1 / 13

CONTRIBUTING TO FUND THE GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN SHELTER RESPONSE THE HAITI EXPERIENCE

CONTRIBUTING TO FUND THE GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN SHELTER RESPONSE THE HAITI EXPERIENCE. Objectives of the presentation. Provide an overview of the global envelope allocated by DG ECHO to emergency shelter operations .

joseph-head
Télécharger la présentation

CONTRIBUTING TO FUND THE GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN SHELTER RESPONSE THE HAITI EXPERIENCE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CONTRIBUTING TO FUND THE GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN SHELTER RESPONSE THE HAITI EXPERIENCE

  2. Objectives of the presentation • Provide an overview of the global envelope allocated by DG ECHO to emergency shelter operations. • Briefly describe on the Shelter Funding Approach currently adopted by DG ECHO in Haiti

  3. 1. ECHO AND SHELTER1.1 Budget breakdown by sectors of intervention (Global operations –2009) MAIN SECTORS: • Largest share of funding (38%) is for food and nutrition ( mainly under the Food Aid Budget Line) • Health (16%) and WASH (15%) are the other main areas of activity. • Only 6% of DG ECHO total funds was allocated to shelter in 2009 Source: ECHO annual report 2009 (Based on the main area of activity covered by ECHO grant agreements

  4. Global Funding of shelter operations (2002-2009) Total Budget Since 2002, an average 7% of TOTAL DG ECHO annual operational funds has been allocated to the shelter sector. EURO

  5. Global funding of shelter operations (without Food Aid Budget Line)2002-2009 Food Aid BL transferred from DG DEV to DG ECHO If one excludes the “Food Aid B.L”, the average annual share of operational funds allocated to shelter projects has increased from: from 6% (from 2002-2006) to 11 % (from 2007to 2009)

  6. 2. FUNDING SHELTER OPERATIONS IN HAITI2.1 Haiti EQ - Contracts awarded by ECHO2.1.1 Primary Emergency & Emergency Financing Decisions TOTAL BUDGET : EUR 21.1 MILLIONS SHELTER AND PROTECTION: EUR 7.1 MILLIONS

  7. 2.1.2 Ad-Hoc Financing Decision TOTAL BUDGET : EUR 80.6 MILLIONS SHELTER AND PROTECTION: EUR 29.9 MILLIONS

  8. 2.2 ECHO Shelter Approach – Haiti Budget allocated to “shelter interventions” (through ECHO’s PED/ED & AD HOC Financing decisions): EUR 37 millions (+/- 60% of ECHO shelter annual budget) Why the need for a “shelter” approach? 1. Shelter regarded as the sector hat requires the greatest funding commitment in the scope of the humanitarian response to the EQ 2. Absence of a DG- ECHO “Shelter” policy framework Guiding principles • ECHO core mandate • Wider internal displacement strategy (rather than a stand-alone approach) • Alignment with the “Internal displacement Strategy Outline” of the CSC .

  9. 2.2 ECHO Shelter Strategy – Haiti (continued) • Haiti EQ settlement Options (endorsed by CSC): • Point of Origin (house – plot) • Proximity Location • Host Household • Temporarily remaining in collective sites • Peri-Urban • Most of ECHO funding allocated to implementing partner’s projects implementing settlement options 1, 2 and 3

  10. 2.2 ECHO Shelter Strategy – Haiti (continued) 1. For immediate results: • Emergency assistance on some of the camps (subject to remain for months) to ensure minimum living conditions and safety (projects to reinforce initial emergency shelters in order to provide minimum protection for rainy and hurricane season, engineering works to avoid floods, facilitate access to water and waste removal, ensure security and protection etc..) • Advocacy to GoH for exceptional measures such as reduction of renter deposit, obligation of rubble removal and acceptance of T shelters on unoccupied plots. • Advocacy to GoH to free land and allocate plots for the creation of “permanent camps” (in line with urban development plans) and with basic infrastructures and services. Considerations for livelihood potential, protection etc should be considered prior to site selections.

  11. 2.2 ECHOShelter Strategy – Haiti (continued) 1. For immediate results (continued) • Assistance to host families outside of PaP. • Development of small scale T shelter projects adapted to ad hoc situations (on sites or on cleared plots). Selection of beneficiaries, involvement of local authorities and geographical location should be the main criteria of selection. • Assistance outside the camps (neighbourhood approach) to facilitate returns and avoid new movement to the camps. • 2. For mid term results • Advocacy to development donors to invest massively in development of housing projects and new suburb development (water and electricity network extensions, access roads, public services in schools and health facilities).

  12. 2.3Shelter solutions funded by ECHO in Haiti As an initial response ECHO provided emergency shelter for a wide population trough various partners. For “transitional shelter solutions”, the current projects have already been funded. • ACTED (ED): …. T shelters (zone II) • Finish Red Cross (ED): … T shelters (zone II) • UNOPS (ED): 400 T shelter (zone II) • Architecte de l’urgence (AH): 1.000 T shelters & 600 house retrofitting (zone II) • Oikos (AH): 600 T Shelters and 100 houses (pilot demonstration project) (zone II). • Concern (AH): 500 T shelters + provision for retrofitting and/or rental allowance (zone I) • French red Cross (AH): 3.000 T shelter (co funding) + provision for retrofitting and/or rental allowance (zone I) • Care (AH): 500 kits for retrofitting (plus 20.000 kits of reinforcement of emergency shelter) (zone I and II).

  13. Thank you

More Related