Round Two: CAMEALEON Rapid Field Monitoring Survey on the Impact of COVID-19 on WFP Multi-Purpose Cash Recipients April 2020
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Round two: CAMEALEON rapid field monitoring survey on the impact of COVID-19 on WFP Multi-Purpose cash recipients April 2020 Photo: Racha El Daoi/NRC This survey, conducted in two rounds with 80% of the same households, aims to gather insights on the impact of COVID-19 on multi-purpose cash (MPC) recipients and their ability to access and spend their assistance. This report presents the findings of the second round of data collection with 120 surveys that took place between 17-24 April 2020 and follows the first round of data collection that took place between 25-30 March. Respondents live in the Bekaa and Northern Lebanon and all receive MPC from the World Food Programme (WFP). The survey was conducted by CAMEALEON, a learning, research and MEAL consortium co-managed by NRC, Oxfam and Solidarités International. Key Takeaways Ability to redeem MPC April assistance ● All survey respondents who attempted to withdraw assistance were able to successfully withdraw, except for one person. This corroborates the high redemption rate (97%) reported by the UN. The average self-reported waiting time at the ATM was half an hour. ● On average, it took families between 2 and 3 days to withdraw the assistance after they received the upload SMS. Respondents on average made 2 attempts to withdraw their assistance over nearly 2 days. ● For respondents that reported that they received their April transfer later in the month compared to previous months, 53% of households said that they took out new debt and 48% said that they were not able to pay financial obligations on time. ● 85% of beneficiaries successfully withdrew the assistance by themselves and spent on average LBP 14,700 to reach the ATM on these successful attempts. This compares to an average self-reported expenditure of LBP 11,570 in March 2020. However, this does not account for other unsuccessful attempts to withdraw, where the respondents could have incurred additional transportation costs. ● 15% of respondents asked a third party to withdraw their assistance. These respondents paid the third party LPB 9,000 on average. The main reasons for this arrangement were care-giving duties or the third-party already going or going close to the ATM anyway. Feelings of safety retrieving MPC assistance ● 94% of respondents said they felt safe * withdrawing assistance from ATMs. ● 79% also felt safe travelling to and from the ATM. The reasons for not feeling safe were due to check points (57%), fear of contracting COVID-19 (43%), and the fear of being robbed (16%). *All icons are designed by Zaynab Mayladan/NRC 2 | Page ● 98% reported keeping 1.5 metres distance while waiting in line at the ATM, 93% used gloves or a barrier while using the ATM, but only 42% used soap or sanitiser directly after withdrawing. Of those that did not use soap or sanitiser directly after, 56% wore gloves until reaching home, 19% mentioned the lack of hand santiser or water at the ATM and 11% said that someone else withdrew the money for them (e.g. someone from the UN or a cooperating partner). ● 64% of respondents reported that assistance was available at the ATM by UN or bank personnel. Spending assistance, income and access to markets ● 96% reported that they were able to shop for food and basic commodities. Those unable to shop said that it was due to fears of contracting COVID-19 (2%) or mobility restrictions (2%). ● 93% used their MPC to purchase preventative COVID-19 items (e.g hand sanitizer/rubbing alcohol/disinfectant (83%), products to clean household floors and surfaces (78%), masks (77%) and gloves (77%), as well as hand/body soap (64%). ● To pay for the preventative COVID-19 items, 28% of respondents used credit at the shop, 9% purchased in credit at the pharmacy, and only 1% borrowed from a friend or relative. ● 38% of households reported not having a way to generate income since before the protests and economic crisis began and 32% lost their ability to generate income since they started. Of the 28% of respondents that did have a way to earn an income, 94% said that COVID-19 had negatively impacted their ability and only 2% said it did not impact their ability in any way. ● For those with livelihoods that were negatively impacted, 18% said it was due to the discontinuation of current job/labour opportunity, 7% said they were worried to interact with others/being infected with COVID-19 and 4% said it was due to the closure of a shop or business. Recipient preferences When asked about their preferences on the modality of assistance, 96% preferred cash only assistance and 2% preferred a hybrid cash and in-kind option. Only 1% preferred in-kind only and 1% did not know what they preferred. “Cash is better because we need it to pay for hospitals in case our children get sick and we can buy what we need from the supermarket. I use it to buy diapers and baby formula for my infant as well. The cash assistance is our only source of income.” 3 | Page 72% prefer to receive assistance in monthly instalments rather than multiple months combined. This was due to MPC being the only source of income and the knowledge that the money will all be spent in the first month, leaving them with nothing in the second. “Monthly is better because our situation is dire and we are indebted to people and these people can barely wait one month for us to pay them back. No one will wait for two months.” Recipient feedback and recommendations When asked what would improve the experience of receiving MPC, the most common suggestions were having access to ATMs that are closer to home to reduce travelling long distances, with the associated travel costs, especially in Baalbek and Labweh, lifting non-customer banking restrictions to make more ATMs available, and faster refilling of ATMs. Another suggestion was to have separate ATMs for MPC recipients. Many respondents added they wished they could withdraw their assistance from ATMs in Baalbek, as they used to before the protest started. In fact, non-customer restrictions have prevented WFP MPC beneficiaries to withdraw their assistance from existing non-BLF ATMs in many parts of Lebanon, including Baalbek. “If we can go back to withdrawing the assistance from an ATM in Baalbak I can save the transportation I spend to get to Zahle and spend it on my children.” Perhaps not surprisingly, people asked for more money in order to keep up with rapidly rising prices. “If the UN could increase the amount of the cash assistance it would be good because prices of goods are on fire and I cannot always buy milk for my young children.” A few wished they could go back to receiving the MPC at the start of the month instead of later in the month due to the staggering of assistance. “I just wish they go back to giving us the assistance at the start of the month. We received it late this month and our situation was desperate. Thankfully, the man at the grocery lets us buy food on credit.” 4 | Page Background and Context On 21 February 2020, Lebanon confirmed its first case of COVID-19 and as of 6 May, this number has grown to 750 cases with 24 fatalities.1 The first case of COVID-19 involving a Palestinian refugee appeared in a collective shelter2, however no other official cases have been reported amongst Syrian refugees to date. The spread of COVID-19 and the economic repercussions to businesses being shut down have exacerbated the economic crisis that worsened last year, and has also led to a resurgence of protests. As a result of the economic crisis, the currency is rapidly devaluing and food and commodity prices are increasing. Forecasted inflation for 2020 currently stands at 25% and WFP has reported that the food component of the survival minimum expenditure basket has increased by 47% between October 2019 and March 2020. The value of the Lebanese Pound has fallen from 1,500 LBP = $1 to 4,200 LBP = $1 in the black market, despite the government maintaining the dollar at the lower original rate. While the entire population of Lebanon is impacted by these events, the economic situation and COVID- 19 are intensifying pre-existing challenges faced by Syrian refugees such as livelihood and mobility restrictions. In addition, the MPC received by the most severely vulnerable refugees now has a diluted impact due to the devaluation of the Lebanese Pound and rising prices. As a result, an increase in negative coping mechanisms have been reported by the Basic Assistance Working Group including changes in expenditure patterns, reduced food consumption, increased debt and loss of livelihoods.3 WFP is estimating a 51% increase in extreme vulnerability amongst Syrian refugees compared to last year. According to a recent UNHCR protection monitoring survey (20 March -5 April 2020) on the impact of COVID-19 on Syrian refugees, the main challenges reported by refugees include reduced movements, difficulties buying food due to lack of money, inability/difficulties paying rent and loss of livelihoods.4 In response to the new and rapidly changing context, WFP introduced new programme adaptations to the MPC programme in April 2020, for example by raising the amount of assistance per household, increasing the number of beneficiaries, further staggering SMS upload messages, and providing personnel support to beneficiaries at high usage ATMs. Round two survey findings: impacts of COVID-19 on spending and income Assistance-related communication Since November 2019, banks put new policies in place, such as restrictions on non-customers for ATM withdrawals, due to liquidity constraints.