Case study earthquake Haiti

1. Case study earthquake Haiti

3. General complex conditions in Haiti Poverty and violence 2/3 of the population lives with less than 2 US$ / day, ¼ in slums in PaP Biggest source of national income are private money remittances from abroad High level of criminality, gang incidents and violence Political instability and weakened national capacity to coordinate the assistance The economic and political center, the capital PoP, is largely in ruins Lack of local ressources Forests have been cleared, land is eroded and qualified manpower is scarce due to „brain drain“ to richer countries Heavy rains / hurrican season since July Prolonged emergency phase until the end of the year Internationale Hilfe 3

4. FACTS & FIGURES • More than 220.000 dead acc. MoH (Tsunami: 230.000) • Approx. 1,5 Mio. displaced persons live in camps, more than 650.000 live with host families. • More than 180.000 buildings destroyed or damaged • Evaluation of 82.000 buildings: 43% green, 27 % yellow, 30 % red • 4.758 schools either destroyed or damaged • Little access to sanitary facilities and safe drinking water / before the earthquake 80 % of the diseases were water-borne diseases Internationale Katastrophenhilfe 4

5. Red Cross Assistance for Haiti • Biggest Assistance Operation in the history of the Red Cross Movement supporting one country • Coordinated by IFRC Geneva and the IFRC zone in Panama • 21 ERUs deployed to Haiti • IFRC coordination of the Shelter Cluster • ICRC delegation in Haiti with focus on WatSan and family links • More than 1.400 international delegates deployed to Haiti • Red Cross total budget CHF 882 Mio. (= EUR 631 Mio.) • The Red Cross in Haiti – Detailed IFRC Report www.ifrc.org/haiti Internationale Katastrophenhilfe 5

6. Overwhelming needs Competing priorities Destroyed/damaged infrastructure Rapid influx of providers Outburst of mutual aid Highly stressed local officials Intense media scrutiny Gap of coordinations The Emergency Environment

7. Gaps and duplications Inappropriate assistance Inefficient use of resources Bottlenecks, impediments Slow reaction to changing conditions Frustration of providers, officials, survivors Difficult to identify decision makers Absence of Coordination

8. is essential and important is a result of intentional actions/a shared responsibility results in humane, neutral and impartial assistance, management effectiveness, shared vision, and donor confidence is a voluntary effort/a secondary priority costly and results in adaptation Effective Coordination

9. UNDAC Affected Population Donor Govt’s OSSOC OCHA Geneva Affected Government ICRC UNDP National RedCross Humanitarian Coordinator HCR MEDIA UNICEF USAID/ DART CIMIC WFP IFRC Ambassadors NGOs PNSs NGOs National military CEDERA IGOs MIL But the reality ?

10. Global Capacity-Building

11. High standards of predictability, accountability and partnership in all sectors or areas of activity More strategic responses Better prioritization of available resources AIM of the cluster approach

12. Develop overall strategy for the response Ensure that response is based on needs assessment and analysis Coordination with national/local authorities, local civil society etc Ensure Inclusion of key humanitarian partners Establish appropriate coordination mechanisms Facilitate participatory and community-based approaches Attention to priority cross-cutting issues (vulnerable groups) Terms of Reference for National cluster leads

13. The Role of OCHA / UNDAC • Provide the HC with analyses on the humanitarian situation updates, analyses and trends • Report to Donors on priorities and funding requirements • Support the incoming relief teams though establishment of OSOCC and facilitate an effective information exchange • Support the National cluster leads • establish inter cluster coordination mechanism • ensure information management systems • ensure that cross clusteral issues are addressed

14. The Role of the EUCP-team • Facilitate the links between the relief teams from the EU-Member states and the OSOCC/Cluster leads • Liaison with teams sent by member states to provide practical assistance on the ground • Advice to the cluster leads regarding possibilities for support from EU-member states • Co-ordinate the practical issues relating to the provision of assistance once offers have been accepted

15. Disaster Request Availibility? MIC MS Response Yes/No MIC Compiled offer Direct contact Disaster MS MIC Selection All MS informed EU Community mechanism

16. LEMA MIC LEMA OSOCC OCHA EU team EU team National Team EU team EU team UN team UN team On Site Coordination Within the EU Outside the EU

17. Emergency Response Units - ERUs to put together highly qualified pre-trained teams and pre-packed sets of standardised equipment • to be deployed within 48hrs all over the world • if a situation necessitates high reaction and affected national societies eg. regional Federation deleagtions are unable to cope with the situation 17

18. ERUs in the Federation Basic health care • Referral hospital facilities • Water and sanitation (3 modules) • Logistics • Relief • Information Technology and Telecomm. (6 modules) • Base Camp 18

19. Procedures Country of Disaster Host National Society Federation Secretariat Geneva Alert, Appeal RC/RC Societies Relief goods Personnel Cash HNS volunteersstart working Request for assistance 19

20. ARC Haiti Assistance Internationale Hilfe Disaster Relief Operation • Deployement of ERU Mass Sanitation Module (MSM 20) • Relief goods to IFRC / ICRC – through ARC E & S • Restoring family links (ARC personnel seconded to ICRC) • Deployment of bilateral delegates to IFRC and GRC field hospital Recovery Programme • 3 year recovery programme with the GRC - rehabilitation of selected earthquake affected villages ________________________ • ARC programme location: Leogane, west of PoP 20