humanitarian response fund indonesia - unocha hrf...humanitarian response fund – indonesia annual...

Humanitarian Response Fund Indonesia

Photo credit: World Vision International

Annual Report 2012

Photo credit OCHA Indonesia

Photo credit: OCHA Indonesia

Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

Humanitarian Response Fund – Indonesia Annual Report 2012

1

Note from the Humanitarian Coordinator The OCHA team and I are pleased to share with you the 2012 Annual Report for the Humanitarian Response Fund (HRF) for Indonesia. Luckily, there was no major disaster in 2012. However, Indonesia’s National Agency for Disaster Management (BNPB) recorded 735 natural disasters and ten conflicts during 2012, directly affecting around one million people across the country. The most frequent natural disasters are whirlwinds (representing 31% of total disasters), floods (29%), landslides (16%) and droughts (14%). While the country is highly prone to earthquakes, tsunamis and volcano eruptions, 2012 was a tranquil year. The conflicts are localized and commonly triggered by land ownership, religious and economic issues, and hostility between ethnic groups or villages. Government capacity is geographically uneven, and thus some areas of the country are notably more vulnerable to disasters than others. In the context of small and medium-scale disasters, those not requiring international assistance, the HRF complements the Government of Indonesia’s commendable efforts in responding to humanitarian needs.

The Indonesia HRF is a country-based pooled fund mechanism uniquely available to national and international NGOs in order to help respond to small shocks and meet the short-term emergency needs of vulnerable communities. The HRF in Indonesia is designed to provide a relatively small financial contribution but remains strategic in advocating for humanitarian principles. The Fund does not undermine growing capacities of the Government of Indonesia on disaster management, including emergency response, but it remains critical to address specific humanitarian needs that may not be sufficiently responded by the Government. The Fund stands out as an excellent tool for rapid response to emergencies in a country ranked as low-middle-income, but with significant capacity gaps among local Governments and local stakeholders in dealing with disasters and conflicts.

A total of 12 projects were funded in 2012, for an overall amount of US$1.1 million, benefiting more than 320,000 people affected by disasters or living in highly disaster-prone areas. The communities are targeted vulnerable groups, who either live in geographically remote areas or slums in urban settings. Approximately 85% of targeted people are women, children and elderly. All projects were funded after the recommendation from the HRF Review Board, whose members also serve as Cluster Leads. The cluster system in Indonesia has maintained its strategic position by strengthening the coordination and the capacity of the Government and people of Indonesia, despite the challenges posed by Indonesia’s geographical vastness. Clusters have excellent knowledge of the type of situations and country context. Therefore, their participation in the Review Board enhances the HRF decision-making process.

The HRF operates in alignment with the Global Emergency Response Fund (ERF) Guidelines to ensure transparency and timeliness in the selection and approval of project proposals. The OCHA Country Office and the HRF Unit are working on further strengthening the HRF by reviewing its Terms of Reference, by specifying the roles and responsibilities of the Advisory Board and the Review Board, and by developing a Monitoring and Reporting (M&R) plan. In addition to monthly humanitarian updates, OCHA Indonesia produces a quarterly HRF newsletter since 2012 to maintain the humanitarian community well informed, as well as to reflect upon lessons learned from project implementation.

I take this opportunity to thank the Cluster Leads, OCHA as well as the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) for their active support in keeping the Fund relevant and strategic to provide the most vulnerable communities with appropriate humanitarian assistance.

I would like to also thank our implementing partners for their good work and commitment in the delivery of humanitarian assistance and the Government of Sweden for its continued support of this Fund. I am convinced that the HRF remains crucial to humanitarian response in Indonesia, and therefore our continued partnership is essential.

Douglas Broderick Humanitarian Coordinator


2

Executive Summary The HRF in Indonesia was established in 2001. The Fund helps alleviate the suffering of vulnerable communities in areas affected by both, natural disasters and the humanitarian consequences of conflict. Between 2001 and 2004, the Fund was mainly used to support emergency response and early recovery projects in post-conflict areas. As the situation in post-conflict areas gradually improved, the frequency of natural disasters increased. Since 2005, the HRF has primarily focused on responding to natural disasters across the country. Although the capacity of the Government on disaster management has been increasing, especially with regulation and institutional development at national and local level, the Fund remains relevant as it addresses unmet humanitarian needs.

Compared with 1,598 events in 2011, the occurrence of natural disasters decreased to 735 events in 2012. Hydrological disasters continue to be the most frequent disaster, partly due to extreme weather condition. In most cases, the Government at local and national level provided humanitarian assistance, including food, health services, non-food items and emergency shelters. However, some responses cannot fill all gaps and thus require complementary support from the in-country stakeholders, including Red Cross society, NGOs, and the private sector. One of the advantages of the HRF is that it is considered as an in-country mechanism that can release funds quickly. International assistance often takes some time to get the Government’s approval. HRF proposals are approved when there is a clear humanitarian need or gap in the response. The Indonesia HRF is designed to provide funding to projects for a maximum of six months with a ceiling of US$100,000 per project, which is considered sufficient to complement the Government’s emergency response efforts. However, an Advisory Board meeting will be convened in mid-2013 and the budget ceiling will be reviewed, together with other recommendations from Global ERF Evaluation that visited Indonesia in November 2012

The humanitarian community assesses gaps with the BNPB, other pertinent Government counterparts and stakeholders on the ground, including Indonesia Red Cross. The size of HRF projects in 2012 ranged from $65,000 to $100,000.

In 2012, the HRF allocated US$1.1 million to address the remaining needs of people affected by natural disasters such as the Thousand Islands whirlwind, drought and volcanic tremors in Palue Islands, floods in Central

Sulawesi, North Sumatra and Maluku, earthquakes in Central Sulawesi and the high volcanic activities of Mt. Merapi. The HRF received 22 project proposals in 2012, of which only 12 were recommended by the Review Board for approval by the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC). Those project proposals aiming at institutional capacity building, general disaster management education and disaster mitigation sectors were deemed beyond the scope of HRF and were not cleared by the Review Board. The 12 projects approved in 2012 benefited 323,584 persons (approximately 55% male and 45% female). HRF funding is exclusively for NGOs. In 2012, half the projects were implemented by national NGOs.

Thousand Islands, a district of Jakarta Province, was hit by a whirlwind in early 2012. More than 2,000 households were affected, and seven schools and around 550 houses were damaged. While the Government provided relief assistance including shelter, NGOs identified that sanitation and education were lacking. The HRF was utilized to address those needs.

Palue Island, populated by 10,515 people, is frequently affected by drought, seasonal cyclones and tremors due to activities around the Mt. Rokatenda volcano. Access to water is a big issue because volcanic earthquakes have damaged the water catchment and water storage infrastructure. HRF funding is being used to renovate the construction by applying high density polyethylene that will not be affected by tremors. This intervention is suspended at the moment due to eruptions of the mountain.

During the rainy season that started in September 2012, floods and landslides occurred in many places. Some flood events overwhelmed the capacity of local governments; therefore, four HRF projects were implemented in North Sumatra, Central Sulawesi and Maluku, addressing hygiene, health, food, nutrition, and protection needs of vulnerable groups.

In August 2012 a medium-scale earthquake hit a remote part of Sigi district of Central Sulawesi during Eid celebration. HRF funding was used to construct temporary shelters and provide critically needed Non-Food Items (NFI) assistance. World Vision accessed the Fund trough a single proposal to address most vulnerable people were affected by flood and earthquake in Sulawesi.


3

Scientists estimated that after the 2010 eruptions, Mt. Merapi still holds 77 million cubic meters of volcanic material that could be released either by eruptions or lava flows. While the eruptions catch more government and public attention, lava flows are a threat to around two million people who live along the rivers upstream from Mt. Merapi. One HRF project implemented by Majulah Indonesia Tanah Airku (MITA) was approved for the development of an integrated Early Warning System. Coordination among local governments, community groups and radio broadcast received highest priority to ensure sustainability of this system. Furthermore, MITA is committed to maintain the system for one year, until the local governments have the capacity to sustain it.

Most HRF projects were approved on the grounds of their immediate life-saving and life-sustaining objectives. However, both the Early Warning System project, and two projects that assisted vulnerable people who have lived in IDP sites for two years since the Mt. Merapi eruptions in 2010, were also funded to address the

potential loss of lives in the absence of those interventions.

In 2012, the Global ERF Guidelines were translated into Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian language) to facilitate access to and raise awareness of the HRF amongst the national humanitarian community.

In April 2013, the OCHA Donor Support Group (ODSG) carried out a mission to Indonesia with a strong preparedness focus in addition to the usual review of OCHA’s humanitarian coordination activities. The group also visited Yogyakarta to review the implementation of HRF funded projects. The projects visited comprised the installation of the community-based early warning system for cold lava flood implemented by MITA, the water facility recovery for Mt. Merapi for six affected communities implemented by Islamic Relief, and the early recovery efforts aiming at the reestablishment and maintenance of basic living conditions within highly affected rural communities implemented by Arbeiter Samariter Bund Deutschland (ASB).

The ODSG mission visited an HRF water project in Magelang, Central Java


ODSG delegates visit a livelihood activity which targeted female group, following Mount Merapi eruptions



4


5

Information on Contributors Since 2007 SIDA contributed US$8,130,635 to the Indonesia HRF. Besides a contribution from Saudi Arabia in 2007 of US$266,576, SIDA has been the sole contributor to the HRF since 2009.

The funds used to finance the projects in 2012 came from the balance remaining of contributions from prior years. No new contributions were received from donors during

the year. OCHA obtained SIDA’s authorization to utilize in 2013 (until 30 June 2013) US$944,768 representing the 2012 carry-over. OCHA is having an internal discussion to adjust the direction and future of the HRF in 2013 and beyond. OCHA will keep the donor community informed of any future funding requirements and may call on other countries to diversify the donor base.

Table 1: HRF donor contributions and number of projects by year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Grand Total Saudi Arabia (in US$) 266,576.00 266,576.00 SIDA (in US$) 1,115,375.00 959,960.00 2,986,650.00 728,200.00 2,340,450.00 8,130,635.00 SIDA (in SEK) 7,500,000 6,500,000 21,500,000 5,000,000 15,000,000 55,500,000 No. of HRF projects 19 9 21 22 11 82

Grand Total 1,381,951.00 959,960.00 2,986,650.00 728,200.00 2,340,450.00 8,397,211.00

Fund Overview

Summary of HRF Allocations in 2012

Requested for 2012 in US$

Carry over from 2011 in US$

Amount received in 2012 in US$

Total available in 2012 in US$

0 1,875,243 0 1,875,243 HRF allocated funds in 2012 by partner type in US$ HRF funds allocated in 2012 by project type in US$

UN Agencies 0 Emergency response 984,839 International NGOs 543,470 Preparedness 99,979 National NGOs 541,348 Innovative (if any) 0 Total 1,084,818 Total 1,084,818


6

Results of HRF Projects per Cluster

Overview of Education Cluster

Number of projects Budget in US$ Implementing agencies Geographic Area

1 99,223 Humanitarian Forum Indonesia Thousand Islands of DKI Jakarta

Outputs

■ Whirlwind occurrence had impacted the education sector, particularly the building infrastructure, education materials and the psychosocial condition of children. In addressing these psychosocial needs, parents needed to be convinced that their children can continue their study at school by increasing their knowledge on whirlwind and anticipating its impacts.

■ 416 students and 55 teachers participated in Emergency Response and Risk Reduction workshops focusing on extreme weather as well as a simulation exercise for responding to whirlwind events.

■ School kits (writing books, school bags, pencil cases, pencils and pens) were distributed to 499 boys and 506 girls

■ 15 schools each received 420 books for their libraries, and 171 units of educational tools and equipment.

■ Eight child-friendly spaces were established and made operational with the attendance of 557 children.

■ Emergency Response and Risk Reduction training sessions focusing on extreme weather were conducted for 213 community leaders and members. They were also equipped with 15 packages of ‘first response equipment’ consisting of first aid medicine, stretchers, bags, tent, tarpaulins, chainsaw, megaphone, and radio communication equipment. This equipment is considered crucial to save lives as the children and their families live in small islands with poor logistical access, meaning external assistance may not arrive in the first hours or even days after an event.

■ 1,000 disaster management posters were distributed to schools and other community places.

■ Value added: In addition to the assistance provided to schools and the wider community, the HRF engages with the local government to highlight the importance of disaster management and advocate for better preparedness especially early warning measures for whirlwind events, which increasingly hit small islands. At the end of the project, a contingency planning exercise was developed by the local government and local leaders with whirlwind events as the hazard.

Overview of Emergency Shelter and NFI Cluster


3 289,601 Church World Services (CWS), World Vision International (WVI), HOPE

Worldwide

Sigi District of Central Sulawesi and Serdang Bedagai of North Sumatra

Outputs

■ A medium scale earthquake hit Central Sulawesi during a public holiday, resulting in delayed emergency response. The situation was exacerbated by the remoteness of the worst affected area, which is hardly accessible and does not have access to electricity or wired telecommunication. The earthquake damaged around 2,000 houses. Following the flooding situation in North Sumatra, prices of basic items significantly increased and thus affected people were forced to compromise on their water consumption, as well as sanitation and hygiene practices, which exposed them to more health risks. Therefore, NFIs assistance was considered crucial.

■ 160 earthquake-affected households received temporary shelters, which can sustain for at least two years.

■ Eight packages of reconstruction tools (consisting of wheel barrows, block makers, shaping tools, drills, crowbars, shovels, saws, chisels and plaster board) were distributed to 180 people. Those tools were used jointly to construct the shelters and became community assets after the reconstruction works were completed.

■ Training on earthquake-resistant, temporary shelter construction was provided for the groups. In addition, 29 people (18 male and 11 female) participated in a simple disaster management and preparedness training session.


7

■ Total beneficiaries of this sector are 3,073 households, out of 8,354 affected households.

■ Distributed 2,000 cleaning kits (brush sticks, water buckets, mops, brooms, disinfectant and cleaning fabrics), blankets and hygiene items (shampoo, soap bars, toothbrushes, toothpaste and sanitary napkins).

■ Distributed 653 hygiene kits for adults (sanitary napkins, soap, toothpaste, toothbrushes, blankets, tissue rolls, sarongs, sleeping mats and tarps).

■ Distributed 420 hygiene kits for children (soap, toothpaste, toothbrushes, eucalyptus oil, blankets and baby powder).

■ Distributed 170 cleaning tool kits (wheel barrows, shovels, hoes, crowbars and buckets) to benefit 653 households.

■ Value added: The Government provided health assistance and one time food, NFI and tarpaulin distributions, but did not provide sufficient and longer term solution for shelter. Thus, the HRF’s contribution significantly helped beneficiaries prevent further deterioration of their lives and restore normalcy quickly. NFI assistance enabled disaster-affected people to prevent post-flood diseases and clean their houses.

Overview of Health Cluster


1 99,998.5 YAKKUM Emergency Response West Seram and Central Maluku Districts of Maluku

Outputs

■ Triggered by days of torrential rain in August, 2012 flood and landslide occurred in wide areas of Ambon city, West Seram and Central Maluku Districts, affecting more than 32,000 people for weeks. In most emergencies the Government is able to manage health needs. This particular project was endorsed in supporting Governmental health assistance for directly affected people due to the flooding situation in wide areas of Maluku province, which overwhelmed health practitioners.

■ Three Integrated Health Posts (Posyandu) were rehabilitated. Posyandu is a village-level health service center that typically provides health prevention, public health information and exercise, and simple health treatment monthly.

■ A total of 252 people (119 children under five years, nine pregnant women, 124 elderly people) received monthly supplementary food and health services. As equipment was provided, Posyandu attendees have their weights and blood pressure regularly checked, and children under five have their growth and development monitored.

■ Five IDP sites were supported. About 1,000 people were provided with healthy food while staying at the sites. About 700 people with health problems accessed medical services. Twenty latrines were constructed to maintain cleanliness and decrease the occurrence of diseases like diarrhea, acute respiratory infections and skin problems.

■ Value added: This assistance saved lives through early detection and prevention of diseases.

Non-food items ready for distribution

Photo credit: YEU

Healthy food preparation at Integrated Health Post



8

Overview of WASH Cluster


4 353,869 Yayasan Sosial Dian Desa, Catholic Relief Service (CRS), HOPE Worldwide

Thousand Islands of DKI Jakarta, Flores of East Nusa Tenggara, Ambon of Maluku

Outputs

■ In general, the water, sanitation and hygiene practices of Indonesian people are poor. During disaster, affected people are forced to compromise their water consumption, as well as sanitation and hygiene practices. In terms of the coordination challenge, different government agencies address WASH issues separately; causing more difficulties to get clear information on WASH needs, as data and information sharing is inadequate.

■ 63 latrines were constructed benefitting 4,320 people. 75 per cent of beneficiaries contributed some of their own resources (labor and locally-available materials) to the construction process.

■ One month after the project completion, CRS conducted an evaluation, with the following summary of results:

■ 99 per cent of households said the latrines were useful, 51 per cent said the latrines were built quickly, 95 per cent said the latrines quality was good and 95 per cent said they were satisfied with the overall program.

■ Coordination: Strong coordination arrangements were developed and maintained between CRS and the local communities. The Village Secretary confirmed that the NGO actively coordinated with village officials and reported their appreciation of CRS’s efforts on the latrines construction project.

■ Efficiency: Clear goals and objectives, in addition to formal and informal monitoring, were key drivers for success. The program was also timely. The relevance of the program, its simple structure, and the hard work and determination put forth by the program team were instrumental in timely completion.

■ Impact: The latrines construction project has increased the security of women and vulnerable family members, especially for those needing to use the latrines at night. The project has decreased the occurrence of open defecation reducing the contamination of water and health risks for the population.

■ A total of 2,000 m³ of rainwater storage is being reconstructed in Palue Island using high density polyethylene material. Frequent volcanic tremors have damaged people’s water storage, and thus, such material is required to prevent leaking of the storage. This project is considered crucial in this area that frequently experienced extended dry season. As of March 2013, this project is experiencing delays due to high activity of the Mt. Rokatenda volcano. The total population of this small island is 10,515 people, and this project will benefit at least 2,346 people. In addition, the project improves Palue Island residents’ awareness of sanitation, health and hygiene.

■ Value added: HRF assistances in WASH have contributed to the prevention of diseases that are caused by a lack of water access, and good sanitation and hygiene facilities.

Latrines with septic tank

Photo credit: CRS

Latrines in Thousand Islands of Jakarta



9

Overview of Early Warning System


1 99,979 Majulah Indonesia Tanah Airku Yogyakarta City, Sleman and Bantul Districts of Yogyakarta

Outputs

■ More than 290,000 people living around the Boyong and Code rivers are benefitting from this early-warning system for lava-flow. The system has been established for Yogyakarta Provincial BPBD, BPBDs of Sleman District, Yogyakarta Municipality and Bantul District and also connected to community groups along the river banks and broadcast radio. Local government officials were trained on the usage of this system. To address the sustainability of the system, the NGO MITA maintains the system and assists local government in using the system for one year after the project is completed. It is expected that after one year the local government will have sufficient capacity and budget to sustain the system.

■ Real Performance: On the afternoon of 25 December 2012, cold lava flow occurred and the system sent warning signals, which was received by provincial and district BPBDs, and volunteer groups. Similar case occurred on 28 December. Fortunately the lava flows in those occurrences did not reach populated areas downstream. From this experience, local governments admitted the reliability of the system and are committed to sustain it.

■ Value added: Following the Mt. Merapi eruptions in 2010, volcanologists have predicted a new threat of around 77 million cubic meter of volcanic material that can be released as lava flow at any time, which can potentially damage thousands of houses along the riverbanks. The loss of lives, assets and livelihoods can be avoided as the early warning system provides sufficient time for communities living along the riverbanks to evacuate.


10

Overview of Early Recovery Cluster


2 142,147 INPROSULA, PALUMA Magelang District of Central Java

Outputs

■ Following Mt. Merapi eruptions in 2010 that enforced evacuation of more than 300,000 people, the Government had not realized the value of its disaster recovery assistance but had closed it after the eruptions had stopped. However, humanitarian needs remained. Due to this time gap, vulnerable groups needed initial assistance to start their own recovery. This gap of assistance had also triggered small conflicts between IDPs and the hosting communities. Thus, early recovery projects were considered important to be funded by HRF. The activities of these projects are an integral part of livelihood support to the affected people and contribute to saving lives.

■ Total beneficiaries for this cluster are 791 households (859 men and 1,041 women) who were directly affected by the Mt. Merapi eruptions and who lived at IDP sites.

■ 112 hectares of agriculture land were recovered and planted with rice, corn and horticultural plants. Two water pumps were provided for irrigation purpose. Three hundred and eighty nine farmers, mostly men, participated in these activities.

■ 64 women received on-the job training, and inputs for making tempe, catfish crackers, and fermented cassava, in order to restart their food processing business.

■ 455 targeted households received 25kg of rice per month for five months, until the next harvest.

■ Four Disaster Preparedness Groups were formed and maintained, involving 455 households or 1,089 people (458 men, 631 women). Work plans and Contingency Planning in facing Mt. Merapi lava flow were completed and evacuation exercises for each group were conducted.

■ Value added: The HRF is used to help communities since the Government has ended its relief assistance and recovery support is yet to arrive. The HRF assistance contributed to preventing social conflict between host communities and temporarily displaced people.

■ Lessons from HRF Early Recovery projects were communicated to the Government through workshops and other occasions, as a way to advocate for accelerated Government recovery action and as input for the Government recovery model.

Interventions to safeguard livestock during an emergency contribute to saving lives


Workshop participants learn more about snack production as a livelihood recovery activity

Photo credit: PALUMA


11

Summary and analysis of achievementsIn general, the capacity of the Government of Indonesia to address recurring disasters is increasing. However, the decentralization of the Government’s system imposes local administrations to take the ultimate responsibility, including emergency response. Thus, humanitarian challenges remain as the capacity of local governments to provide humanitarian assistance is inadequate. In some cases, local governments provided very short-term humanitarian assistance and declared the end of emergency response phase. With the end of the emergency, emergency funds could not be used anymore, leaving humanitarian needs even more difficult to be met. Thus, HRF continues to play a significant role in Indonesia.

In 2012, 12 projects benefited more than 320,000 people. The projects provided assistance based on needs assessment and targeted vulnerable groups affected by disaster. Although the nature of assistance is emergency, the impact of aids is attempted to be longer term. The HRF was utilized not only for humanitarian service delivery, but also to enhance coordination, especially with local governments. Once the proposal is approved, implementing NGOs share their planned activities with local governments in order to confirm the humanitarian needs and avoid overlap. Some local government officials acknowledged that they get broader understanding on accountability from HRF projects, as the implementing partners were able to deliver principled, highly accountable and gender-considered humanitarian activities. Some projects demonstrated a number of humanitarian needs remain after the government ended the emergency response phase.

Information sharing on HRF projects was conducted by implementing NGOs. For disaster recovery efforts which need sharing of resources from local, provincial and national level, the government develops Disaster Recovery Action Plans. When applicable, HRF implementing NGOs shared their lessons, which became input for the Action Plan. Therefore, although the amount of HRF projects is relatively small, it plays a strategic role in voicing the concerns of disaster-affected population and bridging the gaps between emergency response and longer-term recovery.

OCHA-Indonesia made efforts to increase transparency and accessibility of the HRF. Out of the 12 projects, five projects were implemented by NGOs accessing the Fund for the first time. They knew about the HRF from OCHA Indonesia’s regular activities (including monthly UN-Donors-Red Cross-NGO coordination meeting and monthly Humanitarian Updates), from the OCHA Indonesia website, in which all information related to the HRF are made available, from other NGOs and from thematic coordination meetings conducted by different stakeholders. In addition, a quarterly HRF newsletter was issued for the first time in 2012, in an effort to disseminate learning to wider humanitarian stakeholders.

Efforts were also made to reach out to the wider NGO community and invite them to use the HRF. Despite budget limitation, HRF sensitization sessions were conducted by attaching them into partner events of Karina (Caritas Indonesia), CRS and Oxfam. NGOs from across the country attended these three events giving OCHA the opportunity to introduce the project management cycle of the HRF and the IASC Gender Marker to a wider audience of national partners. Some international NGOs are commended for their efforts to develop capacity of national partners.

The Global ERF Guidelines, which were endorsed in October 2012, provide opportunities to sharpen the management and operation of the Fund. The current practice is to combine Cluster technical endorsement and Review Board feedback into a single activity in hope of increasing the timeliness of the Fund. OCHA Indonesia is in the process to separate roles of Clusters and Review Board. No HRF proposal is further processed without Review Board endorsement. Furthermore, a more robust accountability and rigorous monitoring and reporting framework will be needed to ensure full accountability.

CAP and CERF were not applied in Indonesia in 2012. The last time that CAP was exercised was in 2005 while CERF was last implemented in 2009, following the West Sumatra earthquake.


12

Project Monitoring OCHA Indonesia’s monitoring tools for HRF projects include:

a. Field monitoring visits, including interviews with local governments and key stakeholders. While all projects were monitored internally by the implementing partners, eight projects (67%) were physically monitored by OCHA-Indonesia. In 2011, board members managed to monitor HRF projects. For 2012, board members did not monitor any HRF projects due to their different commitments. In 2013, OCHA Indonesia will develop a M&R plan, to be endorsed by HC and AB.

b. Monthly Humanitarian Updates, which are shared with the wider humanitarian community and government, include updated information on HRF and its projects.

c. Monthly coordination meetings, where OCHA Indonesia and HRF implementing partners discuss progress and challenges of HRF projects.

d. The quarterly HRF Newsletter issued by OCHA Indonesia, that include information on project achievements, funding updates, stories from projects and maps of HRF project locations.

Main observations made during field monitoring visits are:

- The understanding of disaster management of local governments is widely diverse. Emergency response actions mainly address physical needs and often do not consider that each group, especially vulnerable ones, may need different types of assistance.

- HRF project implementations were generally according to the plan and with good pace. Two projects were slightly delayed due to weather condition and poor logistic infrastructure. Implementing NGOs and applicant NGOs are encouraged to take factors into consideration that may hamper the activities when developing work-plan.

- Coordination with local governments should be intensified. NGOs can help the national government to share disaster management knowledge and skills with the local governments.

Some lessons from the project monitoring are:

- HRF is not only a funding mechanism that enables humanitarian responses; it also enhances coordination, especially with the government at local level.

- Community participation is high. Projects were designed to avoid beneficiaries’ dependence on external assistance. There is evidence of beneficiaries contributing their own resources when they can.

- NGOs, especially national ones, benefitted from advice and adjustment during monitoring.

In 2012, 5 out of 12 HRF projects needed a no-cost extension. Thus, the maximum duration of the project will be evaluated by the Advisory Board in 2013. Furthermore, and having received guidance from the Funding Coordination Section (FCS) at OCHA Headquarters, the M&R Framework will be developed.

A woman received NFI assistance in Maluku

Photo credit: YEU

ODSG mission visits early warning project



13

Gender ConsiderationsGender issues received high attention in the entire project management cycle of the HRF. The needs assessment requires an analysis of gender issues to be incorporated in the project proposals. When reviewing the proposals, OCHA and the Review Board review the proposed activities and outcomes against gender equality. In monitoring and reporting, project results related to gender should be described by implementing partners.

All HRF projects were Gender coded. An Early Warning System project was coded after the project approval, as it was incorrectly perceived as not applicable for the Gender Marker. The Gender Marker grade of the project implies that the system has provided early information on lava flows, which allow vulnerable groups, including children and elderly to be timely assisted and avoided from death or injuries when flash lava flow occurs.

The majority of HRF projects have shown results on gender equality, for example:

- Public latrines were sensitive to gender; - Family and hygiene kits contents were gender and

age sensitive; - Early recovery activities considered the roles of

men and women in their communities; - Some criteria to select project beneficiaries are

female headed households, widows and households with under-five children. Communities understand and appreciate the projects that have such criteria.

Despite the application of the gender code, measuring the impact or contribution of HRF projects to the overall improvement of gender equality remains challenging, partly due to the short-term duration of projects.

ConclusionIn conclusion, the HRF in Indonesia remains instrumental in covering funding gaps in essential sectors such as Education, Emergency Shelter and NFIs, Health, WASH and Early Recovery as the country experiences recurrent emergency shocks. Timely funding decision from the HRF has enabled implementing NGOs to meet the humanitarian needs in a speedy manner.

After having the Global ERF Evaluation mission visit Indonesia in November 2012, OCHA Indonesia has made several follow-up actions:

In the effort to recruit more donors, OCHA Indonesia met with several in-country donors and will continue this effort.

The focus of the Indonesia HRF is further clarified by revising the Terms of Reference and sharing it widely to in-country stakeholders. Humanitarian prioritization for HRF is described in the document. Cluster Leads and board members were consulted along the revision process.

To strengthen OCHA Indonesia capacity for planning, quality control and Monitoring and Evaluation, a Monitoring and Evaluation plan is embedded in the Terms of Reference. OCHA Indonesia aims to conduct field visits to at least 70% of HRF projects. Advisory Board, Review Board, Clusters, as well as donors and the Government will be invited to these visits. Results of

project visits will be used to enhance information sharing, including between Cluster Leads and cluster members.

While OCHA Indonesia will ensure greater inclusion of cluster members, in particular national NGOs, it understands that capacity building still needs to be further strengthened in support of national and international NGOs to improve the quality of HRF proposals, ensuring smooth processing and more timely response.

OCHA Indonesia will work on shortening proposals’ processing time and develop a more comprehensive database to monitor the status of the projects during processing as well as during implementation and closing.

Flow of information to donors and HRF stakeholders to ensure the transparency and accountability of the Fund will be improved through monthly and quarterly updates, in addition to this annual report.

OCHA Indonesia will continue to focus on increasing the participation of national NGOs with its outreach activities and meetings with them.

In line with the above, the HRF Secretariat will enhance monitoring and evaluation and increase the participation of clusters. OCHA has already taken steps to translate HRF guidelines into Indonesian Language as an effort to reach out to more local and national NGOs.


14

Glossary AusAID The Australian Agency for International Development

BNPB National Agency for Disaster Management (Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana)

BPBD Provincial and District/Municipality Agency for Disaster Management (Badan Penanggulangan Bencana Daerah)

CRS Catholic Relief Service

CWS Church World Services

DFID The United Kingdom Department for International Development

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction

FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization

GoI Government of Indonesia

HFI Humanitarian Forum Indonesia – a national NGO

HRF Humanitarian Response Fund

IDPs Internally Displaced Persons

IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent society

INPROSULA Institute for Promoting Sustainable Livelihood Approach - a national NGO

MITA Majulah Indonesia Tanah Airku – a national NGO

M&R Monitoring and Reporting

NFIs Non-Food Items

NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations

NU Nahdlatul Ulama - a national NGO

OFID OPEC (The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) Fund for International Development

OCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

PALUMA Perkumpulan PALUMA Nusantara – a national NGO

Posyandu Pos Pelayanan Terpadu (village-level Integrated Health Post)

SGBV Sexual and Gender Based Violence

SIDA The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

WASH Water Sanitation Hygiene

WFP World Food Programme

WHO World Health Organisation

WVI World Vision International

YEU YAKKUM (Yayasan Kristen Untuk Kesehatan Umum) Emergency Unit - a national NGO


15

Annex 1. HRF projects in 2012

NGO Main Sector / Cluster

Location Triggering disaster Budget (US$)

Gender Code

Monitored by OCHA?

MITA Early Warning

Yogyakarta City, Sleman and Bantul

Districts of Yogyakarta Province

Mt. Merapi eruptions (October-December

2010) 99,979 2a Yes

Inprosula Early Recovery

Magelang District of Central Java


2010) 76,214 2a Yes

HFI Education Thousand Islands of Jakarta

Whirlwind (January 2012) 99,223 2a Yes

CRS WASH Thousand Islands of Jakarta

Whirlwind (January 2012) 72,184 2b Yes

CRS WASH Thousand Islands of Jakarta

Whirlwind (January 2012) 81,685 2b Yes

Paluma Early Recovery

Magelang District of Central Java


2010) 65,933 2b Yes

YSDD WASH Palue island, Flores, NTT

Drought and volcanic tremors () 100,000 1 No

HOPE WASH Ambon City of Maluku Flashflood 100,000 2a No

YEU Health Central Maluku and

Western Seram Districts of Maluku

Flashflood 99,999 2a No

CWS Shelter Sigi district of Central Sulawesi

Earthquake (August 2012) 99,601 2a Yes

WVI NFIs Sigi and Parigi-

Moutong districts of Central Sulawesi

Earthquake and flood (August 2012) 90,000 2a Yes

HOPE WW NFIs

Serdang Bedagai District of North

Sumatera Flood (November 2012) 100,000 1 No

Total: 12 projects 1,084,818 67% Yes

humanitarian response fund indonesia - unocha hrf...humanitarian response fund – indonesia annual...

Documents