DOCSLIB.ORG

SHF 2017 FIRST ALLOCATION ROUND Strategic Review Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SHF 2017 FIRST ALLOCATION ROUND Strategic Review Report SHF 2017 FIRST ALLOCATION ROUND Strategic Review report Projects Recommended for Funding 13 March 2017 1. Overview 8 • Results 8 • Process 10 • Recommendations 11 2. Case 1 (Displacement): Strategic Review results 12 • Education 12 • Emergency Shelter and Non-Food Items 13 • Food Security and Livelihood 14 • Health 15 • Nutrition 16 • Protection 18 • WASH 19 • Refugee Consultation Forum 21 3. Case 2 (Returnees): Strategic Review results 22 4. Case 4 (Common services) 23 Annex 1: Strategic Review Committee members 24 1. Overview o This document presents the recommend projects to the Advisory Board and then to the Humanitarian Coordinator for pre- approval in line with the Sudan 2017 first Allocation paper. o It includes the results of the Strategic Review Committees (SRCs) meetings and the SHF Technical Unit’s (TU) comments and shows to what extent these results are in line with the allocation strategy. o The document aims to ensure transparency of the process by describing potential issues. o Upon HC preliminary approval of the recommended projects, partners will be requested to develop full project proposals. Final approval of projects and amounts only takes place after successful Technical Review when the HC gives her final approval. • Results o Out of 113 projects submitted, 61 concept notes for a total value of $19.1 million are presented to the Advisory Board. This does not include the protracted displacement pilot (case 3) which will be launched at a later stage, nor 17 projects that were ineligible as per the allocation strategy criteria. An overview of the results per case for funding are presented below: Table 1: Recommend amounts and number of concept notes per case for funding1 Amounts Number of Number of Recommended submitted and eligible concept notes Amounts (US$) eligible (US$) concept notes recommended Sector Case 1 : Displacement Education 2,884,616 13 1,400,000 5 Emergency shelter and NFI 3,156,817 12 1,300,000 6 Food security and livelihoods 2,779,604 8 1,399,969 3 Health 6,828,324 18 3,650,000 9 Nutrition 6,067,274 21 3,000,000 13 Protection 5,092,161 21 1,400,000 6 Refugees 3,285,815 9 1,500,001 6 Water, sanitation and hygiene 4,200,724 10 3,155,194 10 subtotal case 1 39,769,757 98 16,805,163 49 Case 2: Returns 3,285,815 9 $2,499,969 6 Case 4: Common services DTM and M&R officers 824,453 6 $ 824,453 6 Total 43,880,024 113 $19,129,616 61 An average project submission was around $391,000 where the average recommended project was only $313,600. During the 2016 first allocation strategic review 82 projects were proposed totaling $29.3 million averaging $358,000 per project. 1 Amounts per sector include shares in multi-sector projects. The number of concept notes per sector includes all concept notes for the sector including multi-sectorial concept notes. The total number of projects does not double count the multi-sector projects. Area based approach: common priority localities Table 2: Approximate amounts recommended to common priority localities Locality (US$/No. of EDUCATION EMERGENCY FOOD HEALTH NUTRITION PROTECTION WATER, TOTAL SHELTER AND SECURITY AND SANITATION projects)/Sector NON-FOOD LIVELIHOODS AND HYGIENE ITEMS Nertiti 143,956 (1) 136,256 (2) 146,990 (1) 541,007 (5) 165,446 (3) 95,970 (1) 282,659 (2) 1,512,285 (15) Golo 365,852 (2) 136,256 (2) 39,197 (1) 329,991 (4) 278,392 (4) 143,955 (1) 809,645 (4) 2,103,290 (18) Kebkabiya 226,929 (1) (0) 146,990 (1) 140,628 (2) 21,006 (1) 279,936 (2) 200,424 (1) 1,015,913 (8) Tawilla 266,609 (1) (0) 39,197 (1) 199,609 (3) 205,682 (3) 265,491 (2) 150,000 (1) 1,126,589 (11) El Kurmuk 193,310 (1) 90,000 (1) 102,900 (1) 364,890 (3) (0) 286,511 (2) (0) 1,037,610 (8) Nyala 203,345 (1) 115,940 (2) 117,592 (1) 407,033 (3) 159,100 (1) (0) 269,231 (1) 1,272,241 (9) Total 1,400,000 (7) 478,452 (7) 592,868 (6) 1,983,158 (20) 829,626 (12) 1,071,864 (8) 1,711,960 (9) 8,067,928 (69) o Common priority localities are well covered and represent 47% of the allocations under the displacement case (case 1). The most recent displacement (Golo, Nertiti) makes up 45% of the allocations under the common priority localities. o Sectors Health, Nutrition and WaSH are advised to coordinate closely with their partners to avoid duplication on the common priority localities and take into account other funding streams. o The table does not include the RRR response to 3 villages in Um Dukhum. All targeted sectors are covered within this approach. Sector specific localities Table 3: Projects recommended per sector priority localities EDUCATION EMERGENCY FOOD HEALTH NUTRITION PROTECTION WATER, REFUGEE SHELTER AND SECURITY AND SANITATION CONSULTATION NON-FOOD LIVELIHOODS AND HYGIENE FORUM ITEMS No. of sector specific localities covered/ Total sector specific localities in 0/15 1/7 3/5 13/20 10/14 3/9 5/8 8/8 allocation paper o The table indicates that sector specific localities are primarily of added value for the bigger envelopes Health, Nutrition and WASH. Multi-sector projects o 18 out of 107 projects were submitted as multi-sector projects and focused mostly on the common priority localities. o Eight of the 18 multi-sector projects are recommended as a multi-sector project. Four of the multi-sector projects are recommended as single sector projects. o Three of the eight recommended projects are between Education and Protection sectors, while the remainder involves the Health, Nutrition and WASH sectors. FSL and ESNFI sectors do not take part in any multi-sector projects. o In addition, for sector specific localities, two multi-sector approaches based on single sector concept notes are recommended. Multi-annual commitments o Projects under case 2 on returnees all specified a brief description on what those projects could achieve in year two. This can be further worked out during the Technical Review of the projects. o Almost no health and nutrition projects have indicated a request for multi-year funding. The SHF Technical Unit recommends to ask partners about their interest in multi-year funding during the Technical Review and recommend a number of projects for multi-year funding. Procurement projects o 5 pipeline projects (NFI, Livelihoods, Nutrition and two WASH pipelines) were submitted for a total value of $2,900,683. o 3 pipeline projects (NFI, Livelihoods, Nutrition) are recommended by SRCs for a total value of $1,647,601. This is 8.6% of the total allocations. o While for the nutrition and livelihoods pipelines, needs for pipeline supplies were clearly indicated by the partners in the concept notes, this was less clearly the case for NFI and not at all for WASH. Community participation officers o Few partners indicated interest in a community participation officer. The SHF Technical Unit and the protection sector coordinator will discuss this with partners in common priority localities during Technical Review. Allocation by type of partner Table 4: No of projects and amounts recommended per organization type Number of Amount Organization Type concept notes % % recommended recommended International NGO 33 54% 11,893,839 62% National NGO 10 16% 2,042,415 11% UN Agency 18 30% 5,193,362 27% 61 $19,129,616 Grand Total o The bulk of the allocation (62%) is going to international NGOs which is a significant increase compared to 2016. o 11% of funding is directly going to national NGOs while a number of them work together with international NGOs or UN agencies as sub grantees. o The amount of the allocation going to UN agencies is in line with the positioning of the Fund. Allocation by risk levels Table 5: No of projects and amounts recommended per risk level (only for NGOs) Number of Amount Risk Level concept notes % % recommended recommended High 4 9% 598,762 4% Medium 7 16% 2,301,255 17% Low 32 74% 11,036,237 79% o The table shows that a significant amount of the allocation is going to low risk partners. • Process o An eligibility check was done by the SHF Technical Unit. Partners that have requested an explanation have received one. While one SRC decided to discuss an ineligible project, no SRC has exceptionally recommended such a project. o As this was the second year with a clear description of Strategic Review Committees described in the Operational Manual, the scoring process in all SRCs was consistent and with due respect to the ground rules. • Criteria used to select projects after initial scoring have mainly been in line with those specified in the allocation paper resulting in a selection that was based on the scoring. • If a project with a lower score project was recommended, a clear reason for this exception is stated in the below. • While during the allocation paper preparation, the IASC sector coordinators have been strongly involved in the definition of criteria for eligibility/scoring and final selection, this remains important for future allocations. o Regarding the composition of the SRC, • The SHF Technical Unit ensured that no NGO was present in more than two SRCs. • The FSL sector had one scoring member that had not submitted its scoring so only 5 members participated in the SRC. • The WaSH sector had a finance person participating which was considered as a great help to comment on budgets. • There was a strong involvement of sector M&R officers with half of the committees led by sector M&R officers.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Humanitarian Situation Report No. 19 Q3 2020 Highlights
    Sudan Humanitarian Situation Report No. 19 Q3 2020 UNICEF and partners assess damage to communities in southern Khartoum. Sudan was significantly affected by heavy flooding this summer, destroying many homes and displacing families. @RESPECTMEDIA PlPl Reporting Period: July-September 2020 Highlights Situation in Numbers • Flash floods in several states and heavy rains in upriver countries caused the White and Blue Nile rivers to overflow, damaging households and in- 5.39 million frastructure. Almost 850,000 people have been directly affected and children in need of could be multiplied ten-fold as water and mosquito borne diseases devel- humanitarian assistance op as flood waters recede. 9.3 million • All educational institutions have remained closed since March due to people in need COVID-19 and term realignments and are now due to open again on the 22 November. 1 million • Peace talks between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan Revolu- internally displaced children tionary Front concluded following an agreement in Juba signed on 3 Oc- tober. This has consolidated humanitarian access to the majority of the 1.8 million Jebel Mara region at the heart of Darfur. internally displaced people 379,355 South Sudanese child refugees 729,530 South Sudanese refugees (Sudan HNO 2020) UNICEF Appeal 2020 US $147.1 million Funding Status (in US$) Funds Fundi received, ng $60M gap, $70M Carry- forward, $17M *This table shows % progress towards key targets as well as % funding available for each sector. Funding available includes funds received in the current year and carry-over from the previous year. 1 Funding Overview and Partnerships UNICEF’s 2020 Humanitarian Action for Children (HAC) appeal for Sudan requires US$147.11 million to address the new and protracted needs of the afflicted population.
    [Show full text]
  • SUDAN: West Darfur State UNHCR Presence and Refugee & IDP Locations
    A A A SUDAN: West Darfur State UNHCR presence and refugee & IDP locations As of 18 Sep 2019 Ardamata #B A #BEl Riad Tandubayah BAbu Zar Sigiba El Geneina#C# #BAl Hujaj Girgira #BJammaa #BKrinding 1 & 2 Mastura\Sania WEST DARFUR #BKrinding 2 Dankud #B Kaidaba KULBUS Falankei Wadi Bardi village #B Kul#bus Abu Rumayl #B Bardani NORTH DARFUR Selea #B Istereina Aro Shorou Taziriba Hijeilija#B Gosmino #B Manjura A #B JEBEL MOON Ginfili Ngerma Djedid Abu Surug SIRBA #B Sirba Melmelli Armankul Abu Shajeira #B B # Bir Dagig Hamroh #B Kondobe #B Kuka WEST DARFUR A Kurgo CHAD Sultan house Birkat Tayr Kawm Dorti #B Abd Allah El RiadAro daBmata Abu #Zar A Jammaa B #B #Krinding 1 & 2 Al Hujaj #BC# #BBB Kaira Krinding 2## Derjeil El Geneina Kreinik EL GENEINA #B KREINIK A Geneina Goker #B DogoumSisi Nurei #B Misterei A #B A Kajilkajili Hagar Jembuh Murnei Kango Haraza Awita #B o #B A Ulang ZalingeiC# EGYPT SAUDI BEIDA Chero Kasi ARABIA LIBYA Zalingei Tabbi Nyebbei HABILA R Kortei e d S Red Sea e Arara a Beida town Northern Beida #B #B Arara AlwadiHabila Madares Nur Al Huda village River Nile #BBC# CHAD Al Salam# North A UNHCR office Darfur Khartoum Kassala Habila North ERITREA Kordofan Refugee Sites Futajiggi West El Gazira Darfur White Gedaref Sala + Lor CENTRAL DARFUR Nile POC IDP camp/sites Central West Sennar #B Darfur Kordofan Blue #B South Nile C# Refugee settlement South East Kordofan Darfur Darfur ETHIOPIA D Crossing point SOUTH SUDAN Main town Secondary town Seilo o Airfields FORO BARANGA SOUTH DARFUR Boundaries & Roads Mogara International boundary Foro Burunga State boundary #BC# Goldober Locality boundary Foro Baranga Primay road A Secondary road 5km The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
    [Show full text]
  • Information on the Internally Displaced Persons (Idps)
    COI QUERY Country of Origin Sudan Main subject IDPs in Darfur and the Two Areas Question(s) Information on the internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Darfur and the Two Areas in the period of August 2019 - May 2020: - overview of numbers of IDPs and returnees: Darfur, The Two Areas, - living conditions and personal safety: Darfur, The Two Areas, - treatment by the Sovereign Council government: Darfur, The Two Areas. Date of completion 1 July 2020 Query Code Q15-2020 Contributing EU+ COI -- units (if applicable) Disclaimer This response to a COI query has been elaborated according to the EASO COI Report Methodology and EASO Writing and Referencing Guide. The information provided in this response has been researched, evaluated and processed with utmost care within a limited time frame. All sources used are referenced. A quality review has been performed in line with the above mentioned methodology. This document does not claim to be exhaustive neither conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim to international protection. If a certain event, person or organisation is not mentioned in the report, this does not mean that the event has not taken place or that the person or organisation does not exist. Terminology used should not be regarded as indicative of a particular legal position. The information in the response does not necessarily reflect the opinion of EASO and makes no political statement whatsoever. The target audience is caseworkers, COI researchers, policy makers, and decision making authorities. The answer was finalised on 1 July 2020. Any event taking place after this date is not included in this answer.
    [Show full text]
  • UNAMID 4327 R44 Oct20
    22o 24o 26o 28o 30o 20o Sector NORTH UNAMID Kerma HQ PAKISTAN October 2020 u PAKISTAN Militarya Nukheila te Dongola la Zalingei Police P PAKISTAN d a y HQ FORCE HQ (MAIN) SLF Stateb Liaison Function A PAKISTAN (-) l e HQ ETHIOPIA b El‘Atrun e Airport 18o PAKISTAN J 18o ETHIOPIA International boundary h MP KENYA s ETHIOPIA hu Main road as ag ETHIOPIA N Railroad l be ar e GAMBIA (-) ow J H RWANDA di Deployment less than Platoon strength is PAKISTAN a W not shown on map. CHINA MP KENYA 0 100 200 km HQ UNPOL FPU INDONESIA 0 100 mi FPU TOGO HQ RWANDA 16o 16o SLF Central Darfur ETHIOPIA PAKISTAN RWANDA El Fasher PAKISTAN RWANDA HQ LOG HUB CHAD Umm PAKISTAN CHINA RWANDA (TPE) Tine Barru HQ RWANDA FPU JORDAN 1 MP KENYA FPU SENEGAL RWANDA Kulbus FPU JORDAN 2 TANZANIA El Sireaf Kutum SUDAN 14o Sector Mellit 14o CHINA (-) WEST FPU NEPAL Kabkabiya Korma KENYA Saraf Omra Tawila El Fasher MP El Geneina Sortony (see inset) FPU DJIBOUTI SLF West Darfur FPU EGYPT Golo ShangilShangil FPU BANGLADESH Masteri Mournei Tobay HQ TANZANIA Nertiti SLF North Darfur Zalingei Menawashi TANZANIA (see inset) EGYPT Khor Abeche Habilabila Sector Kas CENTRAL ShaeriaShaeria Forobaranga Labado 12o KalmaKalma Nyala 12o Mukhjar NyalaNyala Muhajeria (see(see inset inset)) FPU BURKINA FASO FPU PAKISTAN SLF South Darfur TANZANIA Al Da’ein MP KENYA Graida SLF East Darfur Tulus Muglad Buram Sector Sector EAST 10o SOUTH 10o CENTRAL AFRICAN Abyei Kafia REPUBLIC Kingi SOUTH The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do SOUTH not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Resources Management: Local Perspectives from North and Central Darfur
    Natural Resources Management: Local Perspectives from North and Central Darfur A Feinstein International Center Field Report Hassan-Alattar Satti with Hussein Sulieman, Helen Young, and Anne Radday January 2020 Acknowledgements We would like to extend our gratitude to our Taadoud II partners—Darfur Development and Reconstruction Agency (DDRA), Oxfam America, and Norwegian Church Aid (NCA)—for their support in facilitating field trips to communities; for linking us with stakeholders at state and federal levels; and for generously providing accommodation and office space in North and Central Darfur. Without their support this work could have never been completed. Special thanks go to Mohammed Fadiel and Hawary Abdallah who joined and facilitated Feinstein International Center, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University trips to the communities in North and Central Darfur. The advice and recommendations they offered on how those trips should be organized were invaluable. We would like also to acknowledge Mr. Omer Ali Abdallah for linking Feinstein with a nomads’ group in Um Jalbagh, North Darfur. Finally, we are grateful to the communities we visited, who were open and generous in sharing their time and experiences with us. 2 | Page fic.tufts.edu Natural Resources Management: Local Perspective from North and Central Darfur List of Acronyms FGD Focus group discussion FNC Forests National Corporation IDP Internally displaced person IWRM Integrated water resources management KII Key informant interview NGO Non-governmental organization NRM Natural resources management OR Operational research SWC State Water Corporation UNEP United Nations Environment Programme WES Water and Environmental Sanitation Project 3 | Page fic.tufts.edu Natural Resources Management: Local Perspective from North and Central Darfur Table of Contents Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Central African Republic Refugees in Sudan Dashboard As of 28
    SUDAN Central African Republic Refugees in Sudan as of 28 February 2021 CAR Refugees Population Persons ith The spark of inter-communal violence in September 2019 and Asylum-seekers Distribution Disabilities have led refugees from Central African Republic (CAR) to flee to safety in Sudan. 14% of population live in camps¹ 165 27,043 With more than 10,000 refugees arriving in 2020 and the 1% of CAR registered situation along the CAR-Sudan border remaining tense and Individuals population are persons with volatile, UNHCR has revised its planning figure for arrivals disabilities from CAR to 10,000 individuals by end of 2021. 9,014 Unaccompanied and Households Separated Children CAR Refugees and Asylum-seekers Per State 86% of population Average Family Size 10,430 (48%) 3 live out of camps 148 South Darfur 11,272 (52%) Um Shalaya camp in Azum/ Central Darfur Registration Status Registration Since 2015² Central Darfur 120 (2%) | 5,066 (98%) 6,223 43% 11,547 Registered Khartoum 126 (100%) Households 39% 10,430 Registered 29 (100%) 1,274 2,031 West Darfur 658 999 147 35 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 18% 5,066 Un-registered Registered Un-registered 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 169 have been registered prior to 2015. Age-gender Breakdown New Arrivals | 2021 3% 2% 56% Elderly Elderly 86 28 Female (60+) Male (60+) 44% Total arrivals in 2021 Total arrivals in February 2021 58 22% 14% Adult Adult Female (18-59 yrs) AGB Male (18-59 yrs) 31% 28% 28 Child Child Female Male Female (0-17 yrs) Male (0-17 yrs) Population distribution statistics are based on registered individuals only.
    [Show full text]
  • They Were Shouting 'Kill Them'
    HUMAN RIGHTS “They Were Shouting ‘Kill Them’” Sudan’s Violent Crackdown on Protesters in Khartoum WATCH “They Were Shouting ‘Kill Them’” Sudan’s Violent Crackdown on Protesters in Khartoum Copyright © 2019 Human Rights Watch All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 978-1-6231-37854 Cover design by Rafael Jimenez Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people worldwide. We scrupulously investigate abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice. Human Rights Watch is an independent, international organization that works as part of a vibrant movement to uphold human dignity and advance the cause of human rights for all. Human Rights Watch is an international organization with staff in more than 40 countries, and offices in Amsterdam, Beirut, Berlin, Brussels, Chicago, Geneva, Goma, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles, Moscow, Nairobi, New York, Paris, San Francisco, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto, Tunis, Washington DC, and Zurich. For more information, please visit our website: http://www.hrw.org NOVEMBER 2019 ISBN: 978-1-6231-37854 “They Were Shouting ‘Kill Them’” Sudan’s Violent Crackdown on Protesters in Khartoum Map of Sit-in Area ................................................................................................................. i Glossary ............................................................................................................................... ii Summary ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Central Darfur South Darfur West
    Bahia as of 31 December 2015 SUDAN: 2015 New DisplacementsCHAD in Darfur Shegeg Karo Wakhaim Furawiya no. of IDPs independently verified Bamina Muzbat by IASC partners 6,667 109,543 Gurbura Malha Kornoi people returned to Umm Baru locality from El Malha Malha no. of IDPs reported but unverified Umm Baru Umm Baru TS within the same locality Umm Baru Umm Baru Fongo 1&2 69,750 Tina Kornoi (IOM tracking team and ES/NFI sector) 18,697 no. of 2015 IDPs reportedly returned El Tina people returned to Orschi different locations in Mellit Miski to their places of origin Tandubayah 67,348 NORTH 10,363 (385) locality from villages within the same locality 765 Abassi camp (IOM-DTM team) Sigiba Umm Baru (IOM tracking team) Monthly no. of IDPs & returnees Abu-liha DARFUR 67,348 UNAMID team site Ana Bagi Anka in 2015 69,750 Girgira 4,327 50,304 58,490 58,490 65,610109,543 10,000 Baashim/tina 250000 69,494 66,050 66,035 57,902 104,098 99,554 99,569109,075 Saiyah town and 150 28,468 28,468 Dankud Anka and 33 surrounding 129,447100,433 98,932 surrounding areas 74,036 81,545 83,734 villages in Kutum locality Kutum 11,820 150 136,848 Kaidaba 200000 Falankei (HAC & Community Leaders) Mellit town and 50,605 Abdel Shakur Hashaba North Kulbus 8,612 surrounding areas Abu Rumayl El Sireaf town 50,605 Kulbus Abu Gamra Um Sidir 150000 Bardani 150 150 Saiyah 74,624 75,339 38,602 41,304 36,170 36,668 Kutum El Kuma 56,124 Mellit Mellit 100000 36,170 4,587 Um Sayalla Hillet Ahmed Istereina Mellit Taziriba 4,190 Kulkul Fata Borno Tawila town Abbasi people returned to
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Conflict Analysis
    Organization: Danish Refugee Council (DRC) Address: House 17, Block 3/4/A, Street 29, Amarat, Khartoum, Sudan Website: drc.ngo Author: Hassan Alattar Satti, Consultant Analysis: August 2020 Report: October 2020 Photos: All rights DRC Design: Yassin Ibrahim Funded by European Union Civil Protec�on and Humanitarian Aid Table of contents List of Acronyms List of figures List of tables Executive summary .......................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3 1.2. Context ............................................................................................................................. 4 2. Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 6 3. Conflict actors’ analysis ............................................................................................................ 9 3.2. Communities: villages and damrahs ................................................................................. 10 3.3. Sudan Liberation Army – Abdulwahid ............................................................................... 12 3.4. Sudan Transitional Government (STG): a fractured structure ........................................... 12 3.4.1. Civilian component ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • WFP Market Monitor
    WFP Market Monitor - Sudan March 2021 Highlights - The national average retail price of sorghum was SDG98.21/kg, which is slight increase by 0.90% compared to the previous month. - The national average retail price of Wheat flour was SDG261.9/kg, which is an increase by 7.89% compared to the previous month. - The national average retail price of goat was SDG8,547/head, which is an increase by 13.05% compared to the previous month. - The national average retail price of groundnut was SDG8,361/sack, which is an increase by 16.80% compared to the previous month. - The national average cost of local food basket was SDG149.5, which is a decrease by 1.43% compared to the previous month. - Food Security Outlook Commodity Unit of Current Previous month 1 year before measurement SDG SDG % Change SDG % Change Sorghum KG 98.21 97.33 0.90% 34.95 181.00% Wheat flour KG 261.9 242.75 7.89% 73.8 254.88% Goat Head 8,547 7,561 13.05% 4,203 103.35% Groundnut Sack (45 KG) 8,361 7,159 16.80% 1,724 384.91% Local Food Basket Unit 149.5 151.67 -1.43% 52.94 182.4% In March, the average cost of local food basket is slightly decreased to 149.5 SDG. The exchange rate policy change is likely to have impact on the food prices which clearly captured in the local food basket cost that slightly decreased compared to the previous month, which will be monitored closely by WFP.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Darfur 2020 Multi-Sector Needs Assessment
    Central Darfur 2020 Multi-Sector Needs Assessment Danish Refugee Council Produced with financial support from: April 2021 Data collection for the Multi-Sector Needs Assessment was conducted between 20 July and 11 December 2020. All data collection activities were conducted directly by Danish Refugee Council (DRC) staff, lead and supervised by the Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning department. Funding was provided by the European Commission’s Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO) and the Danish International Development Agency (Danida). For information or questions related to the Multi-Sector Needs Assessment, please contact: Jacob Sprang, DRC MEAL Manager at [email protected]. 1 Table of Contents Map 3 Executive Summary 4 Background 6 Assessment Objectives 6 Methodology 7 Limitations 8 State-wide Trends 9 Demographics 9 Displacement and Intentions 11 Protection 12 Food Security 14 Livelihoods 17 Education 20 Health 21 Nutrition 22 Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) 23 Shelter 24 Accountability to Affected Populations 25 Locational Analysis 27 Active Conflict Zones 27 Protracted Displacement and Resource-Based Conflict 29 Resource Scarcity and Inaccessible Services 30 Conclusion and Recommendations 31 2 Map of Central Darfur, Sudan 3 Executive Summary From 20 July to 11 December 2020, DRC Staff Food Security conducted a Multi-Sector Needs Assessment in Food insecurity is widespread throughout the Central Darfur. In total, 1530 households were state. 79% of respondents rely primarily on surveyed from all 9 localities in the state. Data household agricultural production to meet their was collected through in-person interviews. food needs. In addition, 23% of respondents rely Covid-19 social distancing and mask-wearing solely on household agricultural production as measures were upheld to mitigate the potential both their primary and secondary livelihood.
    [Show full text]
  • Humanitarian Situation Report
    UNICEF SUDAN SITUATION REPORT – JANUARY 2017 PlPl SUDAN Humanitarian Situation Report SITUATION IN NUMBERS Highlights UNICEF’s 2017 Humanitarian Action for Children (HAC) appeal for Sudan launched in 3,100,000 children January amounted to US$ 110.25 million to respond to children’s humanitarian needs across the country. According to the 2016 Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) for Su- 5,800,000 people dan, an estimated 5.8 million people are in dire need of humanitarian assistance, in- # of people affected cluding over 3 million children. (Source: Sudan HRP 2016) In December 2016, the Government of Sudan’s Humanitarian Aid Commission (HAC) issued amended directives regarding humanitarian work in the country. The new direc- 1,200,000 children tives outline better acceptance of humanitarian partners by the Government. 1,980,000 people Four States continued to experience a widespread outbreak of Acute Watery Diarrhoea # of people displaced in Darfur (AWD) - Geizira, Khartoum, Gedarif and Red Sea. UNICEF responded through the pro- (Source: Sudan Humanitarian Needs Overview 2016) vision of hygiene promotion material, water chlorination, rehabilitation of water sources, water trucking and provision of supplies such as medicines, soap, chlorine and jerry-canes. 208,018 children UNICEF and partners continued to support the provision of life-saving improved water 297,168 people supply to 1.6 million people (around 581,551 girls, 556,008 boys, 245,056 women, # of South Sudanese Refugees since 243,937 men) in AWD and conflict affected areas. outbreak of conflict on 15 December 2013 In December of 2016, UNICEF admitted nearly 14,000 children under 5 with severe (Source: UNHCR Information Sharing Portal, 31 acute malnutrition (SAM) for treatment.
    [Show full text]