1 / 7

UNICEF’s past and future position on CMP Approach Dr. Samuel Godfrey

UNICEF’s past and future position on CMP Approach Dr. Samuel Godfrey WASH Section Chief, UNICEF Ethiopia Dukem, 19 June 2013. UNICEF’s engagement in CMP. Approach tested with support of the GoF for the last 7-8 years in Amhara and B.G.

mareo
Télécharger la présentation

UNICEF’s past and future position on CMP Approach Dr. Samuel Godfrey

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. UNICEF’s past and future position on CMP Approach Dr. Samuel Godfrey WASH Section Chief, UNICEF Ethiopia Dukem, 19 June 2013

  2. UNICEF’s engagement in CMP • Approach tested with support of the GoFfor the last 7-8 years in Amhara and B.G. • UNICEF started supporting CMP in Amhara Region since 2012, • Preparatory works underway to support CMP approach in selected (high shallow GW potential) woredas in Oromia, SNNPR & Tigray Regions

  3. Advantages of CMP Approach • To increase ownership of the community (improved functionality; increased capacity) • Change the role of the district from implementer to facilitator/supporter • To improve the efficiency of implementation • To enhance local private sector to come closer to the communities • To bring credit facilities closer to the community

  4. Critical Considerations for UNICEF • There are no doubts about the positive effects of CMP • CMP is mentioned in the WIF, but MFIs are not an approved funding modality by MoFED • UNICEF’s operations are determining the approach of financial procedures; MFIs started taking commission (from 3% to 7%) and it is not UNICEF’s mandate to pay commission to unrecognized modalities, and MFIs cannot be audited • UNICEF is accountable for children; there is no guarantee that CMP (via community contracting) will be implemented without child labour • Modality for non-payment for negative boreholes/dry wells under CMP in not clear

  5. Options for UNICEF support - CMP UNICEF will support some CMP interventions in 15 Woredas in 4 Regions Alternative mode of financing under a WMP approach is already there. The modality for Woredas to channel funds to WASHCOs will need to be explored with Government On the basis of the above, for EFY 2006, Oromia, SNNPR & Tigray Regions could channel funds for selected CMP through WoFEDIn Amhara Region, transitional measures could be applied for already transferred cash. UNICEF is considering moving away from Direct Cash Transfers for small projects because transaction costs for the organisation are too high; engaging in rather large scale RWS projects is envisaged. Supporting the CMP through the One WASH National Programme is one option Another option is to channel the funds through the Woreda/WoFED

  6. WOREDA Communities

  7. Thank You

More Related