south sudan - danish refugee council | drc south sudan strategic programme document (spd) 2017 –...

South Sudan

Photo; Demelash Defar, seeds distribution at Lelo payam, Malakal county

Danish Refugee Council

Strategic Programme Document

2017 - 2019

DRC South Sudan Strategic Programme Document (SPD) 2017 – 2019 2

Contents

.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1

List of acronyms ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................. 4

2. Situational analysis .................................................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 general analysis ................................................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Political and security ......................................................................................................................................... 5

2.3 Economic and social .......................................................................................................................................... 6

2.4 Conflict analysis ................................................................................................................................................... 7

2.5 Displacement analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 9

2.6 Capacity and willingness of duty bearers ............................................................................................ 10

2.7 Humanitarian needs ....................................................................................................................................... 11

2.8 Humanitarian access ...................................................................................................................................... 12

3. DRC vision and objectives .................................................................................................................................. 13

3.1 Vision ............................................................................................................................................................... 13

3.2 Programmatic and operational objectives ........................................................................................... 14

3.3 Critical operational principles ..................................................................................................................... 16

4. Capability ..................................................................................................................................................................... 17

4.1. Relations with key stakeholders and partners ................................................................................. 17

4.2. DRC’s capacity ................................................................................................................................................. 17

5. Risk Matrix .............................................................................................................................................................. 20

6. Annex ........................................................................................................................................................................ 21

6.1 Map of area of operation ............................................................................................................................. 21

6.2 Response framework objectives South Sudan .................................................................................. 22

6.3 DRC risk matrix and mitigation actions ................................................................................................ 24


List of acronyms

AVR Armed Violence Reduction

BFU Budget Follow Up

CCCM Camp Coordination and Camp Management CBO Community Based Organization

CDRS Community Driven Recovery and Safety CHS Core Humanitarian Standards

CME Conflict Management Education

CSC Community Safety Committees CSP Community Safety Plans

CoC Code of Conduct COHA Cessation of Hostilities Agreement

DRC Danish Refugee Committee DDG Danish Demining Group

ERW Explosive Remnants of War

FSL Food Security and Livelihood GBV Gender Based Violence

HR Human Resources ICWG Inter Cluster Working Group

IGA Income Generating Activity

IGAD Governmental Authority on Development IMSMA Information Management System for Mine Action

MDF Maban Defence Force M&E Monitoring & Evaluation

MRE Mine Risk Education

NFI Non Food Item NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NMAA National Mine Action Authority NNGO National Non-Governmental Organization

PoC Protection of Civilians PWSN People With Special Needs

RMF Risk Management Framework

RRC Relief and Rehabilitation Commission RRA Relief and Rehabilitation Authority

SOP Standard Operating Procedure SPD Strategic Development Plan

SPLA Sudan People’s Liberation Army

SPLA-iO Sudan People’s Liberation Army – in Opposition SPLA/N Sudan People’s Liberation Army/North

SPLM Sudan People’s Liberation Movement TGoNU Transitional Government of National Unity

ToT Trainer of Trainers UN United Nations

UNMISS United Nation Mission In South Sudan

UXO Unexploded Ordinance WFP World Food Programme


1. Introduction

DRC’s Strategic Programme Document (SPD) provides the general rationale and fully integrated objectives for DRC’s South Sudan response to current conflict and displacements. The SPD defines

the strategies within a three year frame. It provides the broad view over the displacement situation.

In 2016, Danish Refugee Council (DRC)1 has changed its global response framework. The change

signals DRC’s reinforced profile focusing on three strategic programme platforms: • Emergency response aimed at saving lives,

• Solutions to displacement aimed at ensuring lasting integration in all displacement scenarios and • Root causes aimed at preventing displacement triggers and causes

DRC started operating in South Sudan in 2005 following the Comprehensive Peace Agreement. Mine

action programming by the Danish Demining Group (DDG) began in 2006. In South Sudan DRC has

proven technical and organizational capacity in multi sector and integrated emergency responses – for both refugees and IDPs - the components of which include: Camp Coordination and Camp

Management (CCCM); protection and GBV; emergency and transitional shelter; NFI distributions; food security and livelihoods, including income generating activities (IGAs), agricultural support and farmer

field schools, Mine Action and Armed Violence Reduction (AVR). DRC has ongoing projects and

operational bases in: Maban, Pariang, Bentiu, Malakal and Melut, see below table. In Malakal and Bentiu, DRC has presence in the Protection of Civilians (PoC) sites, operating from humanitarian

hubs, located within the UNMISS bases, from which activities in the PoCs and counties are supported.

Table 1: Current DRC operation bases in South Sudan

State Location main base

Satellite base

Outreach location

Target group

Upper Nile state

Maban Doro, Batil

Gendrassa, Kaya Refugee, IDP, host community and communities affected by UXO

Melut -

KhorAdar, Dethoma’s, Malek, New Paloich School, Melut PoC

IDP in PoC, IDP and host community and communities affected by UXO

Malakal PoC

Wau Shilluk, Kodok

Malakal town, Fashoda, Manyo county


Unity state

Bentiu PoC

-

Bentiu town, Rubkona town, Guit, Koch, Mayom counties


Pariang (Ayuong Thok)

- Pamir Refugee, and host community

DDG Roving - - Communities affected by UXO

1 Danish Demining Group is a technical Mine Action Division within the Danish Refugee Council


2. Situational analysis

2.1 general analysis The key situational analysis by DRC in South Sudan is presented in the next sections. In summary the

situation is characterized by ongoing civil war, with continuous conflict in numerous parts of the country of varying intensity, and a very fragile and conflict ridden political establishment.

DRC is anticipating that since the dramatic setback to the peace process in July 2016, the South

Sudan context is set to be characterised by conflict and uncertainty. With the Transitional Government of National Unity (TGoNU) apparently on its knees, it is expected that South Sudan will

continue to face high insecurity and violence, lack of governance and justice, collapsed economic situation, food insecurity in majority of the population, increase of displacement, very limited return

of South Sudanese refugees back in country. Intercommunal tension is likely to become more and more entrenched in South Sudan, with rifts emerging between tribal groups who were not add odds

in previous years. Therefore flexibility in strategy and programme design, allowing for adaptability of

activities and planned interventions, is needed in the coming years. In anticipation of further deterioration, DRC intends to explore remote management options as a means to ensure continued

programme continuity, should this be needed.

2.2 Political and security

The Cessation of Hostilities Agreement (COHA) was signed in August 2015. It was brokered

by the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and with heavy international pressure including threat of sanctions. The Transitional Government of National Unity

(TGoNU) was formed and with the arrival of the First Vice President and opposition leader Riek Machar in April the expectations of the population grew.

In the period between April and July 2016 the TGoNU were not able to show that

controversial issues were being discussed or agreed upon. The main controversial issue being President Kiir’s 28 states decree of October 2015, which undermined the terms of the peace

agreement and sought to side-line tribal groups in South Sudan to the advantage of the

Dinka. In line with the terms of the peace agreement, in advance of his return to Juba, First Vice

President Machar’s SPLA-IO were permitted to deploy a lightly armed contingent to ensure

his security. However, in July 2016 widespread clashes erupted in in Juba when forces loyal to President Kiir and forces loyal to First Vice President Machar clashed at the Presidential

Palace. A period of three days of sustained fighting followed – including a host of heavy

weapons and attack helicopters – that resulted in the departure of the First Vice President and his surviving troops out of Juba.

After the departure of Riek Machar from Juba, the president was fast to announce a new First

Vice President; Taban Deng of Unity state. The appointment was condemned as illegal and illegitimate by Machar, but keen for the Opposition to be represented in the transitional

government, the international community, in time, accepted the appointment. The move split the Opposition along two lines; those loyal to Riek Machar (SPLA-IO 1) and those loyal to

Taban Deng (SPLA-IO 2), with Machar retaining most of his supporters – especially at the

grass roots level. At the political level the frequent reshuffles or dismissals of senior political figures will

increase instability, especially as these give the impression to be in favour of individuals with

military backgrounds belonging to specific ethnic groups, known to be favourable to President Kiir’s government.

Restructuring of political and administrative systems and setups can occur with no prior

notice, and may have significant impact on existing power agreements.

A number of people or groups are known to be close to the president and providing advice,

including Paul Malong (Chief of General Staff - SPLA) and Jieng Dinka Council of Elders. Both are highly influential forces with a vested interest in ensuring the Dinka continue to dominate

the political system of South Sudan. Factions and separations within Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), Sudan People’s

Liberation Army (SPLA) and Sudan People’s Liberation Army – in Opposition (SPLA-iO) and


other armed groups2 are likely to become more pronounced. The number of separate armed groups is increasing and defections between groups are common.

The affiliation in the region remains complex and fluid, the governments of Uganda, Ethiopia,

Kenya, Sudan and Eritrea have stakes in stability in South Sudan, though the support and affiliation could be changing depending on the context.

As a consequence of the fighting and de-stabilisation of Juba in July, the UN passed a

resolution to deploy a 4,000-strong Regional Protection Force (RPF) that will fall under the

command structure of the UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS). The plan has been controversial and rejected by some top political figures due to the perception that extra

foreign peacekeepers will further undermine South Sudan’s sovereignty. Foreign governments have been supporting the plan of the UN Security Council and as such the deployment may

take place in 2017. However, the government is likely to resist the deployment of the RPF

and it is not yet clear where the 4,000 troops will come from and when they might arrive. Since the July clashes and as a direct result of its opposition to the RPF, the government has

been active in stirring up anti-UN sentiment in South Sudan. UN personnel now face

additional measures in order to be able to gain access to the country. Harassment and violence targeted at UN personnel in some parts of the country has occurred, and is likely to

continue. The international community in general is also likely to suffer harassment from the

government as the economic situation worsens and mistrust of foreigners – particularly regional Africans and Americans – rises.

In 2016 there have been numerous cases of people going missing or targeted assassinations,

either of those working in the media who are outspoken or those who are politically challenging the Government’s position.

Increase, continuation and spreading of violence in insecure areas like Southern Unity and

Upper Nile state. However in 2016, the conflict has proliferated away from the more ‘traditional’ theatres, and into previously unaffected locations like Northern Bahr el Gazal, and

the Greater Equatoria region.

Besides that the abduction and violation of women in and around the PoC sites is increasing.

Public demonstrations – usually uncommon in South Sudan – could occur with greater

frequency if disgruntlement with the country’s politics and economic issues grow. House to house searches for weapons and people are likely to increase, and so are the

arbitrary arrests and detentions of national staff.

Crime levels in urban areas are increasing, especially in Juba. This includes carjacking,

compound robberies and increasing use of (sometimes fatal) violence. Illegal roadblocks will become more common, especially in rural areas/roads, demanding food

or valuables. Extortion is already common in South Sudan and set to become more

widespread as a means of supplementing the incomes of police and security personnel. The limited stability is highly dependent on individuals, so even minor incidents such as

illness have the potential to destabilize things quickly.

The government facilitated return to places of origin (i.e. moving people from Dinka ethnicity

from Juba to counties and states that was originally their ancestor’s land) was controversial

since these people might not have lived in these locations for generations, though can be anticipated to be continued strategy of government in the next 12 months.

Due to increased fighting between different armed groups, ERW contamination as a result of

artillery fire continues to be created, including alleged laying of new landmines in insecure areas.

There is an abundance of small arms available amongst the civilian population in South

Sudan.

The continuation of loss of lives, violations of human right and depravation is affecting the

population sentiment, which is becoming bitter in certain areas. On top of the sentiment and constitution of violence increased numbers of civilians are experiencing Post Traumatic Stress

Disorder, which is left unidentified and untreated, which influences erratic human behaviour.

2.3 Economic and social South Sudan is in a deep economic crisis with multifaceted and wide implications, and there are

limited prospects for this to change in the near future. Some of the effects of the crisis include:

2 Other major armed groups are not mentioned like the militia under David Yau Yau and Johnson Olony are not mentioned, however DRC is monitoring the different groups closely


Hyper Inflation and USD shortages: Price increase, undermine mechanisms that deliver

humanitarian assistance through the local market. As a result many contracts with suppliers

are currently in USD. The wider food security of the population is very likely to deteriorate further; and procurement will need to source more and more items outside of the country

due to unavailability locally or unrealistic local pricing. The local currency, SSP, is becoming a

non-preferred currency. Dollar shortages have already lead to collapse or withdrawal of companies operating in South

Sudan such as water bottling and food companies.

Both the price and production of oil continues to reduce, lowering revenue for the country.

Paloich is the only working oil field in the country at the moment, Salary payments for civil servants, military, police are infrequent and several months behind

schedule, leading to increased crime and alternative ‘income generation’ methods.

Supplies and supply routes are disrupted due to conflict, leading to a narrower selection of

items on markets, shortages of basic items such as sorghum and huge price increases.

Continuation of frequency of fuel shortages expected, INGOs storing fuel will increasingly

become targets for theft. Borders are being closed during sensitive periods, affecting supply routes and population

movement, particularly the Uganda and Sudan border, which was the case in July fighting

when all routes to Uganda and Kenya closed. The financial constraints due to the high inflation have effect in a number of areas:

Healthcare (and medicine shortages)

Banking (cash shortages) Education

Construction and infrastructure projects grind to a halt

Power shortages are prevalent Taxation and penalties on INGOs especially is likely to continue. With the validation of the

NGO Bill and the creation of the 28 states, NGO will face closer monitoring of the government

and additional administrative duties and costs. As a direct consequence of the high insecurity, disrupted markets and hyperinflation, the

South Sudan population is facing severe food insecurity. 6.1 Million people are in need of

assistance of which 4.8 million people are food insecure.3

The humanitarian funding is 42% unmet for 2016.

Due to the instability, continuation of violence in different localities in country, the mass

migration, the dilapidating basic services, the social fabric is diminishing at local and national level.

More civilians are likely to self-impose curfews4 as the worsening economic situation leads to

normal citizens being targeted for crime; economic migration increases. Health problems including cholera, malaria, kala-azar and other outbreaks will most likely

continue especially during rainy season.

Due to active fighting there is a continuation of loss of infrastructure. In 2016 there has been

an increase in stealing and looting medical drugs and destruction of health facilities.

2.4 Conflict analysis

During the year of 2016 the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement and the formation of the Transitional Government of National Unity collapsed with the violent outbreak of fighting in early July. As a result

of the fighting the First Vice President and opposition leader Riek Machar and his troops left Juba and ultimately South Sudan. A large number of political consensus and discussions remained unsolved

(including the issue around the 28 states). The situation in country which was already fragile and

rigged with active war in several locations remains uncertain and extremely fragile.

Map 1: Map shows current fighting and high insecure areas in South Sudan

3 Humanitarian Bulletin South Sudan, OCHA, issue 15, 5 October 2016

4 National DRC Juba staff indicate they stay in their compounds after dark


5

Related aspects in terms of security for citizens in South Sudan include:

SPLA structure is likely to increasingly fracture, and simultaneously the number of

uncontrolled armed groups that will align themselves to one or the other parties to the

conflict will increase. The three states (Upper Nile, Unity and Jonglei) where the violence and fighting was most

pronounced in 2014 and 2015 will most likely continue to be the conflict affected.

However other states especially the Equatorias and Norther Bahr el Gazal are also expected

to see continued violence and deteriorate and destabilise further. The fracturing of groups, formation of new alliances or weakening of existing alliances have

been seen to lead to new trouble spots and shifting front lines at short notice. At the same

time previous conflict areas are experiencing a decrease in conflict levels. Forced recruitment and child recruitment is seen to continue by all parties in many areas of

the country.

The usual seasonal pattern to the conflict is reducing due to weaponry changes which allow

for continuation of fighting even during the rains, though dry season will still experience

higher movements and intensity of fighting. The relationship between SPLA and the United Nations Mission In South Sudan (UNMISS) is

likely to further deteriorate.

Ethnic targeting or violence between communities is likely to increase as political differences

are increasingly running along ethnic lines and seized upon by opposing sides to mobilise supporters against one another

Inter-communal disputes, particularly those driven by agro-pastoralist conflicts resulting from

competition for grassland, water and migration routes account for 37 percent of all violent

incidents and 50 percent of all fatalities recorded by GRSS and UNMISS in South Sudan. In the current power vacuum state authorities do not interfere in local conflicts including the

wide spread cattle-raiding and associated violence, which is likely to get worse.

Intercommunal tensions are very likely to be exploited as part of the current broader conflict. This will include groups that were previously ‘outside’ of the past conflicts.

5 Conflict and Displacement Analysis, Weekly Brief, IOM, 5 October 2016


2.5 Displacement analysis Since the onset of the new civil war of mid December 2013 until 16th September 2016 more than one

million South Sudanese refugees are sheltering in neighbouring countries6. Of these, more than

185,000 South Sudanese have fled since fresh fighting broke out in the capital, Juba, on 8 July.7

The number of South Sudanese arriving daily into Uganda has reached new peaks, with an average of 2,854 arriving each day in September, compared to 1,594 in August and 1,727 in July 2016. There

has also been an increase in arrivals in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which has now received 40,000 South Sudanese refugees since July 2016. More than 32,000 South Sudanese have arrived

into the Gambella region of Ethiopia in recent weeks, seeking assistance and protection.8

Of the people remaining in South Sudan 6,1 million are in need of assistance, 1,6 million are

internally displaced and 4,8 million are food insecure9. There is a sharp spike of need in new areas, such as Eastern Equatoria or Western Bahr el Gazal, where malnutrition rates in some places are

reaching dangerous levels. More than 200,00010 11 people are still sheltering in the Protection of

Civilian (PoC) sites inside the UNMISS compounds i.e. 16% of the overall total of internally displaced people in South Sudan. 1,3 Million IDPs remain scattered in various locations, including in hard to

reach areas.

The active fighting in geographic areas is in direct correlation to displacement. In 2016 a number of locations, previously not affected by active fighting, has been dragged into war of the two main

armed groups i.e. Maridi, Mundri, Yambio, Nzara, Tambur in Western Equatoria, Yei, Kajo Keji,

Lainya, Morobo, Juba in Central Equatoria, Magwi, Torit, Kapoeta in Eastern Equatoria, Wau, Raja in Western Bahr el Gazal. The original conflict areas of Unity, Upper Nile and Jonglei states still face high

insecurity. The displacement pattern is quite diverse and depends on resources and protection options. The majority of people move on foot and may prefer to settle as close as possible to their

area of origin, while others seek protection in neighbouring countries.

Map 2: Map on displacement movement

12

6 http://www.unhcr.org/uk/news/briefing/2016/9/57dbb5124/number-south-sudanese-refugees-reaches-1-million-mark.html 7 http://ethiopia.iom.int/regional-impact-south-sudan-crisis-growing-civilians-flee-insecurity 8 Humanitarian Bulletin South Sudan, OCHA, issue 15, 5 October 2016 9 http://www.ipcinfo.org/ipcinfo-detail-forms/ipcinfo-news-detail/en/c/421964/ 10 Registered people in PoC, in some PoCs registration of new arrivals has stopped though people have been arriving the in the PoC. 11 CCCM Cluster Weekly Situation Report, South Sudan, 26 September - 02 October 2016 12 Emergency dashboard, WFP, September 2016


Unfortunately, continued conflict with shifting geographic focus will most likely result in more people being displaced in the years to come. Many have already been displaced several times, and resources

and coping-strategies are depleting. There is also evidence that with the high levels of food insecurity

in many parts of the country people are not only attracted to the PoCs for the physical protection but also due to the availability of food and other humanitarian goods and services.

Assessments suggest that recent arrivals to PoCs cite food distribution as one of the primary

motivations. The current number of IDPs in the PoCs is around 200,000 but in view of the above, this number is unfortunately expected to increase over the coming year. Increased humanitarian

assistance provided outside the PoCs may help decrease the number of new arrivals. However in view

of the access constraints to operating outside the PoCs it is not likely that humanitarian interventions can reach all critical areas and people are still expected to arrive to the PoCs.

In the coming years any large-scale return seems unlikely and most people currently in displacement

are likely to remain in displacement. However it is also observed that with shifting geographical intensity of conflicts, some people do return to areas that have become relative peaceful, for planting

purpose. In the case of Bentiu PoC, people residing in the PoC returned to their planting fields before

the season and the registered people in the PoC dropped. However, when fighting resumed in the counties people returned to the PoC.

In addition to the many internally displaced, South Sudan is also host to approximately 262,000

refugees13 from neighbouring countries of which refugees from Sudan account for approximately 220,000 people hosted in refugee camps in Upper Nile and Unity States. Sudanese refugees are not

returning in large numbers, but anecdotal evidence shows that there might be movement towards

camps in Ethiopia. The SPLA/N continues to forcefully recruit in the camps of Maban. New refugees have continued to arrive throughout 2016, with some significant periodic influxes occurring in

particular into Unity State, as people have fled on-going conflict, including aerial bombardments in Blue Nile State, Sudan. Similar influxes can be expected in the coming years.

2.6 Capacity and willingness of duty bearers

There is a significant lack of capacity and willingness amongst national authorities to ensure that

basic services and institutions are available to all citizens. However, the relationship and willingness of county level authorities and ministries is good. DRC works constructively with several governing

bodies like Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Commissioner of Refugees, National Mine Action Authorities, Labour Office, Relief Rehabilitation Commission (government) and Relief and

rehabilitation Authority (RRA) which is a similar department in opposition held areas. A number of designated coordinating bodies lack the capacity to fulfil their roles due to reduced support in

resources (capital, human, training). Due to the situation in the country, humanitarian aid is seen as

a bargaining chip.

Military, police and armed militia are underperforming with regards to their responsibilities to rights holders. Their interests are currently tied to broader political dynamics, and therefore often result in

widespread abuse of power and direct targeting of the civilian population. Armed forces and police

presence at the local level is not assuring, as they are regularly aggressive and intoxicated and unable to carry out their core security function of enforcing rule of law. Recruitment of youth is an

issue throughout the country representing a clear departure from the mandate of these duty bearers. Solicitation for bribes and engagement in corrupt activities is rampant as the armed forces find

alternative coping mechanism to the deteriorated economic situation. Police capacities are rendered

useless in heavily militarised contexts, where the military effectively takes over responsibility for policing (at times, through force/intimidation, eg, Yei). Conversely, in its areas of operations DDG has

forged a working relationship with military and police to ensure clearance of mines and ERW, in some cases finding them to be effective key informants regarding the whereabouts of dangerous items.

The judiciary in South Sudan consists of both statutory and traditional bodies that handle different

levels of civil / criminal cases. Statutory capacity remains very weak outside of Juba, and at all levels

actors within judiciary rarely hold a strong understanding of due process, the Rule of Law or basic tenants of international human rights / humanitarian law. DRC has some experience working directly

13 UNHCR Operational update, 18/2016, 30th September 2016


with the judiciary through its Protection programme in Maban. In this case willingness to develop understanding of these principles has been strong, with DRC staff providing trainings to the County

Prosecutor. Generally, however, the disconnect between statutory and criminal law in practice

remains substantial. Given traditional norms prevailing in many areas of South Sudan, traditional courts often treat victims of sexual and gender based violence (SGBV) unfavorably, allowing room for

acts of SGBV to be committed with relative impunity.

UNMISS, the peacekeeping mission in South Sudan with a Chapter 7 mandate, has a strained relationship with humanitarian actors and the IDPs residing in the PoC. The population is increasingly

depending on the humanitarian community to provide basic services – as well as physical protection

within the UNMISS PoC sites. Within the PoC, the capacity of the UNMISS is high, though the willingness and credibility is under investigation with numerous incidents in 2016 where UNMISS is

not exercising its mandate to protect when people are being violated. UNMISS has also exhibited a different philosophy to those of humanitarian agencies. There is a variance of position on whether or

not to encourage IDPs to move out of the PoC sites.

In view of the civil war, and the involvement of duty bearers in the warring factions, DRC will remain

careful in the collaboration with duty bearers over the coming year. Most of the interaction with duty bearers will be limited to negotiations for access to deliver assistance to the people in need.

2.7 Humanitarian needs

Many IDPs are facing poor prospects for return, not only due to continued insecurity, but also due to

loss of housing, assets and livelihoods and destruction of infrastructure and services in their areas of origin. The majority of IDPs will most likely remain in displacement for the years to come. Even if

majority of the IDPs have been in displacement since late 2013 their needs vary according to where they are displaced and which resources are available to sustain their survival.

The IDPs in the PoCs largely depend on support from the international community for their survival. They have come to the PoCs for protection along with food, shelter, health, water, sanitation and

other basic services delivered within the PoCs. Generally women, youth, children and elderly are the most vulnerable and have the highest needs for both protection and life-saving interventions.

However, majority of IDPs are located outside of the PoCs, residing within host communities, in

collective centers, or in make shift spontaneous settlements. Generally their needs are as basic as

those of the IDPs in the PoCs (protection and survival) but there are variations depending on their relations with the hosts, and livelihood opportunities in the displacement locations. The IDPs living

with host families or within host communities are generally provided with some form of physical protection and have been allowed access to basic resources for survival. However with time these

resources are also being depleted. In these contexts depletion of and competition for scarce

resources is a big risk and potential point of conflicts between IDPs and hosts. Generally the IDPs are more vulnerable than their hosts, but needs are to a large extent similar between hosts and the

displaced and evolve around basic protection, livelihoods and access to services such as water points, health facilities and education. To mitigate conflict, assistance should not be targeted to IDPs only,

but should be given with a view to also support the capacity to function as well as host community.

The majority of the refugee population in Upper Nile and Unity states have been in displacement

since 2011, and are falling into the category of “protracted displacement”. Generally their most basic needs are being met in the well-established camps, but a clear decrease in services and support has

occurred in the past years, including a substantial reduction in WFP food rations, due primarily to funding constraints. In both locations (Maban and Pariang) tensions between the host and refugees

communities are growing over natural resources exploitation due to the environmental degradation.

DRC’s work in the refugee locations is increasingly moving towards promoting and implementing activities that focus on longer-term solutions and support sustainability and greater self-reliance –

including in terms of food-security, income generation and community self-management -, which will support refugees while in displacement and also prepare them better for durable solutions – whether

this is through local integration or through return. Supporting self-reliance will be a key priority in all

DRC’s refugee response interventions in the coming years. Furthermore, increasing a sense of interdependence between groups experiencing tensions (eg. through shared local markets) will help

to promote peaceful coexistence. Besides addressing root causes, the location of Maban where a


growing IDP population is also present, will need to be supported to implement resilience building and integrated programming. For Pariang, a new trend is being observed that migrants are on the

move between southern counties of Unity to cross the border in Sudan. The ethnic tensions of the

migrant population and the residents of the area are an area of concern.

In places where return is potentially possible it is often hindered by mine and Explosive Remnants of War (ERW) contamination. Mine Risk Education (MRE), survey of contaminated areas and clearance is

needed to allow for return to these areas. Furthermore clearance is essential in areas where productive activities are prevented due to existence of mines/ERW. Compounding this problem is the

fact that there remains a substantial information gap regarding mine/ERW contamination in South

Sudan, particularly in areas recently affected by conflict. As restrictive security and operating contexts have moved humanitarian mine action operators away from systematically assessing the scale and

location of contamination in any given area, the extent of unknown hazards further impedes the ability of affected communities to prevent mine-/ERW-related injury or death. Given weaknesses in

the nationally-managed Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA), more must be

done in 2017 to better analyse contamination that is bearing the greatest impact on affected populations, to prioritise limited resources available within the Mine Action sector.

2.8 Humanitarian access

Access continues to be difficult, and unpredictable. In the locations where DRC has a base contingency planning is in place to cater for emergency situations and to enable effective allocation

of responsibilities between humanitarian actors to address a sudden influx of population.

In order to respond to emergency situations in new locations, there is a great need to be able to react quickly to deliver aid to those most in need. The establishment of roving emergency teams will

aim to address those needs, when other humanitarian actors are not present or slow to respond.

There will continue to be areas that have huge needs that are challenging to access, either due to insecurity or bureaucratic impediments. Staff movement or staff selection will be further affected by

increasing fracturing and ethnic separation of the conflict. This means that DRC may be unable to

recruit preferred candidates, or may not be able to send national relocatable staff or international staff of certain nationalities to support in specific areas.

DRC has remote management plans in place as part of the contingency plan. In an emergency

situation where international and re-locatable staff are being removed form base, measures have

been put in place to ensure basic activities will continue with national staff. This is in line with the nationalisation plan and as part of the exit strategy. DRC is also keen to invest in working with local

groups and CBO/NNGOs. The presence and capacity of CBO/NNGOs is weak, nevertheless CBO/NNGOs can have major impact in reaching difficult to reach communities due to presence and

local language capabilities. In the PoCs no CBO/NNGOs are present but through the CCCM coordination local groups are keen to work towards a better living environment. DRC is keen to work

to strengthen the capacity of some of the groups to build on social fabric and ownership of the PoC

residents.


3. DRC vision and objectives

3.1 Vision

DRC South Sudan vision is that durable solutions have been achieved for displaced populations and basic rights are respected. The programme objectives for the period 2017-2019 are articulated around the DRC’s global response

framework, reformulated and contextualized to the South Sudan situation. 1. Response to emergencies: To save lives and alleviate suffering among displaced people and

their hosts

2. Solutions to displacement: To reduce displacement related risks and support and facilitate solutions

3. Addressing root causes: To promote peaceful, inclusive and resilient societies and address root causes to displacement

These three objectives are rooted in the core DRC protection mandate and in the DDG framework for Armed Violence Reduction (AVR). They are designed to be implemented in complementarity and

throughout all contextual displacement scenarios. Given the unpredictable context of South Sudan the SPD will focus primarily on 2016 programme priorities. DRC will remain focused on the IDPs and

refugees. For both caseloads there will be a focus on also including service provision to hosting

communities with a view to reduce the risks from resource-based conflicts. Conflict mitigation measures will be applied in these settings.

Figure 1: DRC response framework


3.2 Programmatic and operational objectives

Objective One

To save lives and alleviate suffering among displaced people and their hosts

This objective relates to the platform on providing emergency assistance. The emergency response

objective is designed around the three-tier approach;

1. Mobile emergency protection monitoring team. This team that addresses emergencies in country where DRC does not have a current presence. The approach will involve quick

exercise of protection monitoring and light footprint, to ensure people’s protection concerns

in the emergency situation are being recorded and humanitarian actors are informed about the protection needs of the people;

2. Multi sector emergency response team. In case the immediate needs of the people in the emergency situation, of which the mobile emergency protection monitoring team provided

information, are not being addressed by other humanitarian actors; 3. Continuation of programme interventions of camp coordination and camp management,

shelters and protection and responding to emergencies occurring in the locations DRC is

currently operative (i.e. Maban, Pariang, Bentiu, Malakal and Melut).

The emergency response is designed around the changing context in South Sudan. The current states, where DRC has a base, are fragile, highly insecure and often faced with immediate

emergencies of a displaced population. However, in the broader scope of South Sudan, dire needs

are also occurring in states and counties previously known as more stable. In order for DRC to remain relevant and a humanitarian actor responding to needs, the mobile

emergency protection monitoring team is addressing needs in locations where DRC does not have a base (and is not necessarily considering setting up a base). The response will be fast to initiate other

humanitarian actors to provide services to address immediate needs. DRC’s mobile emergency

protection monitoring team will be focussing on protection monitoring, assessing needs, information gathering and dissemination to clusters and other stakeholders.

DRC might consider intervening with a multi sector emergency response team under the second tier

when other humanitarian actors indicate they will not be able to address the identified needs of a population. An emergency light weight NFI kit will be distributed to People With Special Needs

(PWSN) in this approach, until the regular NFI pipeline of the UN is in action. This team will have

community construction or shelter, protection monitoring and coordination expertise and food security and livelihoods kits. This will be an intervention where DRC does not require to set up a

base.

DRC will maintain its presence in three PoC sites (Bentiu, Malakal and Melut) and spontaneous

settlements around Melut, and the refugee settings in Maban and Pariang and the surrounding areas around these locations. Continuation of programme interventions of camp coordination and camp

management, provision and repair and maintenance of emergency shelters and protection monitoring, identification of PWSN and provision of individual assistance will remain activities under

this objective. The experiences over the last year have shown that emergency situations regularly occur in these fragile locations. The humanitarian coordination of these locations is functioning and

thorough contingency planning is in place to address emerging influx of population and immediate

needs. DRC will be responding with technical expertise through protection monitoring, case management and mainstreaming in conjunction with CCCM and shelter/NFI assistance to the newly

displaced population under this objective. Objective two To reduce displacement related risks and support and facilitate solutions

The objective relates to the existing displaced population sides where DRC is providing services in the refugee locations (Maban and Pariang) and in the IDP locations (Malakal, Bentiu and Melut). The

populations are likely to remain in the areas in the coming years. The various population groups are providing different reasons for the inability to return (i.e. insecurity, destruction of property, ethnic


politics, etc.) and hence DRC is considering the displacement as protracted and is addressing needs on the medium term. Durable solutions to displacement are commonly understood as being

integration, repatriation and resettlement. However DRC South Sudan, under this objective, is

including upholding the rights of people while in protracted displacement, avoiding further displacement and working towards dismantling barriers to future solutions – and facilitating interim or

medium-term solutions for persons in protracted displacement.

In the coming years DRC will be building up a level of self-reliance for these displaced groups through livelihoods and skills training support and strengthening of local groups. This will improve the self-

reliance capacities of the population so that when return or local integration eventually becomes

possible, people are better prepared.

DRC’s agricultural activities including provision of seeds and tools, demonstration gardens and trainings, including the use of Farmer Field School (FFS) methodology are solutions oriented and will

focus on improving the access of vulnerable households to high quality farming inputs and

sustainable food production This will contribute to the adoption of improved agricultural practices inter-alia enhanced agricultural productivity. DRC will be laying a foundation for longer term solutions

driven programming in the county, in which current operations by most humanitarian actors are only limited to population in IDP settlements.

The most vulnerable population will also be supported with Cash for Work activities, which will serve

to boost household income during the lean season and improve access to the markets by enhancing

liquidity. Through Cash for Work rehabilitation of essential communal infrastructure will improve the peaceful co-existence of host and refugee communities. In Maban, DRC will support youth from the

refugee and host community in establishing small scale commercialised irrigation agriculture along the riverine belt. This is aimed at tapping on market opportunities provided by the many

humanitarian actors in Bunj town and the town population which is cut off from external markets by

the conflict. In the refugee locations DRC will also work towards transitional shelter and community infrastructure.

DRC will be exploring the opportunities and viability of increased use of cash assistance in urban

programming. Feasibility and location will be developed through a consultancy in order to guide appropriate intervention design.

In hard to reach locations, in Upper Nile and Unity State (for example Kodok), where humanitarian access remains highly constrained, DRC is increasing support. DRC aims to provide shelter and

community infrastructure support adapted to local community’s traditions. The shelter will be to assist the most vulnerable people. These will be expected to complement Food Security and livelihood Cash

for Work activities. DRC will continue to advocate for increased assistance to the population.

DDG will provide a roving response capacity in Unity and Upper Nile States. DDG will prioritize clearance of areas contaminated with mines and ERW where they restrict access to displaced

populations by DRC and other international organizations working in different sectors, as well key transit routes to key socio-economic assets (eg. education/water facilities). Similarly, Mine Risk

Education (MRE) equipping at-risk populations with knowledge and behaviors that can avoid injury or

death will further reduce vulnerabilities amongst displaced and host populations. DDG will continue to build on successes achieved with MRE delivery by delivering Training of Trainers (ToT) sessions to

local partners to increase the reach of lessons risk reduction strategies taught by its teams.

Objective three To promote peaceful, inclusive and resilient societies and address root causes to displacement This objective is a longer term ambition to address root causes of displacement and conflict. The situation of South Sudan is in many locations not suitable for longer term interventions, nonetheless

the areas of Maban and Pariang have been relatively unaffected by the South Sudan civil war (though has seen violence relating to forces of Sudan and host communities). In order to address the root

causes of local level conflicts DRC/DDG will pilot and upscale the Community Driven Recovery and

Safety (CDRS) approach in its current areas of operation. This will be achieved through activities


aimed at improving local level governance, enhancing employment opportunities, social services and security for conflict affected populations.

DRC will continue to promote the transfer of vocational and life skills to vulnerable youths and women in Pariang and Maban counties respectively. The support will enable vulnerable groups to become

self-reliant, through improvement of household income and livelihood options but the key aim of the activity is to bring together refugee and host community members in joint programming to promote

peaceful co-existence. By strengthen women’s capacities and self-reliance is not for the sole purpose of reducing vulnerabilities. It needs to be noted that vulnerable women are not necessarily

contributing to conflict, however they are considered to play a role in peacebuilding and are role

models for the youth.

DRC is working on Natural Resource Management to address root causes of environmental depletion conflicts between the refugee and host communities in Maban and Pariang. Depletion of communities’

resilience and their inability recover after exposure to shocks and resultant stresses has contributed

to recurrent conflicts over limited resources, lack of traditional conflict resolution mechanism, lack of access to justice for aggrieved persons and overdependence on humanitarian aid for survival.

Displacement of population has also contributed to immense pressure on land and its resources threatening the existence of the communities who live in it. A recent NRM study authorised by DRC in

Pariang, underscored the appalling situations of the effects of refugee settlement in the area over the past five years. DRC will establish Natural Resource Management community groups in both locations

and support them in establishment of tree nurseries, and growing tree seedlings. Fast maturing tree

species (3-5 years) will be promoted to ensure quick impact of the project in the medium and long term. Additional measure, such as awareness creation on tree harvesting methodologies, allows the

trunk to regenerate after the harvesting of trees for domestic and commercial purposes.

A successful joint DRC/DDG intervention is the strengthening of the joint courts in Maban, where

traditional South Sudanese, Sudanese and South Sudan judiciary are working together on rule of law in the four camps of Maban and the host communities. DRC’s Protection Team is working to establish

joint courts combining different traditional legal systems, to provide a platform for refugee/host groups in tension to resolve disputes in accordance with commonly accepted legal standards. The

DDG team will provide complementary technical support, conducting community level survey that can ensure the legal ‘terms of reference’ established between refugee and host representatives fully

reflect community-level preferences regarding rule of law and justice provision. DDG will also meet

with representatives within Maban’s local police force to sensitize them on the new agreements made between refugee and host groups.

DDG under its Armed Violence Reduction (AVR) programming will launch Community Safety Planning

(CSP) processes in Maban that will build community mechanisms that can map conflict patterns,

identify risks and capacities within target communities, and through an inclusive safety process, plan how the safety of the community can be improved. DDG will establish Community Safety Committees

(CSCs). The CSP process allows communities to decide on the assistance required by DRC and other international organisations. Whilst interventions could vary for this reason, DRC’s analysis of the local

contexts in Maban and Pariang has concluded that the interventions will likely include delivery of

Conflict Management Education (CME). DRC/DDG will conduct targeted trainings aimed at providing individuals at risk of engaging conflict or violent crime with personal strategies for avoiding recourse

to these actions as a means of addressing disputes.

Target population for the three objectives

Internally Displaced People

Refugees

Refugee and IDP hosting communities People at risk from explosive remnants of war and armed violence

3.3 Critical operational principles

Protection is a specific programme intervention in its own right both within the refugee and IDP Responses where DRC is carrying out monitoring and advocacy activities. However in all programmes

DRC works with a rights-based approach hence protection of rights of IDPs and refugees is at the core of DRC strategy and engagement in South Sudan.


Conflict sensitivity: Drawing on DDG AVR conflict sensitivity expertise, DRC has previously

been able to carry out regular conflict analysis and design programmes in conflict sensitive

manner. DRC will also draw on its conflict prevention and transformation inputs in line with its experience in implementing CDRS in different locations globally.

Rights based approach: DRC works with a rights-based approach in programming, hence

protection of rights of refugees and IDPs is at the core of DRC’s activities.

Age, gender and diversity: Project participants are not homogenous and it is important that

DRC take into account the wide range of vulnerabilities amongst the target communities when DRC designs, monitors and evaluates programmes as activities have different impacts on different

members of the community. In assessments DRC continues to take age, gender and diversity into account through disaggregated data collection and monitoring.

Accountability towards stakeholders and the communities served: DRC has developed

and implemented a humanitarian accountability action plan to improve accountability to project participants – in line with Core Humanitarian Standards (CHS) requirements. In order to ensure

accountability and transparency across the board, a Code of Conduct mechanism is implemented

and functioning. By late 2017, DRC South Sudan will conduct a self-assessment exercise to check compliance with the Core Humanitarian Standards. Should any critical compliance gaps be

identified these will be addressed. Beneficiary participation: Ensuring participation of project participants is an integral

operational approach that will be employed in all DRC humanitarian activities. Within both the

refugee and IDP responses DRC has been instrumental in the set up and management of

dialogue and communication platforms within displaced communities and with host communities.

Do No Harm: All activities will be carried out with a ‘Do-No-Harm’ approach. The DRC team will

utilize conflict sensitive programming tools that search for connectors within community groups

and understand the dividers or potential triggers for escalating tensions.

4. Capability

4.1. Relations with key stakeholders and partners

DRC maintains good relations with the host government at county levels of the administration as well

as at the national level where a relationship is required. This includes Ministries of Forestry and Agriculture, Planning, the County Commissioners, Relief and Rehabilitation Commission (RRC), and

labour offices. The Mine Action and AVR teams have regular contact both in the field and at a national level with NMAA. Due to the current conflict DRC are maintaining relations as needed but

currently not entering into any capacity building or strong relations. DRCs activities will be implemented in close cooperation with other agencies, including UNHCR and IOM and through the

clusters. DRC will also remain a member of the NGO forum in South Sudan.

DRC is an active participant in clusters relating to DRC technical expertise. DRC participates in the

national and state level clusters in protection, FSL, CCCM, shelter/NFI plus the sub-clusters of GBV and urban FSL and DDG in the mine action sub-cluster. The support departments are active in the

logs cluster and the HR working groups. In addition, DRC is co-lead at national level of the refugee

coordination meeting and hence participates as co-lead in the national ICWG. In the field locations DRC continues to participate and be co-lead in several state protection clusters.

4.2. DRC’s capacity

The mandate of DRC rest upon the principles enshrined in the relevant bodies of law: international humanitarian law, international human rights law and refugee law. DRC works within the applicable

domestic legal framework of South Sudan, and seek registration with relevant government

authorities; DRC is a registered NGO in the country. Acceptance from communities and authorities is essential to operate and is largely ensured through a participatory approach in programming and

systematic conflict and context analyses.


Human resources DRC South Sudan continues to harmonize and strengthen the human resource department. The focus

for the next three years will be on nationalization and capacity strengthening of national staff. All field

sites and departments drafted nationalization and training plans in July 2016 which will be rolled out in the coming year. The plans include identification of positions to be nationalized and identification of

capable national staff to strengthen in order to take over positions, currently held by international staff. A number of generic trainings have been conducted for DRC staff i.e. CoC, protection

mainstreaming, HR, Finance and safety trainings. A number of national staff, based on performance appraisal, suitable for their position and ambition, have attended training outside the country. In

2017 the national staff handbook will be revised to facilitate the nationalization. Every field office has

come up with staff training priorities which will be administered at field office level, Juba level, plus a few individual courses to be conducted online or outside the country. Emphasis on training will be on

growing management capacity and of middle cadres and enhancing supervisory skills of junior cadres. A pool of Training of Trainers will be trained and appropriate tailor made courses will be devised to

induct new or newly promoted supervisor/manager level staff to ensure that they are well equipped

for their new responsibilities.

Staff retention and timely recruitment remains a priority in order to avoid gaps in the departments. Visa’s and permits process continue to be lengthy since regulations and procedures for international

staff are regularly changed. Termination of national staff (due to funding or disciplinary issues) and the approval of the Ministry of Labour remains a challenge, despite the good working relationship

with the ministry and will continued to be on the agenda. Regular HR audits in field locations and at

national level in Juba will ensure adherence to the HR procedures and protocol is being monitored.

Finance DRC finance systems are managed at country level supervised by Copenhagen. In order to

strengthen financial management at the country level, DRC South Sudan has begun working with extended BFUs to ensure proper overview on expenditures (inc. commitments) and incorporating core

support functions like logistics, procurement and Human Resources.

Financial risk management and compliance has improved in 2016 and will continue to be a priority for

the next years. A number of Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) have been set and will be rolled out and implemented in the coming year to provide clarity on procedures and responsibilities of

budget holders and improve communication between various departments. Training both in field

locations and at Juba level will support the roll out of SOPs and extended BFUs for strengthened budget follow up and oversight.

Logistic and procurement

The logistic and procurement departments will build on the achievements of previous years. In particular, the procurement department is working towards having more framework agreements with

suppliers of the goods regularly consumed or reoccurring in regular project cycles. The department is

working towards a standardized equipment catalogue to support the development of the procurement plans of each project. To support the quality and speediness of procurement a SOP will be developed.

This will lead to reduced procurement lead times due to increased procurement planning (realistic expectations in line with DRC regulations and timelines for bulk purchases). In 2017 a revision of the

supplier contract agreement will be undertaken to adjust and iron out a number of commonly

experienced challenges of delayed delivery of good of suppliers and preferred delivery directly to field locations.

The logistics department will improve the quality of the warehouses in the field and Juba to ensure

proper storage management of supplies. The logistics department will be involved in project design to

guarantee sufficient allocation towards transportation, fuel, fleet and warehouse management. To reduce costs on cargo flights, DRC is working closely with the logs cluster, which is providing

transportation of humanitarian goods to remote field locations. A number of other SOPs will be developed i.e. vehicle maintenance and fuel consumption.

In the next three years DRC South Sudan’s ambition is to shift the focus from mere ‘compliance’ to compliance and quality assurance.


Safety DRC has the comparative advantage of three dedicated international safety staff and five national

staff. The Country Safety Advisor oversees the safety of all staff in country, analyses incidents and

trends and closely monitors the Minimum Operating Safety Standards (MOSS) and contingency plans being implemented by the Area Managers.

In Unity and Upper Nile state DRC has two NGO safety advisors who work with all humanitarian

actors to ensure access to independent security analysis and improve humanitarian access. In 2017 a SOP will be developed focusing on the safety assurance for working in locations outside the current

operating bases. For more details on safety management and risk mitigation, please also refer to

Annex 1 (Risk Matrix).

Programme DRC has technical coordinators in place for all technical sectors to ensure programme quality. The

coordinators are in charge of developing strategies for each sector and supporting implementation.

The sectors are Protection, FSL, CCCM, Shelter, M&E and for DDG Mine Action and AVR. The technical coordinators will also participate with the dedicated emergency response team when emergencies

occur in locations outside current bases.

Field Office Operations Living conditions in field office locations have been a challenge and have contributed to high staff

turnover. During the past two years, efforts have been made to improve the minimum living

conditions of staff in field offices. Improved living standards motivate staff and improve retention. Over the next few years, further improvements will be made and maintenance carried out to sustain

favourable living conditions. For field offices with multiple camp or location set ups, operations will be further decentralized to the beneficiaries. Overall, efforts will be targeted towards rationalizing and

restructuring field office operations to enhance efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery to

beneficiaries.

Monitoring and evaluation A country Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) framework of 2016 was further enhanced including

Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning components, including the monitoring system of IPT (Indicator Performance Tracking) a management tool.

It is critical for DRC to determine and show impact and to continuously improve the quality of its actions. In the dynamic South Sudan environment continuous monitoring through IPT will also assist

managers with on-going corrective changes in order to be relevant to the changing context and priorities. The M&E framework is in line with DRC’s Monitoring Evaluation & Learning Minimum

Operating Procedures (MELNOP).

The key priorities / main focus areas for the South Sudan Operation in 2017 will be documented in a

Results Contract with HQ: a document agreed between the Country Office and Head Office in Copenhagen to capture and monitor progress towards agreed priorities, objectives and indicators.

This captures the priorities for programme direction, quality and enabling factors.

Accountability

The internal Code of Conduct (CoC) system is operational and all reported violations of CoC cased are being investigated and followed up. In the coming years the ambition is to roll out a beneficiary CoC

reporting mechanism, in 2017 this will be piloted in two of the current DRC locations (1 in refugee site and 1 in IDP site). All CoC focal points in the field sites will attend a refresher training to ensure

quality of the system process and reporting. In relation to the Core Humanitarian Standards an

accountability framework will be developed in 2017 and actions disseminated to all staff. Each field site will also have a CHS focal point identified and trained.

Funding and donors

Due to the collapse of the peace agreement, it appears that funding donors are making a shift to less

bilateral government funding. Foreign governments are careful how to position their funding to the humanitarian needs in South Sudan. For this reason it can be assume that fewer emergency- and


development funding will be available in the coming years. DRC South Sudan donor mapping and funding strategy will be updated to reflect the current fragile political situation.

Implementation of programmes in South Sudan is likely to remain expensive: especially as logistics and procurement solutions in South Sudan are costly. Furthermore, programmes and operations are

highly dependent on international and re-locatable staff, due to weak local capacity. DRC aims to maintain a varied donor-base and will be pursuing new donors to support its interventions in 2017

and beyond. Maintaining the strong relationship with UNHCR will be crucial in terms of sustaining country interventions.

For new initiatives like urban youth programming, working with community groups and CDRD/S interventions DRC will be actively sourcing and engaging new potential donors.

5. Risk Matrix

Inherent high amount and high levels of risk are the normal condition in the environment of a fragile

state. In order to more systematically identify, analyse and mitigate risks, DRC, in 2016 introduced a global Risk Management Framework (RMF).

The RMF uses a structured and holistic approach to managing risks – distinguishing between contextual, reputational and institutional risks and assessing the likely impact on DRC’s ability to

reach objectives. The RMF was recently introduced in the South Sudan operation, and will be fully

adopted in 2017, including categorization of key risks under five headings: financial, reputational, legal/compliance, safety, and programmatic. At present, however, DRC South Sudan’s risk analysis is

still structured under three types: security, economic and political.

Part of the RMF also includes the systematic recording and review of financial liabilities in each

country operation, using a specifically developed Financial Liabilities Matrix (FLM). DRC South Sudan will continue to use the FLM as a management tool to record and assess financial risks, and will

ensure regular updating and reviewing of the FLM at both country office level and in Copenhagen.


6. Annex

6.1 Map of area of operation


6.2 Response framework objectives South Sudan Vision Durable solutions have been achieved for displaced populations and basic

rights are respected.

DRC/DDG South Sudan

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3

Response to emergencies: Solutions to displacement: Addressing root causes:

To save lives and alleviate suffering among displaced people and their hosts

To reduce displacement related risks and support and facilitate solutions

To promote peaceful, inclusive and resilient societies and address root causes to displacement

Ke

y p

rog

ram

me

focu

s

Monitoring of population movements and needs for a more efficient and contextualized humanitarian response and faster response

Collect and use data, information and evidence through appropriate information management systems in order to inform IDPs of potential return to their areas of origin

Enhancing community driven recovery and safety (CDRS) to address root causes of conflict, armed violence and fragility in a joint activity DRC/DDG

Be the first responder in providing mobile emergency protection monitoring assistance to crisis affected populations both in- and outside the current bases (country wide)

Support the establishment of a conducive environment and take timely steps in view of possible transitional and durable solutions through market studies and intention surveys

Strengthen the self-reliance of refugee and host communities in Pariang and Maban with market driven vocational training skills

Response with multi sector emergency response team with NFI, protection, shelter, CCCM when a gap is identified

Provision of seeds, tools and training of farmer schools for in current locations to strengthen self-reliance of the population

Establish conducive Natural Resource Management based on the priorities of the host and refugee population

Store a sufficient stock of light weight NFI kits for rapid assistance for the multisector emergency response team to provide to people in new emergency situation

Provision of mine survey, de-mining and Mine Risk Education in allocated locations through NMAA

Build the capacity of local rule of law duty bearers to provide safety and protection to affected communities

Respond to sudden emergencies in current bases with protection, CCCM and shelter programming, based on the responsibilities on the humanitarian actors contingency plan of that location

Establish youth-focused programming, including small scale commercial horticulture projects for refugees and host community members

Establishment of Community Safety Planning (CSP) processes and Community Safety Committees (CSCs) in Maban and Pariang

Support conflict and displacement affected population in regular camp coordination and camp management activities

Urban programming (inc. cash grants, IGA, skills training etc.) to be established further based on the needs of the population

Provision of Conflict Management Education (CME) through targeted training for individuals at risk

Provision of emergency shelters to newly displaced people and repair and maintenance of shelters in selected displacement sites

Provision of (transitional/semi-permanent) shelter and community structures in displacement sites and areas of origin


Provision of emergency de-mining and survey and Mine Risk Education

Support the economic recovery of fragile communities through livelihoods (IGA, VSLA, rehabilitation works), social cohesion strategies and community based protection

Strengthen working with existing community groups (for example women groups, People with disability groups, youth groups, elderly groups) on small scale programing (like environment) in PoC, refugee and IDP sites


6.3 DRC risk matrix and mitigation actions Type Risk Likelihood Impact Mitigation

Se

cu

rity

Attacks on staff at project sites or DRC bases (violence, loss of life, kidnap or abduction).

Medium High Regular review of safety levels (SLS system) and MOSS compliance at all sites. Continuous monitoring of security situation by international Safety Advisors in Juba, Bentiu and Malakal, and staff guidance according to situation.

Participation in UNOCHA access constraints briefings.

Carjacking, criminality Medium Medium Consideration of staff nationality and ethnicity in terms of recruitment, movements and their work-locations.

Contextualized Safety and Security training of all staff.

No vehicle movements after dark (outside urban

centres). Nightly curfews. List of ‘no-go’ locations. Evening movements done in ‘undesirable’ vehicles (e.g. no hard-tops after 18.00 in Juba). 24-hour manned safety-phone.

Localized evacuation and hibernation plans in place.

Armed compound robberies (Juba)

Medium Medium Good compound safety maintained inc. guards, lighting, walls/fences, alarm-systems). Staff trained on procedures.

Security conditions temporarily prevent access and project implementation.

High Medium If security conditions are deemed volatile or in response to violent incidences occurring, project activities might be temporarily suspended and staff removed from affected locations.

Security deteriorates significantly, preventing all access and implementation (resumption of open, armed conflict).

Medum High Remote management with national staff to ensure basic services provided to beneficiaries

Eco

no

mic

Prevailing economic stress deteriorates and increases crime and diversion of assistance.

Medium Medium Close monitoring of the economic situation and anticipation of risks to ensure mitigation measures are put in place.

Adherence to standard DRC procurement and supply-chain management procedures to ensure project supplies is well managed / monitored.

Close monitoring and careful selection of appropriate supply-routes and means of transportation.

Diversion of project funding.

Programmatic monitoring, including PDM, to ensure assistance is reaching the intended beneficiaries.

Diminishing / no access to In-kind support from UN pipelines (to complement activities).

Medium Medium DRC prepositioning of Critical Relief Items to ensure provision of some essential or specialized items to especially vulnerable individuals (EVIs).

Significant reduction in funding for DRC’s operations in Unity and Upper Nile state (e.g. inability to maintain

shared support staff, shared operational costs).

Medium Low DRC will actively pursue all suitable funding opportunities and continue to engage with its donors to advocate for sustained funding for interventions in South Sudan.

Should downscaling become necessary in a base, project activities will be supported from other DRC locations.


Po

liti

ca

l

Political decisions instigate further

localized violence, hampering movement of program staff and program supplies (e.g. creation of 28 states).

Medium Medium DRC will continue to advocate, through local leaders and at national level, for risk informed

decision making processes.

Increased regulations and administration imposed on humanitarian agencies (e.g. implementation of the ‘NGO Act’).

High Medium Procedures will be established to ensure DRC complies with all national legislation.

Advocacy through the NGO forum.

High inflation rates and the gap between formal and informal exchange rates, as well as seasonal price fluctuations will influence DRC’s purchasing power. DRC’s assumption is that critically high inflation will not limit

the ability to procure and deliver assistance at the foreseen levels.

south sudan - danish refugee council | drc south sudan strategic programme document (spd) 2017 –...

Documents