based on the same vulnerability criteria used in Phase 1. To validate the CFW beneficiary list, the ANKAD Consortium visited approximately 30% of all targeted households to ensure that selection criteria had been respected.

To ensure appropriate monitoring and supervision of the CFW activities on site, in addition to the workers, team leaders and supervisors were selected to supervise the work. The Team Leaders (one per 20 workers) were selected from among the CFW beneficiaries. They were responsible for ensuring the proper implementation of the work and promoting the motivation, participation, and cohesion of the team. This meant ensuring that safety measures were observed on the work site; that attendance sheets were filled out and sent daily to the Supervisor; that the tools used remained in good condition; and that any problems encountered were reported to the Supervisor. The main responsibilities of the Supervisors (one per six Team Leaders) were to ensure that technical standards were respected; to coordinate the activities of the teams in collaboration with ANKAD staff; to verify attendance records on a daily basis; and to validate attendance records with the ANKAD field staff. Supervisors further received feedback from the Team Leaders and workers on any difficulties or problems encountered, and communicated them daily to ANKAD members so that solutions could be found. Supervisors were those who could demonstrate the required skill, in particular literacy, staff management, and technical skill for the type of activity selected, and were not necessarily beneficiaries of either Phase 1 or Phase 2 of the project. Certain partners included Team Leaders and Supervisors in the target number for every commune, while others chose to add them to the targeted numbers; as such, for this activity some partners exceeded the total number of beneficiaries targeted.

Cash-for-work activities: Following beneficiary selection, the ANKAD Consortium worked with the CCCs, MAST, and local authorities to identify, evaluate, and select work sites. Potential work sites were selected based on their proximity to beneficiaries’ homes (within one hour walk) and where works could be completed with the available number of person-hours. Following sites selection, community meetings (kiosks) were held again in 18 communes to validate the works selected and to remind beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries of the beneficiary selection criteria and payment processes for beneficiaries. The beneficiaries were divided into teams of 20 people and performed work such as backfilling of dirt roads and clearing paths to restore access to the most difficult areas and key community resources such as markets, schools, hospitals. Other works included clearing irrigation canals, soil conservation activities, and school rehabilitations.

The work took place over 20 days (two ten-day cycles), between 07:00 and 13:00; this timing was selected following consultation with beneficiaries as it caused the least disruption to their ongoing agricultural and other income-generating activities. The beneficiaries were paid according to the number of days worked; workers received 400HTG per day, Team Leaders 7 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 received 600HTG per day, and Supervisors received 800HTG per day. The ANKAD Consortium continued to work with FONKOZE and Le Levier for CFW payments; in addition SogeXpress joined the consortium to conduct payments in urban Jeremie. For Phase 2, payments for the first and second cycles of CFW activities were made together to reduce travel time for beneficiaries.

The ANKAD Consortium fully completed the CFW activities from April to June 2017. Every member completed CFW payment distributions as follow:

CARE: CARE was assigned 4,838 households and reached 4,818 beneficiaries or 99% of its targeted households; 735 in Chambellan 1853 in rural Jérémie, 920 in Moron, and 1310 in Roseaux. The total targeted household worked but three beneficiaries in Roseaux were not present on payment days nor during the catch-up sessions organized by CARE.

CRS: CRS was assigned 4,669 households and reached 4,787 beneficiaries or 102% of its targeted households; 573 in Roche-à-Bateau, 704 in Coteaux, 1,121 in Chantal, and 2,389 in urban Jérémie.

ACTED: ACTED was assigned 3,952 households. ACTED reached 3,828 beneficiaries or 96% of its targeted households; 422 in Ile-à-Vache, 557 in Port-à-Piment, 1,076 in Abricots, 641 in Les Irois, and 1,132 in Dame Marie. An additional seven (7) beneficiaries worked but never came to collect payment during the many payments conducted by ACTED.

Food for the Hungry: Food for the Hungry was assigned 2,231 households and reached 2,253 or 101% of its targeted households; 722 in Chardonnières, 825 in Les Anglais, and 706 in Tiburon.

Mercy Corps: Mercy Corps targeted 3,581 households and reached 3,610 beneficiaries; 1,726 in Cavaillon, 808 in Maniche, and 1,076 in Petit Trou de Nippes. Although 1,077 beneficiaries worked in Petit Trou de Nippes, one beneficiary left the commune before the payment date.

The number of beneficiaries targeted for Phase 2 was 19,265 households. The consortium reached 19,296 beneficiaries (100% of its target). The MFIs paid 19,191 beneficiaries and ANKAD partners provided cash directly to 105 beneficiaries who were not able to attend the payment distributions by the MFI. Eleven beneficiaries (one in Nippes, three in Roseaux, seven in Irois) worked but did not collect their cash.

Market Analysis A market study was carried out to analyze the evolution of the price of key products included in the household food basket before, during, and after the cash distributions. An analysis of the data collected by the CNSA demonstrated that when comparing cash distribution and non-cash distribution areas, there were no significant differences between price fluctuations for many products. In addition, factors such as the exchange rate, which changed significantly during the project period, may also have impacted price fluctuations, which varied from 1% in December to 3% in March 2017. The observed variation in prices was not significant and rather in keeping

8 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 with general variations by season. These factors indicated that the influx of cash from the ANKAD project did not have a significant negative effect on market prices.

Cross-cutting Elements Coordination/relationship with MFIs, MAST, and implementing partners Government partners, in particular the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor (MAST) at the central and departmental levels and mayors, and Communal Section Boards (CASEC) at the commune level were involved throughout the life of the project. Departmental and central-level MAST representatives supported consortium members during the presentation of the project to the communities, and played a key role in negotiating with local governments to ensure the smooth implementation of project activities. MAST from both the central and the departmental levels actively participated in site monitoring of safety and work quality on CFW sites. Central- level MAST conducted several monitoring visits throughout the life of the project to assess the project’s progress against its plan and to provide recommendations for improvement; department-level MAST representatives conducted weekly on-site monitoring visits. The ANKAD Consortium also reinforced MAST’s capacity at the departmental level by providing them with office supplies, furniture and vehicles (chair, file cabinets, motorcycles, etc.).

The Mayors and CASECs also played a key role in the project. They participated as part of the CCCs in beneficiary identification, and facilitated cash distributions by verifying the identity of beneficiaries without identification cards and ensuring site security. They further participated and validated site selection for CFW activities. After the finalization of the CFW activities, the remaining tools (wheelbarrows, pickaxes, hammers, machetes, etc.) were transferred to the Mayors and CASECs of the targeted communes. According to the signed protocol, the tools remain the property of the community to ensure the maintenance of the work carried out during the project. The community therefore has a stock of tools accessible for the maintenance and continuity of work of the same kind carried out by the ANKAD consortium.

Accountability, communications, and gender To ensure the accountability of the ANKAD Consortium to project beneficiaries, a hotline was established, which was functional from 8pm to 5pm during weekdays. Throughout the project, questions and complaints received through the hotline were documented and sent to the relevant consortium member to be addressed during community meetings. However, sensitive complaints concerning fraud, harassment, or abuse of power were referred to a committee composed of one representative from each consortium member. The committee decided collectively on the appropriate action to take in response to sensitive complaints including informing USAID, and monitored the response of the involved consortium member. Beneficiaries mostly used the hotline to obtain more information about the beneficiary selection process, project activities, payment dates and to notify delay on payment days. However, other systems were also in place, such as complaints desks during cash distributions.

The project ensured gender equity through a number of activities. Beneficiaries of the CFW activities were primarily women. In addition, there was a 30% minimum quota of women in CCCs. Vulnerable persons such as the elderly and persons with disabilities who could not provide household labor were included in the project and received direct transfers. Lactating or pregnant women who could not perform heavy work were trained to raise awareness on 9 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 hygiene promotion on sites. Accountability and communications activities (community meetings with beneficiaries with leadership from local-level authorities) were implemented throughout the life of the project to collect feedback on the quality of activities realized in order to improve them.

Monitoring, evaluation, and learning: Post-distribution monitoring (PDM) was conducted after each cash distribution. The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of the distribution modality, to assess beneficiaries’ levels of satisfaction, to understand how the cash received was used, and to provide information to measure key indicators. The PDM used a random sample of 10% of beneficiaries. According to PDM findings, beneficiaries were satisfied with the cash received and most used it to purchase food, pay debts, pay school fees for their children, start an income generating activity, or repair their homes.

The analysis of data collected during the final evaluation of the project (conducted by consortium members) showed that 46% of beneficiaries used the cash received to purchase food. In second, third, and fourth positions were payment of school fees, small business investment, and home repair, at 26%, 6%, and 5% respectively (see Table 3, below). The percentage of households who purchased food with the cash received decreased from 60% in February 2017 to 46% in July 2017. This decrease can be considered a sign of recovery, since while beneficiaries primarily chose to invest the unconditional cash received during Phase 1 in food, they invested their Phase 2 CFW earnings in livelihoods and household priorities instead of consuming the total amount received. Therefore, while the ANKAD Consortium did not necessarily reach the target of 80% of cash used to purchase food, food was by far the most common use of the funds distributed for both phases. The table below shows the use of the cash based on the reports from the two evaluations conducted:

Table 3: Comparison table for the use of the cash transfers (Mid-term Evaluation versus Final Evaluation ) Variables Value for intermediate Value for final evaluation (conducted in evaluation (conducted February 2017) in July) Food purchasing 60% 46% Payment of fees schools 13% 26% Small business investment 4% 6% Repair of house 4% 5% Buying livestock 2% 3% Reimbursement of debt 2% 3%

Challenges, Successes, Lessons Learned

Challenges

Beneficiary identification and selection:

10 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 The implementation period of this project coincided with national and local elections; as such, it is possible that some local authorities sought to be part of the CCCs so that they could use this position of power to their political advantage. The ANKAD Consortium had to be vigilant and remind authorities of the methodology of the project and the criteria for beneficiary selection, which focused on the most vulnerable. CCCs sometimes misinterpreted the information received from consortium members and did not always share accurate information with the community. In general, for future projects further efforts could be invested in better defining the roles and responsibilities of the CCCs and ensuring that these were understood all project stakeholders and to developing strategies to encourage their continued engagement as an essential part of the project structure.

Cash distributions: Identification of beneficiaries during cash distributions was an issue, as official government identification was required to receive cash; however, many beneficiaries do not have National Identity cards or had lost them during Hurricane Matthew. The ANKAD Consortium was able to innovate to resolve this challenge; it was agreed that beneficiaries could name a reference (individual in the community with an ID) who could receive payment on their behalf or attest the identity of the beneficiary.

There were some delays to cash distributions as partners and MFIs determined the best way to proceed with cash distributions while ensuring the safety of staff and beneficiaries. Security issues remained a concern for all consortium members throughout the project period. The emergency response in the immediate aftermath of the hurricane was quite slow, and as such the security situation was extremely difficult as affected communities tried (sometimes by any means possible) to access aid, including truck hijackings and disruptions of distributions. During the election period, security challenges were faced due to strikes and public protests. In early January, the arrest and extradition of Senator Guy Philippe caused a serious delay in activities, as all NGOs and UN agencies withdrew their personnel from the Grande Anse and restricted road movement until late January. Throughout the lifetime of the project, some consortium members had to reschedule distributions as a result of potential security risks, including roadblocks and demonstrations. Some consortium members experienced security situations where staff were threatened or held in roadblocks for several hours. The ANKAD Consortium mitigated these risks by developing a security protocol for distributions. All consortium members nominated security focal points, who were trained by CARE’s Security Manager and monitored adherence to the protocol through the project life. Prior to payment, consortium staff with the support of the CCCs and local authorities increased their awareness-raising activities (kiosks) with communities to clarify the selection methodology, especially with the unselected population to avoid demonstrations during distributions in areas known for their high volatility such as Moron Commune.

Hurricane Matthew caused significant damage to infrastructure, and as such in some communities there were no suitable distribution sites that met the security criteria established by the consortium and the MFIs. As a result, some beneficiaries had to walk for more than an hour to receive their cash. Beneficiaries with limited mobility were given the opportunity to nominate a family member to receive their payment on their behalf; those who were able to travel to distribution sites were given priority service. 11 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017

Cash-for-work activities: The main challenge faced during the second phase was the reluctance of beneficiaries to use protective equipment, as they were not accustomed to it. Despite the awareness-raising activities carried out on site to promote the use of protective equipment, where beneficiaries were informed that accidents could occur on work sites, some of the beneficiaries claimed that they were more comfortable carrying out the works without protective equipment. In addition, the procurement of high-quality materials in-country was difficult, in particular for some materials such as wheelbarrows.

Monitoring, evaluation, and learning It took some coordination efforts during the initial phase of the project to harmonize the M&E strategy and ensure a common approach. As such, some data disaggregated by gender for early cash distributions is not available.

Coordination / Relationship with MFIs, MAST and implementing partners Relationships were fruitful with all project partners; however, implementing a project of this scope and complexity poses a particular challenge with regards to coordination. In particular, the relationship between the MFI partners and the NGO partners required ongoing negotiation and mediation to identify and implement better ways of working together. Issues identified throughout the project included the late arrival of MFI staff on distribution days and late or incomplete lists submitted by NGO partners. The renewal of contracts with the MFIs for Phase 2 required significant negotiation, and as such impacted the timing of the project. Delays to project implementation caused by weather and security challenges also increased to operational costs of the MFIs. The ANKAD Consortium worked collectively to resolve these problems to the benefit of all partners and the beneficiaries.

Successes

Beneficiary identification and selection: The ANKAD Consortium was able to produce a list of over 100,000 vulnerable households within a very short period of time despite difficult circumstances (rain, political unrest, etc.). These lists were made possible through the innovative approach for beneficiary identification, where CCCs conducted a census of 100% of the population of their area. Public meetings with communities to validate the beneficiary lists ensured that everyone was aware of who had been selected to participate in the project, and allowed those who had not been enumerated in the census to come forward. In this way, the project ensured the completeness and transparency of beneficiary selection, which could have been contentious given the widespread impacts of Hurricane Matthew and the political context (elections). Thanks to the ANKAD project, MAST has an updated database of the population in the 18 targeted communes.

Cash distribution and cash-for-work activities: Through this project, the ANKAD Consortium experimented with a new strategy, where beneficiaries participated under the leadership of local authorities in community service works during Phase 1 of the project. This allowed some early response immediately after the hurricane to remove debris and improve access to affected communities. 12 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017

The capacity of partners to transform ordinary spaces into acceptable distribution sites was really appreciated. Moreover, although they carried high amounts of cash, MFI partners adopted the humanitarian principles and agreed not to have armed individuals in the perimeter of the distribution. The consortium staff, with the support of the Mayors, CASEC and CCC, ensured all that areas and sites were secured to proceed to the payments.

Beyond injecting cash into the community and supporting beneficiaries to meet their basic needs, community works completed through CFW such as rehabilitation of roads also had a positive impact for all members of the community by promoting access to essential services. Work sites were selected in coordination with the local authorities and therefore were those that would have the most significant impact on community well-being and risk mitigation.

Monitoring, evaluation, and learning The M&E protocol for the project was harmonized between all partners, which allowed consistent use of common tools. Tools were jointly designed and approved by all consortium members to ensure a good understanding of the tools and protocol.

Coordination/relationship with MFIs, MAST and implementing partners The realization of weekly and monthly meetings allowed all project partners (NGOs, MFIs, and MAST) to identify and correct differences in the understanding of the project methodology and allowed partners to share experiences regarding implementation of the project and learn from each other or find common solutions.

The partnership with MAST is considered to have been a great success for the project. MAST’s (central and departmental) participation in all phases of the project gave consortium members more credibility with the community, while MAST's capacity was strengthened through its involvement in the cash project implementation.

Accountability, communications, and gender The mechanism (hotline and suggestion boxes) put in place-enabled beneficiaries to send their concerns, complaints, and feedback and allowed program staff to take proper action. The Complaints Committee functioned well and partners were held accountable to and by each other to investigate and take action on sensitive complaints as a collective.

Lessons Learned Beneficiary identification and selection: • Create CCCs based on known community structures that are already working with targeted community; • Clearly define and ensure understanding and ownership of CCC roles and responsibilities; • Provide CCCs with the necessary resources to carry out their work; • Use a more inclusive targeting strategy when selecting CCC members so that all communal sections are represented; • Balance the work of CCC members as they are volunteers; 13 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 • Conduct training to strengthen the CCCs’ knowledge of humanitarian principles and interviewing techniques;

Cash distributions: • Ensure MFI staff are trained on issues related to humanitarian accountability; • Ensure MFIs’ respect of distribution timelines; • Select distribution sites closer to the beneficiaries' living areas.

Cash-for-work activities: • Reinforce the use of protective materials on sites by workers; • Establish a monitoring mechanism prior to the launch of the activities; • Develop, among partners, a reflex to systematic generate lessons learned and good practices to promote mutual and continuous learning;

C. Success Story Please see Success Stories in Annex.

D. Indicator List

Indicators Type of Target Reached Difference indicator (Final Evaluation) Percentage of households with adequate food consumption Impact 50% 67% +17% indicators Percentage of households using cash to access food Result 80% 46% (33%) Indicator Number of households affected by Hurricane Matthew in communities Produced 102,749 100,938 (1,811) receiving CASH Indicator

Distributed Unconditional Cash Amount Produced 6,146,880 6,080,168 (66,712) (USD) Indicator

Number of cash transfers performed Produced 102,748 100,938 (1,811) Indicator Percentage of Beneficiaries Claiming to be Satisfied with the Timeliness, Produced 75% 85.25% +10.25% Timeliness and Accountability of the Indicator CASH Program Number of community improvement projects completed Produced N/A 79 N/A Indicator Percentage of people who report being 14 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 satisfied with community CFW activities Result N/A 94.75% N/A Indicator Number of cash transfers performed Produced 38,530 19,296 (19,217i) Indicator Number of working days invested by Produced people participating in cash for work Indicator 346,744 381,091 +34,347 activities Number of public spaces (schools, Produced churches, markets, roads) cleaned or Indicator N/A 138 N/A improved Number of environmental protection Produced activities carried out Indicator N/A 59 N/A

E. Technical Sectors Tracking Table See Annex: Technical Sectors Tracking Table

F. Assessment, Evaluation, and Study Reports During the project implementation period, various evaluations were conducted. In February, a mid-term evaluation was carried out to analyze the impact of the project on the beneficiaries and on communities. In March, a market analysis was conducted to highlight the evolution of prices of food products containing in the basket before and after the cash injection. In July a final evaluation was carried out with the M & E team to collect data on the impact of the project on beneficiaries. Following the end of the project, an After Action Review (AAR) was carried out with all partners to identify good practices and lessons learned to be used in future cash projects. The ANKAD Consortium also conducted individual interviews to develop case studies on the relationships between CCCs and the involvement of MAST in the project. All reports of the evaluations below are available in French:

- Mid-Term Evaluation Report - Market Analysis - Final Evaluation Report - After Action Review Report - Case study on the relationship with CCCs during project implementation

G. Unique and Director Participants See Annex: Unique and Director Participant and PE Tables spreadsheet. Sex disaggregated data was not reported because it was not consistently gathered across partners.

i There were supposed to be two payment sessions; one after the first cycle (after 10 days) and the last one after the second cycle. It was agreed with partners to conduct one payment session after the 20 days of work were completed.

15 Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 Indicator Table and Data Source Description FY17 ARR

Indicator Table

Distributed Unconditional Cash Amount Produced 6,146,880 6,080,168 (66,712) (USD) Indicator

Number of cash transfers performed Produced 102,748 100,938 (1,811) Indicator Percentage of Beneficiaries Claiming to be Satisfied with the Timeliness, Produced 75% 85.25% +10.25% Timeliness and Accountability of the Indicator CASH Program Number of community improvement projects completed Produced N/A 79 N/A Indicator Percentage of people who report being satisfied with community CFW activities Result N/A 94.75% N/A Indicator Number of cash transfers performed Produced 38,530 19,296 (19,217i) Indicator Number of working days invested by Produced people participating in cash for work Indicator 346,744 381,091 +34,347 activities Number of public spaces (schools, Produced churches, markets, roads) cleaned or Indicator N/A 138 N/A improved Number of environmental protection Produced activities carried out Indicator N/A 59 N/A

Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017 Data Source Description

Post-distribution monitoring (PDM) was conducted after each cash distribution. The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of the distribution modality, to assess beneficiaries’ levels of satisfaction, to understand how the cash received was used, and to provide information to measure key indicators. The PDM used a random sample of 10% of beneficiaries. According to PDM findings, beneficiaries were satisfied with the cash received and most used it to purchase food, pay debts, pay school fees for their children, start an income generating activity, or repair their homes.

Hurricane Matthew Emergency Response, AID-FFP-G-17-00003 Submission: November 6, 2017

A Little Push to Get Back on our Feet Cash-Based Response in Hurricane Matthew Affected Areas “Welcome to my home!” announces happily from what she calls her “banner” – a varied display of jars containing sweets, peanuts, beans, and other products for sale, mounted on a traditional wooden chair. According to , this display attracts more visitors – and eventually clients – than any poster ever could. “As soon as I received the 4,000 gourdes from CARE, I immediately invested them in my business - there is a lot of demand for the products I sell,” she explains. “I’m proud that I decided to invest the cash I received in my business,” confides. “I’m constantly out of stock; everyone wants to what I have to sell. As almost all the gardens in my area have been destroyed, I have to restock with products from other areas, which I purchase from ’ (travelling business women). Restocking my supply in this way is expensive, but I’m still making a profit; this helps me to diversify the products I have for sale and to meet the needs of my customers.” is a mother of three; she also looks after her young goddaughter. To take care of her family, strategic choices are essential. “In the aftermath of the hurricane, I found myself with nothing. My beautiful gardens near the river - in which I had just invested the profits from my small business - were gone. Part of our house was destroyed, and my husband struggled to find work as a security guard. I had nothing in stock that I could sell… the future looked bleak. I remember telling myself - we need a miracle.” says wistfully. “But when I look back now, I realize how fast I was able to get back to business as usual – and it was the cash I received that made that possible.” In response to Hurricane Matthew, 100,938 heads of households living in the Grande Anse, South, and Nippes Departments, including , benefited of an unconditional transfer of 4,000 Haitian Gourdes through the Ansamn Nap Kanpe Ak Diyite (ANKAD) (“Recovering together with Dignity”) project implemented by CARE, Catholic Relief Services, ACTED, Food for the Hungry, and Mercy Corps and in collaboration with the Haitian Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor (MAST), thanks to the generous support of USAID through its Food for Peace Program. A total of 403,752,000 Haitian Gourdes were directly injected into the pockets of affected households. Beyond the assistance provided in food, water, sanitation, education, shelter, and other sectors as part of the humanitarian response to Hurricane Matthew, CARE and the ANKAD Consortium are working to innovate how humanitarian aid is delivered by directly providing affected people with the financial resources they need to get back on their feet, thereby ensuring that they have the freedom to spend the money received for the needs they deem to be priorities for their family. chose to invest in an income-generating activity and to gradually rebuild her family's economy. "Goodbye to the drought, goodbye torrential rains, the weather is good and it is time for me to revive my vegetable garden," says a who smiles while standing in her small plot of land near the river where she currently grows tomatoes and other vegetables. "In Grande Anse, it is the land that nourishes us. We owe it everything, and we have no choice but to devote ourselves to it. We can only hope that the weather will remain good, but as cyclone season approaches again there’s always a risk. I want to stay positive, because after Hurricane Matthew I had everything I needed: just a little push to get back on my feet.

Beyond Difficulties Cash-Based Response in Hurricane Matthew Affected Areas

“In times of misfortune, focus on the opportunities.” This is ’s motto. If you ever pass by her house, located in in Jeremie Commune of Grande Anse Department, the first image that comes to mind is of an anthill. In fact, ’s business took on a whole new dimension after receiving, in January 2017, a transfer of 4,000 Haitian Gourds from the Ansanm Nap Kanpe ak Diyite (ANKAD) (“Recovering Together with Diginity”) project that was implemented by CARE and partners Catholic Relief Services, Food for the Hungry, ACTED, and Mercy Corps and in collaboration with the Haitian Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor (MAST), thanks to the generous support of USAID through its Food for Peace Program.

Head of a household of twelve, has always been very generous with her time and energy. After the hurricane, she provided shelter to her brother's family, even though her own home was destroyed by the hurricane. Her husband, a retired teacher, helps out in the little grocery shop she has improvised in front of their home."Trading has always been in my blood, so imagine what I did with my 4,000 Gourdes," a very proud explains. "Before, I could buy only small quantities of staple foods to sell in my stall. As soon as I had my 4,000 Gourds in hand, I doubled my stock. I started by buying a big bag of rice. I also bought two packages of spaghetti instead of one." Sugar, oil, flour... doubled the quantity of all these items she had for sale, and soon saw her sales increase. It’s clear in hearing her story that nothing can get down, and this is definitely not the end of her story. With the money injected in the area by this program, many people regained their purchasing power, noticed. "This pushed me to do a quick calculation. I looked into my stall: I already had flour and all the ingredients to make a highly demanded product: bread! This was a golden opportunity to cook and sell it. In my community there is no bakery.” After discussing with a neighbor who owns an oven, the deal was quickly concluded. "You will never know how many people I fed in my community thanks to this business," says

Dynamic and brave, is an active member of the Local Committee of Civil Protection (CLPC) of , a community group that works to help their community be better prepared for natural disasters. She encourages other members of her community to show initiative and to seek the silver lining behind every dark cloud.

100,938 households of the Grande Anse, South and Nippes departments, including , received an unconditional cash transfer of 4,000 Haitian Gourds through the ANKAD program. This represents an amount of 403,752,000 Haitian Gourds that were directly transferred to the most hurricane- affected households. Beyond the assistance provided in food, water, sanitation, education, shelter, and other sectors as part of the humanitarian response to Hurricane Matthew, CARE and the ANKAD Consortium are working to innovate how humanitarian aid is delivered by directly providing affected people with the financial resources they need to get back on their feet, thereby ensuring that they have the freedom to spend the money received for the needs they deem to be priorities for their family.

“ANSAMN NAP KANPE AK DIYITE” Recovering together with Dignity in the Grande’Anse Region of Haiti The Grand’Anse Region of Haiti is responsible for approximately 60% of Haiti’s annual agricultural production, and is the main source of food and income for local residents. During Hurricane Matthew, almost 100% of the crops and livestock within the Grand’Anse region were destroyed. is a 79-year-old father of nine. He resides in , in Jérémie Commune. Prior to Hurricane Matthew, Mr. underwent serval surgeries for a hernia, and now uses a walking stick to get around. “I must tell you, my situation was difficult before Matthew and becomes extremely more difficult after,” says Mr. . Mr. is a beneficiary of the “Ansamn nap Kanpe Ak Diyite” (ANKAD) project. ANKAD is a USAID Food for Peace-funded emergency project that is implemented by CARE, Catholic Relief Services, Mercy Corps, Food for the Hungry, and ACTED. The first phase of the project aims to provide 102,748 of the most vulnerable households across 18 communes in the Grand’Anse, Sud, and Nippes Regions with a cash transfer of 4,000 HTG to increase their access to food. “Before I was tending to my garden; even through the pain, I planted yams and potatoes; unfortunately, I lost everything in the hurricane. This disaster has taken everything, even the dignity and hope of the entire community. Misery has invaded…” Mr says. Unfortunately, his story is not uncommon in the Grand’Anse region. , a 56- year-old mother of five, lives in the locality of , in Jérémie Commune. Before Hurricane Matthew, Ms. tended to a small farm and sold candy. “With the arrival of the hurricane I lost everything - my house and my garden. My situation is becoming more difficult. [I feel like there is] nothing more for me, this situation gives me the impression that my life is over because Matthew has taken everything” says Ms. . Through the coordinated efforts of the ANKAD Consortium and the funds provided by Food for Peace, Mr. and Ms. are among those who have already received cash. Both already have ideas for how to use the funds. “Fortunately there are people in my area who sell me food on credit, now with part of the 4,000 HTG that I just got, I'll pay my debts of food,” Mr. says. “With these 4,000 HTG that I received I will buy food for [my family] and with the rest I will restart my small business.” Ms. says confidently. Mr. and Ms. are just two examples of how the residents of the Grande’Anse are using the resources provided to them through the ANKAD project to be resilient even while facing difficult circumstances.

Attachment G: ARR Technical Sectors Tracking Table Revised October 2016 Country Haiti Awardee Hurricane Program Name Matthew Start Date of Award 23-Nov-16 End Date of Award 22-Aug-17 Instructions: For each technical sector and sub-sector in the drop-down menus, please indicate whether the food assistance project worked on the specified activities during the reporting fiscal year. If the project did not implement activities in a particular sector or sub-sector during the FY, the column for that sector or sub-sector should be marked “no,” even if these activities were included in the project’s approved PREP(s). Note that this is a tracking tool for FFP and that more boxes with “yes” responses is not better or even more desirable.

Works on Topic A. Maternal Child Health & Nutrition Area? Conditional Food Transfer 1 Cash or food vouchers for nutrition Yes 2 Supplementary Feeding P/L Women No 3 Supplementary Feeding Prevention Kids 6-24 mos No Support for local production of specialized nutrition foods (i.e. fortified No 4 flours, pastes, etc.) 5 Household/Protection Rations No Social and Behavior Change Communication 6 Promotion of optimal breastfeeding during the first six months No Promotion of optimal complementary feeding starting at 6 months 7 No with continued breastfeeding to 2 years of age and beyond 8 Promotion of optimal nutritional care of sick children No 9 Promotion of Optimal Women's Nutrition (15-49) No 10 Prevention of Vitamin A deficiency in women and children No Promotion of adequate intake of IFA and prevention and control of 11 No anemia 12 Promotion of adequate intake of iodine No 13 Baby WASH* No 14 Essential Hygiene Actions No 15 Care Group No 16 Peer Support Groups (mothers, mens, grandmothers, etc) No 17 Positive Deviance Hearth No 18 Community conversation/discussion groups Yes 19 Early Childhood Development (ECD) No 20 Mass communication campaigns Yes 21 Home Visit/Outreach for nutrition counseling No 22 Home Visit/Outreach for other MCH related outcomes No 23 Other SBCC (Specify) Health Services 24 Child health days No 25 Baby Friendly hospital Initiative No 26 Integrated Management of Childhood Illness(IMCI) No 27 Community Case Management No 28 Growth Monitoring and Promotion (including height for age) No 29 Community nutrition screening (MUAC or weight for height) No 30 Mobile Outreach/clinics No 31 Facility and Community Health Staff capacity building No 32 Deworming No 33 Iron FA Supplementation Reduce Iron Deficiency Anemia No 34 Vitamin A Supplementation No 35 Immunization No 36 ORT for Diarrhea No 37 Malaria Prevention No 38 Newborn Care No 39 Ante Intra Postpartum Care No Family Planning Services 40 Referral of Family Planning Services No 41 Family Planning Education (i.e. methods) No 42 Healthy Timing and Spacing of Pregnancy Education No Community/Integrated Management of Acute Malnutrition 43 Community based screening/detection No 44 Referral to health center No 45 Recuperative feeding for children under 5 with MAM No 46 Counseling related to acute malnutrition No 47 Follow-up of referred children No 48 Other (Specify) Works on Topic B. Integrated activities/sectors Area? 49 Agriculture Livelihoods No 50 Kitchen or Homestead Gardens No 51 Natural Resource Management (NRM) Interventions No 52 Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) No Country Haiti Awardee Hurricane Program Name Matthew Start Date of Award 23-Nov-16 End Date of Award 22-Aug-17 53 Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) Yes 54 Gender Integration Yes 55 Literacy/Adult Education No 56 Other (Specify) Works on Topic C. HIV Area? 57 Food Insecurity Mitigation No 58 Prevention of HIV: Promote VCT No 59 Nutritional Assessment & Counseling No 60 Direct Supplementary or Therapeutic Feeding, Safety Net No 61 Feeding for Children in Adversity No 62 Clinic as entry or targeting point No 63 Cookstoves No 64 Other (Specify) Works on Topic D. TB Area? 65 Food Insecurity Mitigation No 66 Prevention of HIV: Promote VCT No 67 Nutritional Assessment & Counseling No 68 Direct Supplementary or Therapeutic Feeding, Safety Net No 69 Feeding for Children in Adversity No 70 Clinic as entry or targeting point No 71 Other (Specify) Works on Topic E. Uses of Food Area? 72 Food for Work (FFW) No 73 Monetization (MTZ) Yes 74 School Feeding No 75 Humanitarian Assistance (HA) Yes 76 Other Works on Topic F. Sustainability Area? 77 Capacity Building (Training/Technical Assistance) Yes 78 Transferring Functions to Local/National Governments No 79 Economic Incentives No 80 Recurring Costs Covered by End Users No 81 Private Sector Used for Service and/or input Delivery Yes 82 Long Term Partnerships Formed with other Development Actors No 83 Environment of Investments and not Entitlements Fostered No 84 Household and/or Community Resilience Enhanced No 85 Other (Specify) Works on Topic G. Program Approaches Area? 86 Market-driven value chains No 87 Village banking and other community savings arrangements No 88 Development micro finance institutions No 89 Micro enterprise development No 90 Direct Distribution of Commodities No 91 Direct Distribution of Project Purchased Inputs Yes 92 Fee-for-Service Models No 93 Facilitation Approach No 94 Village Savings and Loan Associates No 95 Business Training Provided No 96 Project Funded Extension Agents No 97 Cash or Food voucher distribution Yes 98 Strengthening Host Government Extension Systems Yes 99 Other (Specify) Works on Topic H. Types of Interventions Area? 100 Safety-Net No 101 Community Strengthening Yes 102 Infrastructure Yes 103 Education No 104 Other (Specify) Works on Topic I. Crop production Area? 105 Adaptive research No 106 Transfer of improved technologies/practices No 107 Input provision (seeds/fertilizers) No Country Haiti Awardee Hurricane Program Name Matthew Start Date of Award 23-Nov-16 End Date of Award 22-Aug-17 108 Post-Harvest Technologies No 109 Aflatoxin (and other mycotoxin) reduction No 110 Improved Seeds No 111 Fertilizer No 112 Compost No 113 Pesticides No 114 Implements (plows, hoes, etc) No 115 Irrigation No 116 Horticulture No 117 Farmer Field Schools No 118 Lead Farmers No 119 Land Access for the Most Vulnerable No 120 Other (Specify) Works on Topic J. Livestock production Area? 121 Animal health No 122 Genetic improvements No 123 Improved feeding and management practices No 124 Animal donation/multiplication schemes No 125 Cattle No 126 Small Ruminants No 127 Poultry No 128 Eggs No 129 Dairy No 130 Community Animal Health Workers No 131 Other (Specify) No Works on Topic K. Natural Resource Management (NRM) Area? 132 Soil conservation Yes 133 Water conservation Yes 134 Watershed management No 135 Forestry/agroforestry No 136 Water Harvesting No 137 Governance and Management of Common Assets No 138 Other (Specify)

Works on Topic L. Market and Input Access Area?

139 Market information systems Yes 140 Market analyses Yes Facilitating market linkages, e.g. trade shows/intro to buyers/other 141 No sales leads 142 Forward contracts No 143 Product development, including development of brands No 144 Product certification No 145 Producers/Marketing Associations No 146 Business Training No 147 Bulk Purchasing of Inputs No 148 Bulk Sales of Products No 149 Processing No 150 Facilitating Private Sector Involvement No 151 Other (Specify) Works on Topic M. Credit Provisioning Area? 152 Provided by awardee No Provided through collaboration with another source, e.g. NGO 153 specialized in credit; microfinance institution, non-bank financial No institution, or commercial bank 154 Community-based revolving credit activities, both cash and in-kind No Community-based savings groups; use of social fund, loan funds or 155 No accumulated savings and dividend at share-out 156 Other (Specify) Works on Topic N. Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) Area? Water Supply-Groundwater (e.g., hand-dug or drilled wells/boreholes, 157 No deep springs) 158 Water Supply-Surface Water (e.g., e.g. rivers, lakes, shallow springs) No 159 Water Supply-Rainwater No 160 Water Supply-Other No Country Haiti Awardee Hurricane Program Name Matthew Start Date of Award 23-Nov-16 End Date of Award 22-Aug-17 161 Water Distribution-Handpumps and/or Community Taps No 162 Water Distribution-Household Taps No 163 Water Distribution-Household Plumbing No 164 Water Distribution- Other No 165 Water Treatment- Disinfection (e.g., chlorine, UV) No Water Treatment- Other (e.g., coagulation/sedimentation, contaminant 166 No removal) Water Quality Monitoring (e.g., pathogen indicators, turbidity, heavy 167 No metals) 168 Sanitation- Unimproved Latrines (e.g. pit, arborloo) No 169 Sanitation- Improved Latrines (e.g. VIP, pour-flush, composting) No 170 Sanitation- Flush Toilet or equivalent No 171 Sanitation- Handwashing Stations (e.g., tippy tap, formal structures) No Hygiene & Behavior- Educational or Community participation model 172 No (e.g., CLTS, PHAST, school-led programs) Operations & Maintenance (O&M) for Systems- Community-led (e.g. 173 No Village Water Committee, Irrigation User Associations) O&M for Systems- External-led (e.g. partner-led O&M, or private 174 No sector) 176 Usage Fees Established for Water/Sanitation No 177 Other (Specify) Works on Topic O. Economic analyses Area? 178 Cost/benefit analyses Yes 179 Farm budgeting No 180 Other (Specify) Works on Topic P. Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Area? 181 Early Warning and Response Systems No 182 Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping No 183 Safety Net Programs No 184 Community Based Preparedness Plans No Climate Change Programming (including but not limited to climate 185 No smart agriculture) 186 Conflict Mitigation No 187 Shelters No 188 Strengthened Government Response Capacity Yes 189 Other (Specify) Works on Topic Q. Infrastructure Area? 190 Roads Yes 191 Irrigation systems Yes 192 Soil conservation structures Yes 193 Water conservation structures Yes 194 Storage structures (e.g. silos) No 195 Other family level infrastructure (greenhouses, livestock shelters) No 196 Other (Specify) Works on Topic R. Organization capacity building Area? 197 Producers/marketing associations No 198 Irrigation users associations No 199 Other (Specify) 2016 Template to Gather Data for Unique and Direct Participants, and for Participants by Program Element Unique and Direct Participants

Unique and Direct Participants

2016 2016 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 Age Breakdown Sex Planned Reached Planned Reached Planned Reached Planned Reached 0-23 months Male Female Disaggregates Not Available Sub-total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24-59 months Male Female Disaggregates Not Available Sub-total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5-17.9 years Male Female Disaggregates Not Available Sub-total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18-49.9 years Male Female Disaggregates Not Available 102,748 85,797 Sub-total 0 0 102,748 85,797 0 0 0 0 Over 50 years Male Female Disaggregates Not Available 15,141 Sub-total 0 0 0 15,141 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 102,748 100,938 0 0 0 0

Data Entry Instructions 1) Under each Planned/Reached column (e.g. 2016 Planned, 2016 Reached): a. Enter the total numbers of direct participants planned and reached that received USG assistance disaggregated by: i. Age (e.g. children 0-23 months, 24-59 month, 5-17.9 years, 18-49, and over 50 years.) ii. Sex (Female, Male), Disaggregates not Available

Note: Sub-total and Total of each FY planned and reached will automatically calculate.

Definitions For the purposes of reporting, project participants are all individuals, households, communities, institutions, and groups that receive significant goods, services, and/or other support as a direct result of project interventions. In cases where an intervention employs a deliberate strategy of training a small number of individuals to deliver services or pass knowledge directly to other individuals or organizations (e.g., cascade training), both 1) those who are directly trained by project personnel and 2) the individuals who directly benefit from the services or training delivered by the project-trained individuals or organizations as part of that service delivery or knowledge-transfer plan are considered direct participants.

In the case of food rations, project participants include the individual recipient in the case of individual rations, and the recipient plus his/her family members in the case of family rations.

Note that the number of unique and direct project participants will be different from the numbers included in the Participants by Program Element and Participants by Age, Sex and Program Element tables. There are three tables: Participants by Program Element, 2016 Participants by Age, Sex, and Program Element and Resources by Program Element which gets populated when data is entered in the Participants by Program tab set of tables by clicking ** Click "New" in the upper left corner to enter each Program Element. ** Illustrative Representation only . Not a template for data entry.

ARR Program Element Information (Listing) New Print Program Element 20/10/2017 < Program Element 1 mm/dd/yyyy

Participants by Program Element 2015 2015 2016 2016 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 Program Element Sex Planned Reached Planned Reached Planned Reached Planned Reached Planned Reached Program Element 1 Male 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Program Element 1 Female 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Disaggregates Not 0 0 0 0 102,748 100,938 0 0 0 0 Program Element 1 Available Sub-Total 0 0 0 0 102,748 100,938 0 0 0 0 Program Element 2 Male Program Element 2 Female Disaggregates Not 19265 19313 Program Element 2 Available Sub-Total 19265 19313 Program Element 3 Male Program Element 3 Female Disaggregates Not Program Element 3 Available Sub-Total Program Element 4 Male Program Element 4 Female Disaggregates Not Program Element 4 Available Sub-Total Program Element 5 Male Program Element 5 Female Disaggregates Not Program Element 5 Available Sub-Total Program Element 6 Male Program Element 6 Female Disaggregates Not Program Element 6 Available Sub-Total Program Element 7 Male Program Element 7 Female Disaggregates Not Program Element 7 Available Sub-Total Program Element 8 Male Program Element 8 Female Disaggregates Not Program Element 8 Available … Sub-Total

2016 Participants by Age, Sex, and Program Element

Male Other Disaggreg Female 24 Disaggreg Disaggreg Total 5 - Disaggrega Total Sex/ Age Group Pregnant and Male 0 -23 Female 0 - Total 0-23 Male 24- Total 24 - Male 5- Female 5- Over Female ates Not -59 ates Not ates Not 17.9 tes Not Over 18 Program Element Lactating Women months 23 months months 59 months 59 months 17.9 years 17.9 years 18 Over 18 Available months Available Available Years Available Years Years Years

Program Element 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Program Element 2 Program Element 3 Program Element 4 Program Element 5 Program Element 6 … Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Resources by Program Element Cost Program Element MT ITSH CDF IDA OCO BEHT IFRP Other Share Program Element 1 Program Element 2 Program Element 3 Program Element 4 Program Element 5 Program Element 6 … Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Participant Data Information In the Participant Data table, for each program element, Awardees must specify the number of planned and reached project participants disaggregated by sex during the reporting Fiscal Year (FY), as well as the number of planned participants for the next three fiscal years.

For the Participants by Program Element, Participants by Age, Sex and Program Element and Resources by Program Element tables, Awardees with development food assistance projects must report based on all relevant program elements in which the project is implementing interventions and assign project participants and resources based on the program element definitions. An individual who participates in multiple interventions within a program element should only be counted once. However, an individual who participates in interventions in more than one program element should be counted once in each program element from which s/he or it received benefits. Since the Participants by Program Element and Participants by Age, Sex and Program Element tables require Awardees to count individuals in each program element in which s/he directly participated, the total number of participants will be likely be higher than for the Unique and Direct Participants table. Definitions For the purposes of reporting, project participants are all individuals, households, communities, institutions, and groups that receive significant goods, services, and/or other support as a direct result of project interventions. In cases where an intervention employs a deliberate strategy of training a small number of individuals to deliver services or pass knowledge directly to other individuals or organizations (e.g., cascade training), both 1) those who are directly trained by project personnel and 2) the individuals who directly benefit from the services or training delivered by the project-trained individuals or organizations as part of that service delivery or knowledge-transfer plan are considered direct participants.

In the case of food rations, project participants include the individual recipient in the case of individual rations, and the recipient plus his/her family members in the case of family rations. ARR Program Element Information

Instructions:

Please select your Program element and data that is only applicable to your reporting requriements. If you have program element that is also a Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust, you will have to create a different record for data entry. To use this for additional Program Elements, create and copy into a new tab for each Program Element.

Participants by Program Element

2016 2016 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 Disaggregates Planned Reached Planned Reached Planned Reached Planned Reached

Male Female Disaggregates Not Available 102,748 100,938 Total 0 0 102,748 100,938 0 0 0 0 Pregnant and Lactating Women Children 0 to 23 months Male Children 0 to 23 months Female Children 0 to 23 months Disaggregates Not Available Children 24 to 59 months Male Children 24 to 59 months Female Children 24 to 59 months Disaggregates Not Available Children 5 to 17.9 years Male Children 5 to 17.9 years Female Children 5 to 17.9 years Disaggregates Not Available Male Over 18 Years Other Female Over 18 Years Over 18 years Disaggregates Not Available

Data Entry Instructions 1) In the drop down menu, select your Program Element that is applicable to your reporting requriements. For each Program Element enter direct participant data:

2) Under each Planned/Reached column (e.g. 2016 Planned, 2016 Reached): a. Enter the total number of direct participants planned and reached that received USG assistance disaggregated by: i. Sex (Female, Male, Disaggregates not Available); ii. Preganant and Lactating Women; iii. Male Children Age (e.g. children 0 to 23 months, 24 to 59 month, 5-17.9 years, Over 18 years, disaggregates no available) iv. Female Children Age (e.g. children 0 to 23 months, 24 to 59 month, 5-17.9 years, Over 18 years, disaggregates no available)

Note: Total of Sex disaggregates in each FY planned and reached will automatically calculate.

Do you distribute specalized food products? Yes No

Specialized Food Products Add New Delete Participan 2016 2016 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 2019 Commodity t Planned Reached Planned Reached Planned Reached Planned Reached

Female

Male

Female

Male

Total Female 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Male 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Participant Data Information For each specialized food product commodity, Awardees must specify the number of planned and reached project participants disaggregated by sex (male and female) during the reporting Fiscal Year (FY), as well as the number of planned participants for the next three FYs.

Data Entry Instructions 1) In the question, "Do you distribute specailized food products?", click yes or no.

2) Click "Add New" for each specialized food commodity. a. Enter Participant Female information for that commodity under each Planned/Reached column (e.g. 2016 Planned, 2016 Reached), enter the total numbers of direct participants planned and reached.

3) Click "Add New" for each specialized food commodity. a. Enter Participant Male information for that commodity under each Planned/Reached column (e.g. 2016 Planned, 2016 Reached), enter the total numbers of direct participants planned and reached.

Note: To use template for more than two commodities, insert more rows between row 35 and 38. Total of Sex Male and Female disaggregates in each FY planned and reached will automatically calculate.

Commodity Add New Delete Commodity MT

Total 0

Participant Data Information For each commodity distributed in the FY, Awardees must specify themetric tons.

Data Entry Instructions 1) Click "Add New" for each commodity. a. Enter metric tons for that commodity.

Note: To use template for more than two commodities, insert more rows between row 46 and 47. Total will automatically calculate.

Resources by Program Element ITSH ($) $0 OCO ($) $0

CDF ($) $0 BEHT ($) $0

IDA ($) $0 IFRP ($) $0

Cost Share ($) $0

Others ($) $0

Specify, if there is a value in Other field