1 / 29

TRAINING

TRAINING. 3. THE CERF GRANT COMPONENT. SESSION. WORKSHOP. Rapid Response Promote early action and response to reduce loss of life Enhance response to time-critical requirements Underfunded Emergencies Strengthen core elements of humanitarian response in underfunded crises.

otis
Télécharger la présentation

TRAINING

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. TRAINING 3 THE CERF GRANT COMPONENT SESSION WORKSHOP

  2. Rapid Response Promote early action and response to reduce loss of life Enhance response to time-critical requirements Underfunded Emergencies Strengthen core elements of humanitarian response in underfunded crises THE CERF GRANT COMPONENT Objectives by Grant Window

  3. Allocations to new needs Process initiated by RC/HC, with the support of the HCT ERC’s decision-making based on best information available at time of application (i.e. needs assessments) Timeframe for implementation is six months THE CERF GRANT COMPONENT Differences Rapid Response Underfunded Emergencies • Regular allocation to poorly funded emergencies: twice a year • Process initiated at headquarters • ERC selects countries and provides an amount (upon consultation with CERF, UN agency headquarters and OCHA) • Selection of recipient countries based on analysis of funding and vulnerability data • RC/HCs and HCTs then prioritize and submit projects for funding • Timeframe for implementation is around 9 months

  4. Bolivia Floods 2011 DR Congo 2010 IDP Crisis Haiti 2011 Cholera Outbreak Ethiopia 2011 Refugee Crisis Zimbabwe 2011 Chronic Food Insecurity THE CERF GRANT COMPONENT Exercise Case Grant window • Rapid Response • Underfunded Emergencies • Rapid Response • Rapid Response • Underfunded Emergencies

  5. TRAINING 3 RAPID RESPONSE WINDOW SESSION WORKSHOP

  6. Promote early action and response sudden onset emergencies or crises, both natural disasters and complex emergencies rapid deteriorations of existing complex emergencies Enhance response to time-critical requirements: respond to slow-onset natural disasters time critical funds to prevent escalation, reduce costs & impact RAPID RESPONSE WINDOW Objectives Maximum allocation per emergency $30 million

  7. RAPID RESPONSE WINDOW Decision-Making Process

  8. Selected projects should be: (a) based on needs assessments, (b) essential for the immediate humanitarian response (prioritized by the RC/HC and Humanitarian Country Team), (c) life-saving, as defined by the CERF criteria (LSC). Grant period: Funds must be expended and activities completed within 6 months of disbursement RAPID RESPONSE WINDOW Project Selection Criteria NEW !!

  9. RAPID RESPONSE WINDOW Flash Appeal and CERF Rapid Response • Within the context of a sudden humanitarian crisis, the RC/HC determines whether an inter-agency response is required. If yes, rapid needs assessments are undertaken and roles and responsibilities are assigned (including cluster/sector leads) • RC/HC triggers a Flash Appeal and HCT/partners begin defining humanitarian needs, priority sectors, projects, etc. • At the same time, RC/HC may make a CERF request to jump start planned operations. Based on a draft response strategy, RC/HC determines CERF funding priorities, collects project proposals and prepares package for the ERC and CERF Secretariat. The RC/HC immediately sends whichever is ready first. The projects proposed to the CERF must be included in the Flash Appeal.

  10. RAPID RESPONSE WINDOW New Umbrella LoU

  11. RAPID RESPONSE WINDOW Example Philippines 2011 Flooding • OCHA Philippines contacted CERF on behalf of HC in regard to potential submission in response to floods on 28 June. CERF Secretariat forwarded current application template and guidance. • Telecom held with CERF Secretariat and OCHA Philippines on 30 June – to discuss submission and answer questions. • Draft submission received on 8 July – CERF responded with comments on the same day; • Official submission received on 13 July; two projects were fine; clarifications were requested by email on the same day; • 14 July a revised submission was received addressing all clarifications.

  12. TRAINING 3 UNDERFUNDED EMERGENCIES WINDOW SESSION WORKSHOP

  13. Objective: Promote equitable response to protracted crises Two rounds per year (January / February & July / August) Approximately 1/ 3 of grant element In 2011: Total reserved for UFE window is $144 million out of $450 million available for both windows UNDERFUNDED EMERGENCIES WINDOW The Basics • First round allocated $84 million for 15 countries – frontloading • Second round allocated $60 million for 10 countries

  14. UNDERFUNDED EMERGENCIES WINDOW Process

  15. 28 April 2011 Launch of the process 10 May 2011 1st agency HQs Consultation (UF Working Group) 30 May 2011 CERF completes CAP funding analysis based on FTS reporting 31 May 2011 Deadline for agency recommendations of 8 non-CAP countries 3 June 2011 Deadline funding and severity analysis for CAP and non-CAP countries followed by consultations Between 3 June 2011 Further consultations with UN agencies and IOM, within OCHA and with 15 July 2011 and RC/HCs to finalize country selection and apportionment By 15 July 2011 ERC announces selected countries and allocations 30 July 2011 RC/HC’s office to submit one-page prioritization strategy 22 August 2011Deadline for CAP country application packages 29 August 2011Deadline for Non-CAP country application packages by RC/HCs 30 September 2011 Closure of 2nd 2011 UF round UNDERFUNDED EMERGENCIES WINDOW Timeline 2nd 2011 UFE Round April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 August 2011 September 2011

  16. UNDERFUNDED EMERGENCIES WINDOW Case Study Ethiopia 2011 Chronic Food Insecurity • Underfunded Working Group (UFWG) members recommended Ethiopia due to: • the chronic food insecurity situation compounded by drought and the rise in food prices. • The ERC recommended an underfunded allocation of US$11 million and encouraged the Humanitarian Country Team to focus the allocation to avoid spreading the funds too thinly across a large emergency. • The Humanitarian Country Team in Ethiopia also requested a rapid response allocation to address a sudden rise in malnutrition in a particular region. • Due attention was required to ensure that underfunded and rapid response grants were well-coordinated.

  17. UNDERFUNDED EMERGENCIES WINDOW Case Study Haiti 2011 CAP Mid-Year Review • An underfunded allocation was not recommended for Haiti (2nd round), due to: • The original Haiti CAP included significant early recovery and recovery requirements that were significantly reduced or eliminated during the Mid-Year Review process, increasing the overall coverage. • Additionally, CAP funding figures most likely did not reflect the total available funds carried over from 2010. • Rapid response funds were made available in January 2011 for the cholera outbreak and additional funds could be made available during the upcoming hurricane season, if required.

  18. TRAINING 3 APPLICATION PROCEDURE (FOR RAPID RESPONSE AND UNDERFUNDED EMERGENCIES) SESSION WORKSHOP

  19. Template available at: (http://cerf.un.org). For countries with an appeal (CAP or Flash Appeal), it is expected that proposals submitted to the CERF complement activities prioritized in the appeal. The OCHA field or regional office supports the RC/HC in facilitating the application process. In all cases proposals should be sent as a package with a cover letter from the RC/HC to the ERC – with a copy to the CERF Secretariat (cerf@un.org). CERF Application Procedure CERF Application Template

  20. CERF Application Procedure Composition of a CERF grant package • Prepared by the Office of the RC/HC with the support of OCHA and the inputs of the Humanitarian Country Team, to be sent to the ERC • Cover letter • I. Applicant information • II. Overall grant request • Summary • B) Humanitarian context and response • C) Grant request justification • D) Project allocation table • Prepared by the agencies requesting funds • III. Agency project proposal (narrative and budget)

  21. CERF Application Procedure Cover Letter (by the RC/RC) example

  22. CERF Application Procedure I. Applicant Information

  23. CERF Application Procedure II. Overall grant request - Summary

  24. CERF Application Procedure II. Overall grant request – Context & Justification

  25. CERF Application Procedure II. Overall grant request – Project allocation table

  26. CERF Application Procedure II. Overall grant request – Project allocation table example

  27. CERF Application Procedure III. Agency project proposals

  28. CERF Application Procedure III. Agency project proposals (2)

  29. TRAINING 3 QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS SESSION THANK YOU

More Related