south sudan humanitarian fund annual report sudan hf... · 2019-05-01 · south sudan humanitarian...

SOUTH SUDAN HUMANITARIAN FUND

ANNUAL REPORT

2018

2 SSHF 2018 ANNUAL REPORT

CREDITS This document was produced by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) South Sudan. OCHA South Sudan wishes to acknowledge the contributions of its committed staff at headquarters and in the field in preparing this document. The latest version of this document is available on the SSHF website at www.unocha.org/southsudan/SSHF. Full project details, financial updates, real-time allocation data and indicator achievements against targets are available at gms.unocha.org/bi. For additional information, please contact: South Sudan Humanitarian Fund [email protected] Front Cover Hygiene promoters conducting awareness session in school in Kapoeta, Central Equatoria Credit: PAH The designations employed and the presentation of material on this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Financial data is provisional and may vary upon financial certification.

THE SOUTH SUDAN HUMANITARIAN FUND THANKS ITS DONORS

FOR THEIR GENEROUS SUPPORT IN 2018

http://www.unocha.org/southsudan/shf.

mailto:[email protected]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

4 FOREWORD

6 2018 IN REVIEW 7 HUMANITARIAN CONTEXT 9 SSHF AT A GLANCE 11 ABOUT THE SOUTH SUDAN HUMANITARIAN FUND 13 DONOR CONTRIBUTIONS 15 ALLOCATION OVERVIEW

16 FUND PERFORMANCE 18 INCLUSIVENESS 21 FLEXIBILITY 23 TIMELINESS 25 EFFICIENCY 28 RISK MANAGEMENT

30 ACHIEVEMENTS BY CLUSTER 31 CAMP COORDINATION AND CAMP MANAGEMENT

32 EDUCATION

33 EMERGENCY SHELTER & NON-FOOD ITEMS

34 FOOD SECURITY & LIVELIHOODS

35 HEALTH

36 NUTRITION

37 PROTECTION

38 WATER SANITATION & HYGIENE

40 LOGISTICS

44 ANNEXES 45 ALLOCATIONS BY RECIPIENT ORGANIZATION 48 SSHF-FUNDED PROJECTS 53 SSHF ADVISORY BOARD 54 ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS 55 REFERENCE MAP


FOREWORD I am pleased to share with you the 2018 South Sudan Humanitarian Fund (SSHF) Annual Report. The document reviews SSHF operations and demonstrates how the Fund was used strategically to address the urgent humanitarian needs of the most vulnerable South Sudanese in 2018. It provides an update on the management and accountability of the Fund, and a brief synopsis of results by cluster. I want to express my sincere appreciation to the Fund’s donors for their long-standing partnership and support. With funding provided to the SSHF we are able to respond to the highest priority needs on the ground in a timely and coordinated way. In 2018 their contributions exceeded $88.9 million, making the Fund the fourth best supported of all the Country-based Pooled Funds. Our collective thanks go to the governments of Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, Ireland, Denmark, Australia, Switzerland, Republic of Korea, Canada and Luxembourg for their generous support and advocacy to ensure the continuing relevance of the Fund. Funds provided by the SSHF enabled partners to save lives through timely and integrated multi-sector assistance, alleviating acute needs, reinforcing protection, promoting access to basic services for the most vulnerable people, and supporting the capacities of at-risk communities to cope with significant threats to lives, livelihoods and well-being. Furthermore, the SSHF reserve allocation mechanism was used to make a vital contribution to support Ebola Virus Disease prevention and preparedness.

Combining flexibility and strategic focus with its robust accountability system, the SSHF supported collective prioritization, helped ensure timely allocation of scarce resources, and strengthened humanitarian coordination, leadership and the efficacy of the wider response. The SSHF continues to demonstrate its commitment to the targets agreed through the Grand Bargain at the World Humanitarian Summit to channel funds through national NGOs. 39 per cent of the funds allocated in 2018 went to national NGOs. Looking ahead to 2019, the signing of the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict offers the prospect of new opportunities to promote recovery and development. However, the cumulative effects of years of conflict, violence and destroyed livelihoods that have left the country with immense humanitarian needs must not be overlooked. We will continue demonstrating the Fund’s added value in supporting direct implementation of integrated frontline services for those at greatest risk of mortality, disease and destitution. The SSHF will remain one of the key enablers of humanitarian response in South Sudan, not least because of its support for local partners and its unique placement within the humanitarian coordination structure.

MR ALAIN NOUDÉHOU Humanitarian Coordinator for South Sudan

SSHF –

Coordinating timely, efficient and effective

delivery of humanitarian assistance to

save lives

UNICEF Bentui PoC- Adolescents enjoying their time at the child friendly center

This Annual Report presents information about the South Sudan Humanitarian Fund during the 2018 calendar year. However, because grant allocation, project implementation and reporting processes often take place over multiple years (CBPFs are designed to support ongoing and evolving humanitarian responses), the achievements are reported in two distinct ways:

1. Information about allocations made during 2018 (shown in blue). The data describes funds allocated through new grants in 2018, and the expected results of those allocations once the corresponding projects are fully implemented. Since implementation of some projects will continue beyond the end of 2018, full and final results are not available at the time of publication of this annual report.

2. Information about all results reported in 2018, whether attributable to allocations made in 2018 or in prior years (shown in orange). The data is derived from all final narrative reports submitted by partners and approved between 1 January 2018 – 31 December 2018. These final narrative reports may pertain to projects supported by allocations in both 2017 and 2018.

3. This new approach to Annual Reporting means that the full extent of achievements will be captured over time through successive Annual Reports; however the achievements noted in any given Annual Report for any given calendar year will no longer be limited to those attributable to the funds allocated in that same calendar year.

4. Numbers of people targeted and reached through funds allocated in any given calendar year have been adjusted to minimise the potential for double counting where individuals may have received support from different projects under more than one cluster. The methodology used is the same as has been used for previous Annual Reports and is consistent with the methodology used for estimating the numbers of people targeted and reached under the South Sudan Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP). However, no offsetting has been applied where the same individual may have been supported through funds allocated in different calendar years.

5. Contribution recorded based on the exchange rate when the cash was received which may differ from the Certified Statement of Accounts that records contributions based on the exchange rate at the time of the pledge.

SSHF 2018 ANNUAL REPORT

2018 IN REVIEW

2018 IN REVIEW: HUMANITARIAN CONTEXT 7

Humanitarian Response Plan

7.0M People in need

6.0M People targeted

$1.72B Funding requirement

2018 IN REVIEW

HUMANITARIAN CONTEXT Key drivers of the humanitarian situation The humanitarian situation in South Sudan remained dire. Cumulative effects of years of conflict, violence and destroyed livelihoods have left about two thirds of the population in need of humanitarian assistance and protection. At the beginning of the year the total number of people in need was estimated at 7 million, a figure that remained broadly unchanged throughout the year with 7.1 million people estimated to be in need at the start of 2019. While the signing of the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict went some way to reducing the scope and intensity of the conflict, the country remained in the grip of a humanitarian crisis. Efforts by humanitarian partners sustained implementation of the response, however compounding effects of conflict, inadequate basic services, destroyed livelihoods and eroded coping capacities at community and household level, driving up vulnerabilities, with the ability of affected people to meet their basic needs severely compromised. Limited access to basic services Conflict and related economic decline continued to limit the Government’s ability to provide dependable basic services to the population at large. In 2018 one primary health centre served an average of 50,000 people; just 40 per cent of nutrition treatment centers had access to safe water; only one in five births were assisted by a skilled health worker, with the maternal mortality ratio estimated at 789 per 100,000 live births; and more than 70 per cent of school-age children were not receiving an education, with every third school damaged, destroyed, occupied or closed since the onset of the conflict in 2013 (HNO 2018). Displacement Throughout 2018 the conflict continued to destroy homes, disrupt lives and ruin livelihoods. At year end nearly 2 million people were internally displaced, while another 2.2 million people were taking refuge in neighboring countries (2019 HNO). Limited humanitarian access Maintaining access to communities and households in need of humanitarian assistance and protection remained a challenge in 2018. About 1.5 million people were located in areas facing high levels of access constraints - places where armed hostilities, violence against aid workers and assets, and other access impediments made humanitarian activities severely restricted, or in some cases impossible.

1 FTS data as of 3 January 2019

Violence against humanitarian personnel and asset accounted for over half of all reported access-related incidents in 2018. 575 aid workers were relocated due to insecurity, disrupting the provision of life-saving assistance and protection services to people in need for prolonged periods. Many of the hardest to reach areas in Unity, Upper Nile and Western Bahr el Ghazal had alarming rates of food insecurity, malnutrition, and sexual and gender-based violence. Fifteen aid workers were killed in 2018, bringing the total of aid workers killed since the start of the conflict in 2013 to 112, the vast majority of them being South Sudanese. At least 117 humanitarian workers were detained for long periods. Local NGOs are disproportionately affected by violent incidents. In addition, operational and bureaucratic impediments hampered intermittently the smooth implementation of humanitarian activities. Resilience of humanitarian partners In spite of these challenges humanitarian organizations reached over 5.3 million people in 2018, including over 4.2 million people with food assistance and emergency livelihoods support; more than 2 million people with access to improved water sources; over 690,000 children with emergency education; and nearly 4 million people with humanitarian protection services. The 2018 Humanitarian Response Plan was 68 per cent funded, with US$1.171 billion received. Clusters including Camp Coordination and Camp Management, Emergency Shelter and Non-Food Items; and Health were significantly under-funded.

8 SSHF 2018 ANNUAL REPORT 2018 IN REVIEW

Timeline of events

2018 IN REVIEW: SSHF AT A GLANCE 9

10 SSHF 2018 ANNUAL REPORT SOUTH SUDAN HUMANITARIAN FUND AT A GLANCE

2018 ALLOCATIONS

2018 IN REVIEW: SSHF AT A GLANCE 11

RESULTS REPORTED IN 2018

ABOUT THE SOUTH SUDAN HUMANITARIAN FUND SSHF basics The SSHF is a multi-donor Country-based Pooled Fund (CBPF) established in 2012 to support the timely allocation and disbursement of donor resources to address the most urgent humanitarian needs and assist the most vulnerable people in South Sudan. The SSHF is an important tool to enable timely, coordinated and effective humanitarian response in South Sudan. It is distinguished by its focus, flexibility, the ability to boost response through targeted allocations; and by its contribution to strengthening humanitarian coordination and leadership. The Humanitarian Coordinator (HC) for South Sudan oversees the Fund and decides on funding allocations. The HC is supported by the joint OCHA / UNDP Technical Secretariat that manages the Fund on a day-to-day basis, the SSHF Advisory Board and the South Sudan cluster coordination structure – Cluster Coordinators and the Inter-Cluster Working Group (ICWG). What does the SSHF fund? The SSHF channels funding to activities that have been prioritized as the most urgent and strategic to address critical humanitarian needs in the country, in close alignment with the South Sudan Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP); as well as for immediate response to sudden-onset, unforeseen crises. Who can receive SSHF funding? The Fund provides grants to eligible national and inter-national non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and United Nations Agencies, Funds and Programs in South Sudan. Funds are provided to partners that are best-placed to deliver prioritized activities in accordance with the agreed strategy for any given allocation, and humanitarian principles in a timely, and effective manner. To be eligible to receive SSHF funding, NGOs must demonstrate through a rigorous capacity assessment the necessary structures, systems and capacities to meet the Fund’s robust accountability standards and ensure effective use of resources.

Who sets the Fund’s priorities? The HC, in consultation with the SSHF Advisory Board and upon recommendation of the ICWG, determines the most critical needs to be addressed, and corresponding top-priority activities and locations. Cluster Coordinators work with partners to define the cluster-specific priorities in support of the overarching allocation strategy. How are projects selected for funding? Funds are usually allocated through two Standard Allocations, early in the year and at mid-year, for top priorities within the South Sudan HRP. The allocation strategy is developed in conjunction with the ICWG and the SSHF Advisory Board, before final review and approval by the HC. The allocation strategy provides the framework for the submission of project proposals by partner organizations, which are reviewed by Strategic Review Committees. Those recommended for funding are subject to Technical Review prior to final approval by the HC. In addition to Standard Allocations, the Reserve Allocation mechanism allows for rapid and flexible disbursement of funds in the event of unforeseen emergencies. Submission of proposals may in some cases be by invitation, based on the characteristics of the specific situation that the allocation is intended to address. Who provides the funding? The SSHF is funded with contributions from UN Member States but can also receive contributions from individuals and other private or public sources. Since its inception in 2012, the Fund has received more than $695 million in contributions.

2018 IN REVIEW: DONOR CONTRIBUTIONS 13

HOW DOES THE SOUTH SUDAN HUMANITARIAN FUND WORK?

2018 IN REVIEW

DONOR CONTRIBUTIONS

CONTRIBUTIONS TIMELINE DONOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Thirteen bilateral donors continued to demonstrate trust and support for the SSHF, contributing $88.9 million between January and December 2018. In addition, a balance of $19.6 million was carried forward from 2017 and $2.5 million was received in refunds from projects funded in previous years, bringing the total amount available in 2018 to $111 million. The total contributed by donors in 2018 represented an increase of 14 per cent over 2017, although it is slightly below the average since 2014 which is equivalent to $ 91.4 million. Germany made the largest contribution ($21.1 million), followed by the United Kingdom ($16.8 million), the Netherlands ($12.5 million), Norway ($9.9 million), Sweden ($9.5 million), Belgium ($4.9 million), Ireland ($4.8 million), Denmark ($3 million), Australia ($2.6 million), Switzerland ($1.8 million), Republic of Korea ($0.8 million), Canada ($0.6 million) and Luxembourg ($0.4 million). The United Kingdom is the first donor to commit to a multi-year funding agreement

with the SSHF – 60 per cent of the commitment of GBP 21.8 million under a 2-year funding agreement was contributed in 2018, with the remaining 40 percent expected in 2019. Just over six per cent of the total amount contributed during the year was deposited during the first quarter, limiting the size and delaying the timing of the first standard allocation round. Forty-three per cent was deposited during the second and third quarters, mainly used for the second standard allocation. Fifty per cent was deposited in the final quarter, much of it very close to year-end, contributing to the carry forward of $51.2 million to 2019. Donor contributions to the SSHF accounted for eight per cent of all secured funding for the South Sudan HRP.

A farmer tendering his crops in Maridi, Western Equatoria Credit: OCHA/Ntolo Ntolo

2018 IN REVIEW: ALLOCATION OVERVIEW 15

Donor trend The SSHF remained pivotal in addressing critical humanitarian needs in South Sudan. Total annual contributions to the Fund have steadily increased over the last three years – from $58.2 million in 2016 to $78.2 million in 2017 and $88.9 million in 2018. The highest annual contribution to the SSHF was in 2014 following the outbreak of the conflict at the end of 2013. Ten donors have been regular contributors. The United Kingdom has been the largest contributor ($154.1 million), followed by Sweden ($71.2 million), Norway ($48.5 million), Netherlands ($40.3 million), Germany ($39.5 million), Australia ($26.9 million), Denmark ($22 million), Belgium ($20.5 million), Ireland ($18.6 million) and Switzerland ($8.4 million). The Republic of Korea, Canada and Luxembourg have contributed to the SSHF since 2016 with contributions between $1.3 million and $2.8 million. Contributions from the United Kingdom have remained stable over the last three years with an average annual contribution of $19.6 million, however contributions in 2014 and 2015 were higher. Contributions from Sweden and Norway have remained stable over the last three years with average annual contributions of $9.3 million and $8.4 million respectively. The Netherlands doubled its contributions from $6.8 million in 2016 to $12.5 million in 2018, although was unable to contribute in 2017. Germany has substantially increased its contributions from $2 million in 2014 to $21.1 million in 2018. Australia contributed an average of $2.4 million in 2016 and 2018 with a substantially larger contribution of $7.7 million in 2017. The average annual contributions from Denmark, Belgium, Ireland, and Switzerland remained stable between $1.5 million and $4.7 million over the last three years. Early and predictable annual contributions are crucial for the ability of the SSHF to optimize resource utilization in relation to the wider humanitarian program cycle and seasonal requirements.

DONOR TREND

0

25

50

2014 2016 2018

United Kingdom

0

25

50

2014 2016 2018

Norway

0

25

50

2014 2016 2018

Switzerland

0

25

50

2014 2016 2018

Netherlands

0

25

50

2014 2016 2018

Denmark

0

25

50

2014 2016 2018

Sweden

0

25

50

2014 2016 2018

Ireland

0

25

50

2014 2016 2018

Germany

0

25

50

2014 2016 2018

Belgium

0

25

50

2014 2016 2018

Australia


ALLOCATION OVERVIEW Timely, prioritized and coordinated response In 2018, the SSHF continued as an important source of timely funding to address urgent requirements within the Humanitarian Response Plan. Rigorous prioritization was pivotal, guided by principles of acuteness and proportionality, to ensure most efficient use of limited resources available. This included strengthening collective, inter-cluster prioritization through the ICWG, and mapping of other funding through ongoing coordination with other major humanitarian donors. Ninety-six per cent of the funding ($51.4 million) was allocated through two standard allocation rounds, and four per cent ($2 million) through the reserve allocation mechanism. In March 2018, $21 million were allocated to top priority frontline projects targeting geographic areas were humanitarian needs were identified as most severe from the compound effects of displacement, hunger and disease and protection risks. In August, a second standard allocation of $30.4 million provided funds to support life-saving humanitarian assistance and protection activities in prioritized locations. In response to the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak in neighboring DRC, $2 million were allocated to selected partners through a reserve allocation in December, to provide timely support to EVD preparedness in South Sudan. Alignment with the South Sudan HRP The South Sudan Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) provided a baseline for allocating SSHF resources throughout 2018 in the evolving humanitarian context. 60 per cent of funds allocated ($32.3 million) supported Strategic Objective 1 – Save lives by providing timely and integrated multi sector assistance to reduce acute needs. 17 per cent of the funds ($9 million) were in support of Strategic Objective 2 – Reinforce protection and promote access to basic services for the most vulnerable people and 23 per cent ($12.1 million) of the allocated funds supported Strategic Objective 3 – Support at-risk communities to sustain their capacity to cope with significant threats. Reaching people with life-saving humanitarian assistance Sectors receiving the highest proportions of allocated funding were health ($10.5 million, 20 per cent), protection ($8.6 million, 16 per cent), nutrition ($8.3 million, 15 per cent), WASH ($6.4 million, 12 per cent), Food Security and Livelihoods ($5.2 million, 10 percent) and Education ($5.1 million, 10 per cent).

A total of 1.7 million people are targeted for humanitarian assistance with funds allocated in 2018. 900,000 people are expected to be reached with health services, 700,000 people with food security and livelihoods support, 400,000 people with water, sanitation and hygiene services, 300,000 people with nutrition services, 200,000 people with protection services, 200,000 people with shelter and NFI support, 200,000 with camp coordination and management and 100,000 people, mainly children, with education services. Through the interrogation and review of cluster strategies proposed for each allocation round, and the review and selection of individual project proposals, the SSHF encourages gender mainstreaming across programming under all of the clusters. Implementing Partners put in place strategies to ensure that programming is gender-sensitive and that the humanitarian response is inclusive of women and girls. Out of 225 projects receiving funding in 2018, 192 projects have been gender marked as “the project is designed to contribute significantly to gender equality”. As part of wider efforts to enhance Accountability to Affected Populations throughout the HRP, SSHF-funded projects promote dialogue and transparency with different stakeholders at national and subnational levels (state, county). As local as possible and as international as necessary In 2018 funds were allocated to 87 partner organizations for implementation of 225 projects. 79 per cent of the funding ($42.1 million) was allocated to NGOs. This included 40 per cent ($21.5 million) to international NGOs and 39 per cent ($20.6 million) to national NGOs. 21 per cent of funding ($11.3 million) was allocated to UN agencies. Of this, over 57 per cent ($6.5 million) was for core pipelines, logistics and other common services for which NGOs are the main users. Funding channeled through national NGOs has steadily increased over the last three years from 12 per cent in 2016 to 23 per cent in 2017 and 39 per cent in 2018. Th proportion in 2018 exceeds the target agreed through the Grand Bargain at the World Humanitarian Summit to provide 25 per cent of humanitarian funding to local and national responders by 2020.

2018 IN REVIEW: ALLOCATION OVERVIEW 17

FUNDS UTILIZATION

90%

5% 3%1%

$3.0 PROGRAMSUPPORT COST

$53.4ALLOCATIONS

$1.7HFUManagement

$0.4

$59.4TOTALFUNDS

$0.9MTPF


SSHF 2018 ANNUAL REPORT With the introduction of the Common Performance Framework (CPF) in 2018, OCHA has added a new tool to the set of management, reporting and accountability instruments for the Country-Based Pooled Funds (CBPFs).

The CPF provides Humanitarian Coordinators (HC), Advisory Boards, OCHA and other stakeholders a way to monitor and improve the performance of CBPFs. The tool is built on the five fundamental principles (below) that guide the management of CBPFs: Inclusivity, flexibility, timeliness, efficiency and accountability and risk management.

The CPF applies a common methodology and set of indicators based on the five principles to measure Fund-management performance (Fund Management Level) and the extent to which the use of the Fund adds value to the quality of response (Response Outcome Level).

FUND PERFORMANCE

FUND PERFORMANCE 19

PRINCIPLE 1

INCLUSIVENESS A broad range of humanitarian partner organizations (UN agencies and NGOs) participate in CBPF processes and receive funding to implement projects addressing identified priority needs The Advisory Board has an appropriate size and a balanced representation of CBPF stakeholders. Target 1. Full composition of full members: 10:- 2 UN Agency

(22%); 1 NNGO (11%); 1 INGO (11%); 2 Donors (22%); 1 non-contributing Donor, observer (11%); the HC (11%); 1 UNOCHA (11%); 1 UNDP (11%)

2. Full composition of alternates: 7:- 2 UN Agency; 1 NNGO; 1 INGO; 2 Donors; 1 non-contributing Donor.

Results 1. Full membership was fully constituted throughout the

year, as per target. 2. Alternate membership was fully constituted throughout

the year, as per target. COMPOSITION OF ADVISORY BOARD Analysis Composition is established in the SSHF Operational Manual and AB Terms of Reference, with each constituency (contributing Donors, UN agencies, NGOs) equally represented with 2 seats. Tenure is for one year. Alternates should be in place to ensure participation and continuity in AB proceedings. The spirit of the targets is to ensure that the AB is fully constituted in a timely manner at the start of each year: 2018 membership was endorsed by the HC at the first AB meeting in January. Follow up actions Periodic review of AB Terms of Reference to ensure adequacy in relation to the local context and view of evolving global guidance.

The review committees of the Fund have the appropriate size and a balanced representation of different organizations. Target 1. Full composition of Strategic Review Committee (SRC)

members: 5: - 1 Cluster Coordinator (UN); 1 Cluster Co-coordinator (NGO); 1 UN Agency; 1 NNGO; 1 INGO.

2. Diverse and balanced participation in SRCs. 3. Full composition of Technical Review Committee (TRC)

members: 2:- 1 Cluster Coordinator or Co-coordinator; SSHF Technical Secretariat.

Results 1. All SRCs were constituted in accordance with the

recommended composition. In some cases, additional members were co-opted as appropriate to meet circumstances.

2. On average, SRC membership included; 2 UN Agency (25%), 2 NNGO (25%), 3 INGO (37%), and 1 Cluster Coordinator or Co-coordinator (13%). The SSHF Technical Secretariat participated in supporting and facilitating the work of all SRCs.

3. All TRCs were constituted in line with the recommended minimum composition, involving 1 Cluster Coordinator or Co-coordinator (50%) and the SSHF Technical Secretariat (50%).

REPRESENTATIVES IN THE COMMITTEE Analysis SRC members were drawn from different partner constituencies for balanced representation. TRCs conformed to minimum requirements, while ensuring requisite technical expertise. Follow up actions Periodic revision of guidance for reviews to ensure adequacy for the local context and consistency with evolving global guidance.

1 Inclusive governance

50%

10%

30%

10% 5 peoplefrom United Nations (Includes HC, OCHA, UNDP)

1 personfrom INGOs

1 person

3 peoplefrom Donors

10TOTAL

2 Inclusive programming


PRINCIPLE 1

INCLUSIVENESS

CBPF funding is allocated to the best-positioned actors, leveraging the diversity and comparative advantage of eli-gible organizations. Target 1. 25% of the total amount of funding allocated goes to

national NGOs. 2. 100% of the total amount allocated is aligned with

sectors and geographical areas prioritised in the respective Allocation Strategy Papers.

Results 1. Of $53.4 million allocated in 2018, 39 per cent ($20.6

million) went to national NGOs. 2. 100% of the total amount allocated was aligned with

sectors and geographical areas prioritised in the respective Allocation Strategy Papers

Analysis Targets for funding to each partner type were not set, since allocation processes ensure optimal distribution of funds based on a given prioritisation framework. Efforts continued to enable national responders to engage with the SSHF and

compete for funding, and that the response is ‘as local as possible, as international as necessary’. The proportion of funding to national NGOs increased to 39% (23% in 2017), exceeding the Grand Bargain target of 25% as the SSHF remained a prominent funding source for national partners with limited access to bilateral funding. 40% of the funding went to INGOs, 21% to UN Agencies. Targets for funding to different sectors or geographical locations were not set, since allocation processes ensure optimal distribution of funds based on a given prioritisation framework and the spatial distribution of needs to be addressed. All projects funded were in alignment with the prioritisation parameters set out in each respective Allocation Strategy Paper. Follow up actions Continue to promote engagement of national and local responders, while continuing training to strengthen capacities in project design, implementation and compliance with the SSHF guidelines.

FUNDING LEVEL BY IMPLEMENTING PARTNER BY SECTOR

3 Inclusive implementation

FUND PERFORMANCE 21

PRINCIPLE 1 INCLUSIVENES

Resources invested by OCHA’s Humanitarian Financing Unit (HFU) in supporting the capacity of local and national NGO partners within the scope of CBPF strategic objectives, for example through trainings, workshops, communication material to national partners. Target 1. Training on program cycle (project design, allocation

process, disbursements, reporting, revisions and audits) undertaken

2. 92 person-days invested by the SSHF Technical Secretariat in training activities

3. 300 training attendances recorded

Results 1. Training was conducted as planned on all aspects of the

program cycle and related guidelines and processes. 2. The SSHF Technical Secretariat invested a total of 41

person-days in preparing for and conducting training activities during the year,

3. A total of 547 attendances from humanitarian workers were recorded.

Analysis Training activities enhanced the capacity of partners, especially new partners, to engage effectively with SSHF processes while observing guidelines and requirements. Training topics were of particular relevance for national NGOs, contributing to the increase in national NGO partners and funding to national NGOs. Improved quality of project proposals and compliance with project implementation guidelines is expected to contribute to improved partners performance and hence reduced risk levels. Continuous support and guidance was provided to partners through e-mail, telephone, bilateral meetings, and through engagement with different oversight mechanisms including monitoring and reporting activities, capacity assessments and audits.

Follow up actions Feedback from training participants was generally favourable. A continuation of training activities was recommended, particularly at the commencement of allocations to enhance understanding of any changes in SSHF processes and use of the GMS platform.

4 Inclusive engagement


PRINCIPLE 2

FLEXIBILITY The programmatic focus and funding priorities of CBPFs are set at the country level and may shift rapidly, especially in volatile humanitarian contexts. CBPFs are able to adapt rapidly to changing priorities and allow humanitarian partners to identify appropriate solutions to address humanitarian needs in the most effective way. CBPF funding for in-kind and in-cash assistance is appropriate. Target Establish a marker in the GMS for projects involving cash-based programming in order to enable better oversight and tracking Results During 2018, tracking cash-based assistance across the project portfolio through the GMS was not possible – however the feature was introduced at the start of 2019. Analysis While the volume of cash transfers could not be tracked in the GMS, allocation strategies encouraged the use of cash-based programming alongside in-kind assistance. The feasibility and scope vary according to evolving conditions in the country and the particular prioritization framework for any given allocation, including its sectoral, thematic and geographical focus. Collaboration continued with the Cash Working Group, a dependency of the ICWG, to encourage proper analysis of the appropriateness of cash-based programming within cluster strategies, and the technical rigour of project proposals. Follow up actions Consolidate the use of the GMS to track the use of cash-based programming across the project portfolio. Consider the establishment of targets for the amount or proportion of funding to in-kind and cash assistance respectively in 2019.

CBPF funding supports an enabling operational environment (common services). Target 10% of the total amount allocated goes to support common enabling services Results 7% of the total amount allocated went to support common enabling services, specifically to common logistics services. ALLOCATION TO COMMON SERVICES Analysis The SSHF provided critical funding to ensure the provision and continuity of common services that are essential enablers of the overall response. Based on historical averages, a maximum target of 10% of all funding was established. The result of 7% - all for logistics - fell below the maximum, allowing the remaining 93% of all funds allocated to support frontline activities and core pipelines of emergency supplies. Follow up actions The SSHF will continue to support common services when appropriate and required for the efficient implementation of frontline activities.

5 Flexible assistance 6 Flexible operation

FUND PERFORMANCE 23

PRINCIPLE 2

FLEXIBILITY CBPF funding supports strategic planning and response to sudden onset emergencies and applies the most appropri-ate modality based on the objectives of each allocation to generate operational impact at the right time. Target 1. 75 - 90% of all funding is provided through the

Standard Allocation process 2. 10 – 25% of all funding is provided through the Reserve

allocation mechanism 3. 100% of the total amount allocated is aligned with


Results 1. 96% of all funding was provided through the Standard

Allocation process 2. 4% of all funding was provided through the Reserve

allocation mechanism 3. 100% of the total amount allocated was aligned with


Analysis Decisions on the most appropriate timing and modality for allocations were made in view of needs and fund availability. Against targets established based on historical trends, results show the standard allocation process was used to allocate a higher than average proportion of all funding, and the reserve mechanism a lower than average proportion. As described under indicator 3, targets for funding to different sectors or geographical locations were not set, since allocation processes ensure optimal distribution of funds based on a given prioritisation framework and the spatial distribution of needs to be addressed. All projects funded were in alignment with the prioritisation parameters set out in each respective Allocation Strategy Paper. Follow up actions SSHF will continue to allocate funds to support strategic priorities within the framework of the HRP, while retaining the flexibility to address emerging needs and critical funding gaps through the reserve.

ALLOCATION TYPE BY REGION

CBPF funding is successfully reprogrammed at the right time to address operational and contextual changes. Target Average number of 15 working days to process project revision requests. Results A total of 22 project revisions were processed within an average of 8 working days, from the submission of the project revision to the final approval and overwrite of the project in GMS.

Analysis SSHF funding was reprogrammed, where necessary, in a timely manner to allow the smooth implementation of project activities in view of changes in the operating environment and ensure best use of resources. Reprogramming involved no cost extensions, budget revisions, change in activity locations and change in beneficiary numbers. The total number of revisions remained comparable with the previous year (22 in 2017). Follow up actions Continue to strengthen understanding of, and compliance with, procedures and guidelines for the project revisions, to ensure the quality and timeliness of the process.

7 Flexible allocation

8 Flexible implementation


PRINCIPLE 3

TIMELINESS CBPFs allocate funds and save lives as humanitarian needs emerge or escalate. Allocation processes have an appropriate duration vis-à-vis the objectives of the allocation timeline. Target 1. Average duration of the standard allocation process,

from launch of allocation strategy to HC approval of selected projects, 24 working days

2. Average duration of the reserve allocation process, from launch of allocation strategy to HC approval of selected projects, 15 working days

Results 1. Average duration of the standard allocation process,

from launch of allocation strategy to HC approval of selected projects, 26 working days

2. Average duration of the reserve allocation process, from launch of allocation strategy to HC approval of selected projects, 22 working days

Analysis The average time taken for both the standard and reserve allocations was slightly above the target. For standard allocations this is attributable to the large number of funding applications received and a more rigorous review process to ensure quality of proposals prior to final approval. Nevertheless, timelines were improved as compared to 2017 (31 working days). The reserve allocation for Ebola preparedness took longer than would normally be expected due to the complexity of the subject matter and related coordination and planning. The timeline was slightly longer as compared to 2017 (19 working days). Follow up actions Continue to ensure timely and efficient allocation processes in view of the trade-off between speed and quality and the specific objective of each allocation, developing and publishing clear timelines for each allocation.

Payments are processed without delay Target 1. Average number of working days from HC approval of

an NGO project to first payment, 11 working days 2. Average number of working days from HC approval of a

UN Agency project to first payment, 4 working days Results 1. Average number of working days from HC approval of

an NGO project to first payment, 11 working days 2. Average number of working days from HC approval of a

UN Agency project to first payment, 2 working days

Analysis Funds to UN agencies (including UNDP as the Managing Agent for NGO projects) were disbursed on average within 2 days following the HC’s approval of projects. Subsequent disbursement by UNDP to NGO partners took on average 11 working days, during which time the grant agreements and payment requests are finalized. In general, disbursement timelines were consistent with those in 2017. Follow up actions Continue to monitor and minimize disbursement timelines.

9 Timely allocation 10 Timely disbursements

FUND PERFORMANCE 25

TIMELINESS Pledging and payment of contributions to CBPFs are timely and predictable. Target Distribution of total contributions by quarter: Q1 0%; Q2 50%; Q3 0%; Q4 50% Results Distribution of total contributions by quarter: Q1 7%; Q2 13%; Q3 30%; Q4 50% Analysis Over the previous three years the quarterly distribution of contributions as a proportion of all contributions had varied as follows: Q1, 12 – 27%; Q2, 25 – 35%; Q3, 14 – 38%; Q4, 8 – 27%. Unpredictability in the amount and timing of contributions inhibits the ability to optimize the scope and timing allocations in relation to characteristics of the

operating environment, including seasonality. For 2018, the target highlighted the desirability of receiving most of the contributions in the second and fourth quarters, to enable Standard Allocations in the third quarter and the first quarter of the following year. In practice, however, just $18.1 million or 20% of total contributions had been received by end of second quarter, while $70.8 million or 80% of the total contributions were deposited in the third and fourth quarters of the year. A notable achievement was the conclusion of a two-year funding agreement with the UK (DFID), the first of its type in the history of the SSHF. Follow up actions Continue to promote predictable contributions, including through multi-year donor agreements, to improve the predictability and planning of allocations, and best overall use of resources.

11 Timely contributions

In million USD

QUARTERLY DISTRIBUTION OF CONTRIBUTIONS


PRINCIPLE 4

EFFICIENCY Management of all processes related to CBPFs enables timely and strategic responses to identified humanitarian needs. CBPFs seek to employ effective disbursement mechanisms, minimizing transaction costs while operating in a transparent and accountable manner. CBPFs have a critical mass to support the delivery of the HRPs. Target Total amount allocated is 15% of total HRP requirement Results Total amount allocated was equivalent to 3% of total HRP requirement Analysis The 15% target reflects global commitments from the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016. The result shows a reduction from 4% in 2017, partially attributable to a large proportion of donor contributions received late in the year and a high year-end balance of unallocated funds to carry forward to 2019. As a proportion of funding secured for the HRP, allocations reached 4.5%. Offsetting for food assistance and the refugee response, which the SSHF does not typically engage with, allocations accounted for 7% of all funding secured for the HRP. The total allocated positioned the SSHF as the fifth largest source of funding to the HRP, after bilateral contributions from USA, UK, the European Commission and Germany. Follow up actions Continue to support resource mobilization efforts for the coordinated humanitarian response in general, and specifically for the SSHF.

CBPF funding is prioritized in alignment with the HRP. Target 1. 100% of the SSHF funds are allocated to projects in the

HRP 2. 100% of allocations to clusters and geographical areas

are aligned with the allocation strategy documents Results 1. 100% of the SSHF funds were allocated to projects in

the HRP 2. 100% of allocations to sectors and geographical areas

are aligned with the allocation strategy documents ALLOCATION BY HRP STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES

Analysis Participation in the HRP is an eligibility requirement for funding applicants, and all grants supported projects in the HRP. 60% of the total allocated supported the HRP’s first strategic objective – to save lives by providing timely and integrated multisector assistance to reduce acute needs. 17% went to the second strategic objective – to reinforce protection and promote access to basic services for most vulnerable people, and 23% to the third strategic objective – to support at-risk communities to sustain their capacity to cope with significant threats. Allocation processes ensured that all amounts allocated were in alignment with the prioritisation parameters set out in each respective Allocation Strategy Paper. Follow up actions Continue to support top priorities within the coordinated response and the framework of the HRP.

12 Efficient scale 13 Efficient prioritization

60%17%

23%

$32.3MS01

$53.4MTOTAL

ALLOCATIONS

$12.1MS03

$8.9MS02

FUND PERFORMANCE 27

PRINCIPLE 4

EFFICIENCY CBPF funding reaches people in need. Target 100% of people targeted for assistance by SSHF-funded projects are reached Results 97% of people targeted for assistance by SSHF-funded projects were reached.

Analysis As explained on page 5, the conceptual basis for quantifying people targeted and reached differs from that used in previous Annual Reports. Details are captured for all final project reports approved in 2018, including some projects funded through allocations in 2017 and some projects funded through allocations in 2018. Overall, 97% of targeted beneficiaries were reached, or 2.9 million out of 3.0 million (without double counting). Projects under the CCCM cluster reached 75% of targeted beneficiaries; education 102%; Emergency Shelter and NFI 102%; Food security and livelihoods 71%; Health 104%, Nutrition 93%; Protection 74%; and WASH 99%. Follow up actions Continue to strengthen the quality control of project proposals and reports, to maintain accurate data for people targeted and reached across the project portfolio.

CBPF management is cost-efficient and context-appropriate. Target 1. OCHA’s Humanitarian Funding Unit (HFU) cost

requirement is 2 per cent of total donor contributions 2. All management and administrative costs are 7 per cent

of total donor contributions. Results 1. OCHA’s HFU cost requirement was 1.9 per cent of total

donor contributions 2. All management and administrative costs were 6.7 per

cent of total donor contributions Analysis With staffing requirements the same, there was no significant variation in the planned HFU cost requirement as compared to the previous year. As set out on page 17 (fund utilization), total management and administrative costs for the operation of the Fund in 2018 came to $6m. This included fees to the MPTF Office as the Administrative Agent ($0.9m), the HFU cost requirement ($1.7m), and Program Support Costs ($3m) and audit costs ($0.4) to UNDP South Sudan as the Managing Agent for NGO projects. Follow up actions Periodically review HFU cost requirements in view of the turnover of the Fund, to ensure cost efficiency. CONTRIBUTIONS AGAINST TOTAL HFU EXPENDITURE

14 Efficient coverage 15 Efficient management

1.7MHFU DIRECT COSTS

1.9%

$88.9MTOTAL

CONTRIBUTIONS


PRINCIPLE 4

EFFICIENCY CBPF management is compliant with management and op-erational standards required by the CBPF Global Guidelines. Target SSHF Operational Manual updated and disseminated on annual basis. Results During 2018 a ‘light’ revision of the Operational Manual was prepared, for introduction in 2019. The existing Manual remained relevant and appropriate to guide Fund operations during 2018. Analysis The need for a ‘light’ revision of the Operational Manual that was rolled out at the beginning of 2017 follows the ‘light’ revision of the CBPF Global Guidelines later in 2017. However, the Operational Manual remained relevant and appropriate to guide Fund operations during 2018. Follow up actions Introduce the revised Operational Manual in 2019. Continue to monitor the evolution of CBPF Global Guidance and the local operating context to ensure that the Operational Manual remains fit for purpose, with further revisions as appropriate.

16 Efficient management

FUND PERFORMANCE 29

PRINCIPLE 5

ACCOUNTABILITY AND RISK MANAGEMENT CBPFs manage risk and effectively monitor partner capacity and performance. CBPFs utilize a full range of accountability tools and measures

CBPF funded projects have a clear strategy to promote the participation of affected people.

Target Accountability to affected people (AAP) is promoted in the allocation process Results AAP was promoted during all allocation processes

Analysis Efforts continued to enhance AAP across the project portfolio, including participation of affected people. Cluster strategies were required to articulate an approach to AAP. Allocation Strategy Papers emphasized AAP as a parameter for consideration during the project selection process. The project proposal template required partners to demonstrate how AAP is considered within the project design. Monitoring and reporting activities reviewed achievements, which included different types of project implementation committees, as well as feedback, complaints and dispute resolution mechanisms. Follow up actions Continue to promote AAP as an approach, including it as a parameter in Allocation Strategy Papers and a criteria for the selection of projects, and disseminating good practices.

CBPF funding is appropriately monitored, reported and audited Target 100 per cent of planned project risk management activities (monitoring, reporting, auditing, financial spot-checks) are undertaken in accordance with the Operational Modalities. Results 86 per cent of risk management activities due within the year were completed. Analysis 1,502 of 1,745 risk management activities due were completed, including 501 financial spot checks (of 582 required), 62 programmatic monitoring activities (32 required), 173 audits (274 required), 411 final narrative reports reviewed and cleared (464 required), and 355 final financial reports reviewed and cleared (393 required). Follow up actions Continue to strengthen systems for risk management activities in full alignment with the Operational Modalities.

17 Accountability to affected people 18 Accountability and risk management for projects


PRINCIPLE 5

ACCOUNTABILITY AND RISK MANAGEMENT CBPF funding is allocated to partners with demonstrated capacity Target 1. 100% of funds allocated to eligible partners 2. 80% of funds allocated to partners with an assigned

risk level of ‘medium’ or ‘low’ Results 1. 100% of funds allocated to eligible partners 2. 99% of funds allocated to partners with an assigned

risk level of ‘medium’ or ‘low’ IMPLEMENTING PARTNERS BY RISK LEVEL

Analysis All funding applications were screened for eligibility. Partners were required to have a corresponding project in the HRP, and complete a due diligence review and capacity assessment. The amount or proportion of funding to be allocated according to partner risk levels was not prescribed, since the allocation process gives flexibility to support partners best-placed to meet needs while managing risk through oversight mechanisms. The result is an increase in the proportion of funding to partners with an assigned risk level of ‘medium’ or ‘low’ as compared to 2017 (90%). Funding to partners with an assigned risk level of ‘high’ was 1%, down from 2017 (10%). Follow up actions Continue to manage risk, while addressing most acute humanitarian needs. Work with partners to improve capacity and performance, reducing assigned risk levels. Consolidate oversight activities in line with Operational Modalities.

19 Accountability and risk management of implementing partners

FUND PERFORMANCE 31

Appropriate oversight and assurances of funding channeled through CBPFs. Target 100% of the detected fraud cases and losses reported to the AB and OCHA HQ and followed up in line with standard procedures. Results All cases were reported, and follow up is ongoing in line with standard procedures. Analysis 4 cases of losses were reported to the SSHF Technical Secretariat by partners, and reported onwards to the Advisory Board and OCHA Headquarters. Insecurity in operating areas accounted for three losses of minor value affecting office equipment and emergency supplies. One suspected case of fraud was reported, however upon further internal investigation by the partner the allegation was not substantiated. Follow up for administrative closure of each case is undertaken in line with the policies and procedures of the respective UN Agency to which the funds were allocated, including UNDP where the case pertains to funding of an NGO project. Follow up actions Continue to strengthen awareness across partners of statutory, timely reporting requirements for all cases of losses. Continue to follow up on cases reported in line with respective UN Agency procedures.

20 Accountability and risk management of funding


SSHF 2018 ANNUAL REPORT This section of the Annual Report provides a brief overview of the SSHF allocations per cluster, targets and reported results, as well as lessons learned from 2018.

As described in the note on page 6, the information highlights achievements against planned targets corresponding to different indicators, and is based on final narrative reports from partners cleared between 1 January and 31 December 2018, including from projects funded in 2017 and 2018.

CLUSTER ACHIEVEMENTS

CLUSTER ACHIVEMENTS 33

ACHIEVEMENTS BY CLUSTER

CAMP COORDINATION AND CAMP MANAGEMENT

CLUSTER OBJECTIVES Objective 1: Ensure equal and needs-based access to improve quality services for populations affected by displacement. Objective 2: Effectively engage and respond to vulnerable populations with priority on addressing protection gaps and building resilience Objective 3: Promote relevant community participation and ensure local ownership of site management Objective 4: Prioritize new and unreached displaced populations LEAD ORGANIZATIONS IOM, ACTED, UNHCR

ALLOCATIONS

1,899,674

PROJECTS

7

PARTNERS

6

TARGETED PEOPLE

154,039

WOMEN

41,798 GIRLS

43,482

MEN

28,996 BOYS

39,763

Funding from the SSHF ensured that coordination and management structures were in place for the effective delivery of humanitarian services in camps and camp-like settlements. Cluster partners strengthened efforts to improve accountability to the affected population, including the enhancement of communication and feedback mechanisms to promote equitable access to services, while encouraging self-reliance and reduced dependency on assistance.

Mobile response was strengthened to enhance site coordination and service delivery, as well as site management and maintenance. Key activities included the creation of information desks, the establishment of feedback mechanisms, and capacity building of camp management committees and selected community members.

ALLOCATIONS PROJECTS PARTNERS PEOPLE TARGETED

2017 $1.1M 4 3 0.27M PEOPLE REACHED 0.21M

OUTPUT INDICATORS TARGETED ACHIEVED % Number of people reached with Boda Boda Talk Talk (BBTT) programming

Women 6,931 15,637 226 Girls 6,042 4,127 68 Men 4,909 14,747 300 Boys 5,482 3,937 72

Number of people reached with Camp management services

Women 24,625 24,182 98 Girls 21,468 6,382 30 Men 17,443 22,805 131 Boys 19,479 6,088 31

OUTPUT INDICATORS TARGETED ACHIEVED % Number of females participating in IDP leadership 30 80 267 Number of camp self-management committees 20 22 110 Number of individuals from cam management agencies 95 254 267 Number of people reached with BBTT programming 23,365 38,448 165 Number of people reached with Camp management services 83,015 59,457 72

Allocations in 2018

Results reported in 2018


1 Results are based on 2018 data and may be underreported as implementation of projects and project-level reporting often continues into the subsequent year. For explanation of data, refer to 2018 in Review section above.


EDUCATION

CLUSTER OBJECTIVES Objective 1: Provide crisis-affected girls and boys (3-18 years) with access to safe, protective and inclusive learning environments, including protective services and referral pathways through schools. Objective 2: Strengthen cognitive skills of crisis-affected boys and girls. Objective 3: Improve crisis-affected girls’ and boys’ and communities’ ability to cope with emergencies through relevant education activities and capacity development, including psychosocial support and life-saving messaging to reduce vulnerability LEAD ORGANIZATIONS UNICEF, Save the Children

ALLOCATIONS

$5,114,741

PROJECTS

13

PARTNERS

7

TARGETED PEOPLE

67,409

WOMEN 3,430 GIRLS

26,509

MEN 3,985 BOYS

33,485

Funding provided by the SSHF supported school feeding, to improve attendance and retention of learners in food insecure and hard-to-reach locations. Cluster partners also promoted strategies to engender youth engagement through drop-in centers, life skills training and Adult Learning Programs (ALP), especially for youths not having completed primary education.

Youth community mobilizers strengthened project implementation and promoted wider community participation, while helping to raise awareness about protection concerns and referral services. The availability of psychosocial support and referral services for nutritional and health needs contributed to the success of this innovative programming.

.


2017 $4.1M 8 7 0.16M 20181 $1.3M 4 4 PEOPLE REACHED 0.17M

OUTPUT INDICATORS TARGETED ACHIEVED % Number of children benefiting from school feeding program

Women 0 0 0 Girls 24,938 32,323 130 Men 0 0 0 Boys 40,120 49,172 123

Number of children who have access to PSS services and referral pathways for protection, nutrition, basic health

Women 0 0 0 Girls 7,760 9,948 128 Men 0 0 0 Boys 13,040 17,752 136

OUTPUT INDICATORS TARGETED ACHIEVED % Number of children benefiting from school feeding program

65,058 81,495 125

Number of children engaged as mobilization on life-saving activities

25,006 30,482 122

Number of children who access to PSS services and referral pathways for protection, nutrition, basic health

20,800 27,700 133

Number of youths reached with life-saving messages on child protection, hygiene, health and GBV in schools and local communities

9,568 12,079 126

Allocations in 2018





EMERGENCY SHELTER & NON-FOOD ITEMS

CLUSTER OBJECTIVES Objective 1: Provide life-saving shelter and life-sustaining NFIs to the most vulnerable newly displaced people Objective 2: Provide sustainable shelter and essential NFIs to the most vulnerable protracted IDPs in PoC sites, formal camps and collective centers Objective 3: Strengthening community coping mechanisms and cohesion of vulnerable and at risk displaced community Objective 4: Promote community participation in program implementation and accountability to inform analysis and future response LEAD ORGANIZATIONS IOM, World Vision

ALLOCATIONS

$3,792,292

PROJECTS

24

PARTNERS

14

TARGETED PEOPLE

182,819

WOMEN

52,233 GIRLS

47,128

MEN

39,800 BOYS

43,658

The cluster supported highly vulnerable IDPs, returnees and host community members to live in safety and dignity, through the provision of life-saving non-food items and emergency shelter. Funding from the SSHF focused on shelter solutions in conflict affected, hard-to-reach areas, with most support being channelled through national

partners. Those partners were well placed to enhance accountability to, and communication with, the affected population, and explore ways to promote self-reliance and build on communities’ existing coping mechanisms. Cash transfers were piloted where appropriate, within a mixed approach alongside the distribution of shelter materials.

ALLOCATIONS PROJECTS PARTNERS PEOPLE REACHED

2017 $4.8M 15 10 0.47M

20181 $1.6M 11 11 PEOPLE TARGETED 0.47M

OUTPUT INDICATORS TARGETED ACHIEVED %

Number of people served with shelter assistance

Women 25,984 49,491 190

Girls 21,116 40,836 193

Men 19,463 49,281 253

Boys 17,048 30,377 178

Number of people served with NFI

Women 117,681 170,134 145

Girls 105,116 159,082 151

Men 101,222 132,372 139

Boys 95,191 132,372 139

OUTPUT INDICATORS TARGETED ACHIEVED % Number of people served with shelter assistance

83,611 169,985 203

Number of protracted IDPs, returnees and host community served with cash-based NFI assistance

800 480 60

Number of protracted IDPs, returnees and host community served with cash-based emergency shelter assistance

4,100 11,534 281

Number of people served with NFI

419,210 595,967 142

Allocations in 2018





FOOD SECURITY AND LIVELIHOODS

CLUSTER OBJECTIVES Objective 1: Provide life-saving and sustaining food assistance to improve food consumption, dietary diversity and coping strategies for the most vulnerable population Objective 2: Protection, stabilization and urban livelihoods to improve food availability and reduce the food gaps LEAD ORGANIZATIONS WFP, FAO, World Vision

ALLOCATIONS

$5,199,239

PROJECTS

22

PARTNERS

17

TARGETED PEOPLE

711,470

WOMEN

255,131 GIRLS

152,640

MEN

177,000 BOYS

126,699

With funding from the SSHF, cluster partners protected livelihoods by scaling up the provision of crop seeds, agricultural tools, fishing gear and vegetable kits to the most severely affected households during the main dry season. Additionally, working in close collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture, partners were able to leverage SSHF

resources in the Equatorias, Northern Bahr el Ghazal and parts of Jonglei in support of efforts to mitigate worsening hunger and potential famine conditions. Selected farmers were trained to enable them to provide training and advice to other farmers, and to monitor and mitigate the impact of pests.


2017 $3.6M 12 11 1.14 M

20181 $1.8M 11 11 PEOPLE REACHED

0.79 M


Number of people receiving seeds and tools trained in crop production

229,050 191,873 84

Number of people provided with crop seeds

162,600 151,600 89

Number of people provided with vegetable seeds

311,952 289,534 93

Number of people receiving fishing kits

428,298 372,198 87

Number of recipient farmers of seeds and tools trained

11,597 8,227 71


Number of people receiving seeds and tools trained in crop production

Women 80,275 72,159 90

Girls 52,236 34,267 66

Men 53,850 56,255 104

Boys 42,689 29,192 68

Number of people provided with crops seeds

Women 73,674 90,512 123

Girls 27,705 4,657 17

Men 45,428 53,837 119

Boys 22,793 2,594 11


Allocations in 2018




HEALTH

CLUSTER OBJECTIVES Objective 1: Improve access and scale-up responsiveness to essential health-care needs of the vulnerable populations by focusing on the majority causes of morbidity and morbidity Objective 2: Prevent, detect and respond to epidemic-prone disease outbreaks and promote WASH in health facilities for conflict-affected and vulnerable populations Objective 3: Implement inclusive and dignified essential clinical health services targeting specific needs of vulnerable people Objective 4: Increase access to mental health and psychosocial support services for vulnerable people LEAD ORGANIZATIONS WHO, Save the Children

ALLOCATIONS

$10,517,301

PROJECTS

48

PARTNERS

29

TARGETED PEOPLE

858,741

WOMEN

322,409 GIRLS

128,222

MEN

291,699 BOYS

116,411

Years of conflict have resulted in the destruction of health facilities, undermining healthcare and exacerbating risks of disease and mortality. With timely funding from the SSHF, cluster partners provided vital access to essential healthcare and preventive health services, and supported the detection

of, and response to, disease outbreaks. Mass health education campaigns, as well as collaboration with WASH partners to improve conditions in health facilities, helped reduce risks of malaria, diarrhoea, pneumonia and other diseases. Routine immunization was strengthened.


2017 $7.3M 28 22 1.54M

20181 $3.6M 19 19 PEOPLE REACHED

1.62M


Number of people reached with Outpatient Department consultation

Women 288,431 260,111 90

Girls 129,010 227,621 176

Men 246,767 152,338 62

Boys 115,115 181,929 158

Number of people reached by health education/promotion

Women 225,455 268,508 119

Girls 81,081 122,408 151

Men 151,155 179,712 118

Boys 70,296 103,537 147


Number of children 6 months to 15 years receiving measles vaccination in emergence, outbreak or returnee situations

116,534 73,698 63

Number of deliveries attended by skilled birth attendant (facility or home)

6,714 5,651 84

Number of people reached with OPD consultation

779,323 821,999 105

Number of people reached by health education/promotion

528,987 674,165 127

Number of people vaccinated with oral cholera vaccines in priority location

224,240 703,127 127

Allocations in 2018



Saving new born lives, Aweil, South Sudan

In March 2018 the SSHF allocated a total of USD 180,000 to Impact Health Organisation (IHO) to implement a project aimed at supporting the provision of emergency health services to IDPs and host communities in conflict areas in Aweil West and Center counties, Northern Bahr el Ghazal South Sudan. 12,287 people benefited from maternal and neonatal health care. Maria Poni is a 20-year-old housewife from Malang village, entirely dependent on fishing with her husband. The family was displaced from Malang village to Malang Island because of insecurity, eventually returning home after the security situation improved. Malang village is located in the interior of Magala County, with no health services other than those provided through IHO’s mobile health teams. The alternative is to walk for more than 4 hours to Magala town. When Maria Poni’s baby boy was born mud was applied to the umbilical cord, a local cultural practice which can lead to neonatal tetanus and death. The baby quickly became very sick, presenting high fever and refusing breast feeding just 2 days after delivery. He was kept at home, however, in accordance with traditional practice that requires neonates to reach 4 or 5 days before being brought outdoors. When a community member informed the IHO mobile team working in the area, medical support was provided, and the baby’s health improved greatly on the second day of treatment. “If it was not with your help, I would have lost my baby. I have witnessed similar cases which resulted in death.

Now I know it is bad to put mud on the umbilical cord of new born babies. We do all these local things because no one showed us the right way to do it. We wish you could put a permanent clinic here, or stay longer, because we have to walk a distance of over 4 hours to the nearest health centre, yet our health needs are huge”, said Maria Poni. Across South Sudan local cultural practices have an impact on the provision of medical services to new born babies. Through the efforts of IHO and other health partners, communities are being made aware of the harmful effects of some cultural practices on the health and wellbeing of new born babies.

An IHO health worker and Maria Poni posing with her baby after recovery from neonatal sepsis




NUTRITION CLUSTER OBJECTIVES

Objective 1: Deliver timely, life-saving management of acute malnutrition for the most vulnerable and at risk, including U5 children, PLW and older people in PoC sites Objective 2: Increase access to maternal, infant and young child nutrition programs to prevent under nutrition among the most vulnerable and risk, including U5 children and PLW in conflict and high-burden states Objective 3: Enhance nutrition situation monitoring, analysis and utilization of early warning information for timely, coordinated response and decision-making Objective 4: Increase access to integrated nutrition, health, WASH, and food security and livelihoods activities in counties with critical levels of acute malnutrition LEAD ORGANIZATIONS UNICEF, Concern Worldwide

ALLOCATIONS

$8,268,416

PROJECTS

29

PARTNERS

20

TARGETED PEOPLE

334,975

WOMEN

99,697 GIRLS

110,202

MEN

16,731 BOYS

108,345

SSHF funding enabled partners to scale up the nutrition response in prioritized locations, expanding ongoing nutrition treatment services and outreach to children and pregnant and lactating women in hard-to-reach communities. Funding for rapid response activities supported response in locations with no ongoing services.

Nutrition and WASH partners worked together within an integrated response to prevent cholera and diarrhea, which are key drivers of malnutrition. Severely malnourished children were treated at the same time as items were provided to their households to improve water, sanitation and hygiene, complemented by messaging to caregivers of the children about good caring practices.




Number of girls and boys (6-59 months) newly admitted with MAM and treated with RUSF supplies from the pipeline

Women

Girls 56,056 44,248 79

Men

Boys 52,814 39,885 76

Number of girls and boys (6-59 months) newly admitted with SAM and in OTPs and treated with RUSF supplies from the pipeline

Women

Girls 22,921 22,015 96

Men

Boys 21,541 19,667 91


Number of PLWs trained on nutrition package (MIYCN, WASH, Health, use of Nutrition supplies etc)

11,396 11,403 100

Number of girls and boys (6-59 months) newly admitted with MAM and treated with RUSF

108,873 84,133 77

Number of girls and boys (6-59 months) newly admitted with SAM in OTPs and treated with RUTF supplies from the pipeline

44,462 41,682 94

Number of pregnant and lactating women and caretakers of children 0-23 months reached with IYCF-E intervention

139,207 162,941 117

Allocations in 2018





PROTECTION

CLUSTER OBJECTIVES Objective 1: Provide life-saving response to the protection needs of GBV survivors, children and other vulnerable Objective 2: Strengthen prevention programming to mitigate risks from the consequence of conflict or displacement Objective 3: Enhance the protection environment for IDPs and other affected populations to enable duration solution Objective 4: Enhance protection assessment and monitoring to inform protection and the overall humanitarian response. LEAD ORGANIZATIONS UNHCR, NRC

ALLOCATIONS

$8,633,303

PROJECTS

50

PARTNERS

29

TARGETED PEOPLE

221,589

WOMEN

60,322 GIRLS

69,438

MEN

34,062 BOYS

57,767

The cluster enhanced the safety and dignity of vulnerable people, through stand-alone protection projects as well as mainstreaming protection in other sectors, including through monitoring, assessment, analysis and advocacy. SSHF-funded activities targeted the most vulnerable people in need of protection, including women, children, older persons, persons with disabilities, and survivors of sexual

violence. Services, including for GBV, child protection and mine action, were provided through field-based partners, as well as through Juba-based “Integrated Protection Mobile Teams” deployed to different locations as needed and in response fast-changing circumstances in order to undertake protection assessments and initiate response activities.


2017 $6.4M 27 19 0.3 M 20181 $2.9M 19 18 PEOPLE REACHED 0.21 M


Number of vulnerable children, including unaccompanied and separated children (UASC) registered and received individual support from CP Help desk

Women 0 0 0

Girls 7,585 6,775 89

Men 0 0 0

Boys 7,731 9,090 118

Number of girls, boys, women and men benefiting from Psycho-Social Services (PSS) activities

Women 18,429 18,233 99

Girls 44,438 49,644 111

Men 8,304 7,598 91

Boys 37,749 43,880 116


Number of individuals reached with messages on GBV prevention and services

39,770 58,705 148

Number of vulnerable children, including UASC registered and received individual support from CP Help desk

15,316 15,865 104

Number of girls and boys, women and men benefiting from Psycho-Social Support Services (PSS)

109,320 119,355 109

Number of girls and boys, women and men reached with risk mitigation programming

53,304 73,109 137

Number of individuals reached with messages on GBV prevention and services

39,770 58,705 148

Allocations in 2018



A ray of hope for women, Magwi South Sudan

Women groups in Magwi are now using the fuel-efficient stoves to make bread for selling. © CARE/201

Twenty-year-old Brenda Abee Martin from Nimule in South Sudan has been using firewood for her family cooking needs since she was a young girl. In those days firewood was plentiful, and Brenda could collect as much as she wanted from a forest a stone’s throw away from her home. Today, the once lush forests in her area are disappearing due to deforestation. “We don’t have any alternative fuel apart from firewood,” says Brenda. “So we have to travel long distances in search of firewood, which exposes us to many dangers.” The reality is scary for women and girls in South Sudan as years of conflict have ‘normalized’ violence. In most cases, survivors of violence don’t have recourse to justice or they just keep quiet, as they fear being stigmatized. In December 2018, CARE, with USD 200,000 in funding allocated through the South Sudan Humanitarian Fund for a six-month protection project, supported training of 80 women and adolescent girls at a Nimule woman and girl-friendly space to make fuel-efficient stoves. “I got a lot of knowledge from the training on how to make energy efficient stoves,” says Brenda. “The stove doesn’t use much firewood, meaning less visits to the forests.” The cohort is expected to pass on the skills to other women in their community, creating a multiplier effect. “Most of our forests are gone,” says Brenda. “So it’s very important that we teach those who couldn’t make it to the training to make fuel efficient stoves to save the existing forests.” Using SSHF funding CARE also trained 240 women and adolescent girls in the production of fuel-efficient stoves in Magwi, Nimule and Koch. According to Patrick Vuonze, CARE Gender Based Violence Manager, the training has helped women and girls not only to save on fuel but also to empower them economically. “Some are now using the energy saving stoves to bake bread, which they sell in their communities,” says Vuonze.




WATER, SANITATION & HYGIENE

CLUSTER OBJECTIVES Objective 1: Provide timely, equitable access to safe and sufficient water to vulnerable and affected population Objective 2: Increase knowledge of appropriate hygiene practices among vulnerable and affected populations to prevent and mitigated WASH-related diseases. Objective 3: Enable vulnerable and affected populations to practices safe, sanitary and hygienic living through secured, dignified and gender-appropriate sanitation services. LEAD ORGANIZATIONS UNICEF, NRC

ALLOCATIONS

$6,381,003

PROJECTS

28

PARTNERS

20

TARGETED PEOPLE

391,306

WOMEN

106,358 GIRLS

106,259

MEN

84,006 BOYS

94,683

SSHF resources enabled partners to respond to the needs of the most vulnerable IDPs and host community members, improving access to safe water for drinking and domestic use, as well as improved hygiene to mitigate disease and infections. Activities were integrated with those of other clusters, improving WASH in schools - including the provision of Menstrual Hygiene Kits - and health centers, as

well as in households with malnourished children. Partners engaged with communities about choices related to improvements in safe water and sanitation, providing opportunities for dialogue about sustainable service delivery and gender concerns which informed project design and implementation




Number of people reached through direct and participatory hygiene promotion activities

Women 183,183 219,079 120

Girls 156,542 169,132 108

Men 132,055 168,090 127

Boys 140,937 163,268 116

Number of people with access to safe water

Women 120,091 124,807 104

Girls 116,230 130,215 112

Men 88,785 93,168 105

Boys 98,114 110,564 113


Number of vulnerable populations with a WASH minimum package activity

221,407 261,378 118

Number of emergencies affect women and girls enable to practice safe, dignified menstrual hygiene management

7,900 8,617 109

Number of people reached through direct and participatory hygiene promotion activities

612,717 719,569 117

Number of people with access to improved sanitation facilities

93,343 97,164 104

Number of people with access to safe water

423,220 458,754 108

Allocations in 2018





LOGISTICS

CLUSTER OBJECTIVES Objective 1: Provide logistics coordination support and technical advisory services to the humanitarian community Objective 2: Provide logistics, cargo and passenger air services to the humanitarian community to address the needs of the affected people Objective 3: Provide infrastructure works to ensure humanitarian community is able to access affected people LEAD ORGANIZATIONS WFP

ALLOCATIONS

$3,560,000

PROJECTS

4

PARTNERS

2

TARGETED PEOPLE

455

WOMEN

46 GIRLS

46

MEN

317 BOYS

46

The cluster worked closely with all other clusters in leading operational planning and logistics coordination for multi-sectoral response, while exploring alternative transportation modalities and decentralized coordination arrangements to enhance flexibility, responsiveness and cost effectiveness. Funding provided by the SSHF allowed for prioritized services to continue uninterrupted, including

ground and air transportation for the pre-positioning of humanitarian cargo as well as flights for humanitarian workers through the United Nations Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS). Inter-cluster assessment missions and relocations of humanitarian personnel due to insecurity were facilitated.

ALLOCATIONS PROJECTS PARTNERS ORGANISATIONS TARGETED 2017 $2.4M 3 2 80 20181 $2.0M 2 2 ORGANISATIONS SUPPORTED 94


Number of humanitarian organizations assisted 80 94 118

Number of metric tons of humanitarian cargo transported using the CTS fleet in the hubs 8,500 11,739 138

Number of tons of light cargo transported (MTs) (UNHAS) 100 140 140

Allocations in 2018


Helping survivors of Gender-Based Violence and engaging community members (including men) on GBV through a Coffee Shop Initiative, Mundri, South Sudan In March 2018, as part of the first Standard Allocation, the SSHF allocated funds to Mundri Active Youth Association (MAYA) to implement a protection project aimed at ensuring survivors of gender-based violence have access to emergency and life-saving services. The project set up a woman and girl-friendly space in Mundri’s internally displaced persons’ camp, hosting over 4,000 people following its establishment in mid-2016 when people fled their homes in neighbouring Kedi’ba community to escape from conflict. The camp population remains exposed to risks of harassment, abuse, and assault. The woman and girl-friendly space enables counsellors and social workers to provide emergency case management and counselling services, as well as recreational, stress-relieving activities to help survivors cope with trauma and re-connect with their community. To improve men and boy’s understanding of GBV, MAYA also organized information sessions. These were poorly attended, leading to the innovative arrangement of a coffee shop. Ms. Esther Boyi, a 48 year-old woman who lives in the camp, was given resources to set up the coffee shop and since then every Friday get-togethers over coffee take place. On average, 45 people attended each session and participated in conversations about the safety and the integrity of women and girls. Social workers were on hand to provide information on services available to survivors of GBV. The sessions helped to create bonds and a sense of responsibility between community members. “It is my first time to have such interactions with men. Now my rights are known to me as a woman,” said Linda ‘Botto, a camp resident after one session. The coffee shop initiative also helped Esther and her family to meet their basic needs. “This support helped me realize my dreams. I can now pay school fees for my grandchildren.

Now I can afford sanitary pads for my girls. I [can afford food] when there is a delay in the food ration given to us [instead of going hungry]. I am now economically empowered and [can] participate in major community decision-making since I have money like men to contribute”. Activities like this are important in communities where men and women do not participate equally in decision-making. In bringing men and women together in a common space and at the same level, with moderated discussions, where they are required to apply the same rules of respect towards women as they do to men, moderated discussions allow men to understand and come to respect the women in their community .

MAYA Social Worker in discussion between women and men while selling coffee-

Mundri County

ANNEXES 45

This section of the Annual report provides further details related to allocations by recipient organization, SSHF funded projects, and the SSHF Advisory Board. A list of acronyms and abbreviations, and a reference map, are also included.

SSHF 2018 ANNUAL REPORT

ANNEXES


ANNEX A

ALLOCATIONS BY RECIPIENT ORGANIZATION

.38

1.45

1.46

2.40

2.48

3.10

UNFPA

FAO

WFP

WHO

UNICEF

IOM

United Nations US$11.3M, 21%

ANNEXES 47

.05

.11

.17

.18

.18

.20

.20

.20

.20

.21

.22

.29

.30

.31

.32

.35

.39

.45

.47

.50

.71

.73

.76

.83

1.11

1.16

1.30

1.38

1.45

1.83

2.23

2.71

CMMB

VSF

RMF

IsraAID

CUAMM

HI

MDM Spain

IAS

JUH

RI

TEARFUND

CW

Plan

ARC

JAM

IN

IRC

CARE

ACTED

CORDAID

Solidarités

NRC

CMA

NPP

DRC

PAH

WR

IMC UK

DDG

INTERSOS

WV

SC

International NGO US$21.5M, 40%


0.050.05

0.100.100.120.130.140.150.150.150.160.170.170.180.180.180.200.200.200.210.210.220.220.220.220.230.240.240.250.25

0.300.300.320.320.330.360.390.410.410.42

0.470.48

0.690.70

0.751.63

1.972.07

2.99

SLI - SSCCOC

CRADAMTT

GREDAHRSS

PCOSPOCI

MHATF

HDCSMC

CHADOCIDO

MAYAASCO

RUWASSASSUDA

ADARuCAPD

AHCHACOCARDOPEN

THESOAFSS

TRI-SSHACTSSLSAAHICOER

CCOSSCASS

SAADONSDOLCED

UNKEALiveWell

CINACAO

CAFADHCO

AFODIHO

HLSSSPEDP

CMDUNIDO

Nile Hope

National NGO, US$20.6m 39%

ANNEXES 49

ANNEX B

SSHF-FUNDED PROJECTS

# Organization Fund Code Cluster Budget

1 AAHI SSD-18/HSS10/RA1/H/NGO/11428 HEALTH $250,001

2 ACTED SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/INGO/9771 ES & NFI $203,016

3 ACTED SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/CCCM/INGO/9776 CCCM $269,670

4 ADA SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/NGO/7998 ES & NFI $103,711

5 ADA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/NGO/9783 ES & NFI $100,002

6 AFOD SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/CCCM/NGO/8266 CCCM $340,003

7 AFOD SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/NGO/8289 NUTRITION $150,000

8 AFOD SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/NGO/10057 NUTRITION $202,152

9 AFSS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/NGO/7911 NUTRITION $100,013

10 AFSS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/NGO/9951 NUTRITION $132,303

11 AHC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/NGO/8259 FSL $105,069

12 AHC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/FSL/NGO/9966 FSL $105,021

13 ARC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/INGO/7924 HEALTH $99,999

14 ARC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/INGO/9840 PROTECTION $209,999

15 ASCO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/FSL/NGO/9903 FSL $178,166

16 CAFAD SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/NGO/7929 FSL $213,037

17 CAFAD SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/FSL/NGO/9920 FSL $260,057

18 CAO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/8096 PROTECTION $100,000




22 CARD SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/10099 WASH $218,622

23 CARE Int. SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/INGO/8182 PROTECTION $250,000

24 CARE Int. SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/INGO/9900 PROTECTION $200,000

25 CASS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/8064 HEALTH $220,046

26 CASS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/9981 HEALTH $100,000

27 CCOC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/7948 PROTECTION $49,999

28 CCOSS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/9885 WASH $300,000

29 CHADO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/8072 PROTECTION $49,958

30 CHADO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9834 PROTECTION $125,000

31 CIDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/8179 PROTECTION $50,000

32 CIDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9979 PROTECTION $125,000

33 CINA SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/8092 PROTECTION $260,000

34 CINA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9982 PROTECTION $150,000

35 CMA SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/INGO/8099 HEALTH $100,000

36 CMA SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/INGO/8114 NUTRITION $200,000

37 CMA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/INGO/9953 HEALTH $199,999

38 CMA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/9955 NUTRITION $256,015

39 CMD SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/E/NGO/7880 EDUCATION $325,001

40 CMD SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/NGO/7881 WASH $260,000

41 CMD SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/7883 HEALTH $150,000

42 CMD SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/E/NGO/9796 EDUCATION $700,215


43 CMD SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/9797 WASH $438,789

44 CMD SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/9798 HEALTH $100,000

45 CMMB SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/INGO/8152 PROTECTION $50,000

46 COER SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/NGO/8300 FSL $299,998

47 CORDAID SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/FSL/INGO/9996 FSL $255,000

48 CORDAID SSD-18/HSS10/RA1/H/INGO/11427 HEALTH $249,637

49 CRADA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/9869 HEALTH $100,000

50 CUAMM SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/9902 NUTRITION $184,920

51 CW SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/INGO/7937 ES & NFI $100,000

52 CW SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/INGO/10038 ES & NFI $189,552

53 DDG SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/INGO/8108 PROTECTION $600,000

54 DDG SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/INGO/9946 PROTECTION $850,000

55 DRC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/INGO/7919 ES & NFI $130,000

56 DRC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/INGO/8129 PROTECTION $265,000

57 DRC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/CCCM/INGO/9780 CCCM $265,000

58 DRC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/INGO/9792 PROTECTION $250,000

59 DRC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/INGO/10087 ES & NFI $200,005

60 FAO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/FSL/UN/10025 FSL $1,450,000

61 GREDA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/10005 PROTECTION $120,231

62 HACO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/8241 PROTECTION $45,903

63 HACO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/10081 WASH $170,407

64 HACT SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/10014 WASH $240,000

65 HCO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/8204 PROTECTION $100,000

66 HCO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9777 PROTECTION $100,000

67 HCO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/9790 HEALTH $100,000

68 HCO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/NGO/9891 NUTRITION $175,649

69 HDC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/NGO/8094 ES & NFI $64,311

70 HDC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/NGO/10056 ES & NFI $100,000

71 HI SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/INGO/9782 HEALTH $200,000

72 HLSS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/CCCM/NGO/7921 CCCM $260,000

73 HLSS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/7985 HEALTH $100,000

74 HLSS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/8113 PROTECTION $49,999

75 HLSS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/CCCM/NGO/9918 CCCM $215,000

76 HLSS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9919 PROTECTION $125,000

77 HRSS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9770 PROTECTION $130,001

78 IAS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/INGO/8146 WASH $200,000

79 IHO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/8169 HEALTH $180,000

80 IHO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/NGO/8238 WASH $150,000

81 IHO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/9945 WASH $270,000

82 IHO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/10030 HEALTH $100,000

83 IMC UK SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/INGO/8205 HEALTH $300,000

84 IMC UK SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/10040 NUTRITION $279,502

85 IMC UK SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/INGO/10080 HEALTH $200,000

86 IMC UK SSD-18/HSS10/RA1/H/INGO/11297 HEALTH $603,784

87 Internews SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/CCCM/INGO/9963 CCCM $350,000

88 INTERSOS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/INGO/8184 PROTECTION $250,000

89 INTERSOS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/E/INGO/8191 EDUCATION $200,000

ANNEXES 51

90 INTERSOS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/INGO/8212 WASH $200,000

91 INTERSOS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/INGO/8258 ES & NFI $200,000

92 INTERSOS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/E/INGO/9889 EDUCATION $302,712



95 INTERSOS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/INGO/10041 ES & NFI $224,928

96 IOM SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/CCCM/UN/7890 CCCM $200,000

97 IOM SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/UN/7897 HEALTH $200,000

98 IOM SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/L/UN/7900 LOGISTICS $1,300,000

99 IOM SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/L/UN/10026 LOGISTICS $1,200,000

100 IOM SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/UN/10071 HEALTH $200,000

101 IRC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/INGO/8255 FSL $390,000

102 IsraAID SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/INGO/10072 PROTECTION $179,998

103 JAM Int. SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/9965 NUTRITION $160,238

104 JAM Int. SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/FSL/INGO/10046 FSL $159,986

105 JUH SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/INGO/8074 NUTRITION $200,000

106 LCED SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/NGO/7988 ES & NFI $140,309

107 LCED SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/NGO/8005 WASH $100,948

108 LCED SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/NGO/9859 ES & NFI $121,882

109 LiveWell SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/8081 HEALTH $100,000

110 LiveWell SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/9824 HEALTH $100,001

111 LiveWell SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/9845 WASH $205,859

112 MAYA SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/8090 PROTECTION $50,000

113 MAYA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9804 PROTECTION $125,000

114 MDM Spain SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/INGO/9787 HEALTH $200,000

115 MHA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9769 PROTECTION $150,000

116 MTT SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/8256 PROTECTION $50,000

117 MTT SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9861 PROTECTION $50,010

118 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/NGO/7944 NUTRITION $300,000

119 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/NGO/7984 WASH $259,978

120 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/NGO/8046 FSL $204,000

121 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/8060 PROTECTION $54,000

122 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/E/NGO/8144 EDUCATION $269,722

123 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/8157 HEALTH $150,000

124 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9772 PROTECTION $130,000

125 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/NGO/9773 NUTRITION $308,230

126 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/9791 WASH $400,000

127 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/9836 HEALTH $149,993

128 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/E/NGO/9959 EDUCATION $519,172

129 Nile Hope SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/FSL/NGO/10015 FSL $240,000

130 NPP SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/INGO/8101 PROTECTION $276,830



133 NRC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/INGO/7953 ES & NFI $169,962

134 NRC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/E/INGO/7954 EDUCATION $347,345

135 NRC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/INGO/9938 ES & NFI $215,000

136 NSDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/NGO/7893 WASH $130,000


137 NSDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/9907 WASH $200,406

138 OPEN SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/8137 HEALTH $120,000

139 OPEN SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/10032 HEALTH $100,000

140 PAH SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/INGO/7915 WASH $259,991

141 PAH SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/INGO/8035 ES & NFI $259,983

142 PAH SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/INGO/9784 ES & NFI $275,274

143 PAH SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/INGO/9841 WASH $365,364

144 PCO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/NGO/8089 FSL $135,000

145 Plan Int. SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/INGO/8220 ES & NFI $105,532

146 Plan Int. SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/10070 NUTRITION $191,251

147 RI SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/9847 NUTRITION $211,309

148 RMF SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/9774 NUTRITION $171,157

149 RuCAPD SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/NGO/7947 FSL $105,074

150 RuCAPD SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/FSL/NGO/9830 FSL $104,860

151 RUWASSA SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/NGO/7892 WASH $200,000

152 SAADO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/NGO/8252 FSL $162,026

153 SAADO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/FSL/NGO/10077 FSL $159,874

154 SC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/INGO/7941 HEALTH $140,000

155 SC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/INGO/7978 NUTRITION $400,000

156 SC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/INGO/7987 PROTECTION $260,099

157 SC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/E/INGO/7997 EDUCATION $280,001

158 SC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/E/INGO/9810 EDUCATION $700,703

159 SC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/9825 NUTRITION $533,806

160 SC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/INGO/9921 HEALTH $200,000

161 SC SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/INGO/9939 PROTECTION $200,004

162 SLI - SS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/10073 PROTECTION $49,927

163 SMC SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/7931 HEALTH $170,042

164 Solidarités SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/INGO/8008 FSL $145,500

165 Solidarités SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/INGO/8118 WASH $260,000

166 Solidarités SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/INGO/9989 WASH $300,000

167 SPEDP SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/NGO/7894 WASH $150,000

168 SPEDP SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/7976 HEALTH $100,000

169 SPEDP SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/E/NGO/8036 EDUCATION $326,354

170 SPEDP SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/NGO/8078 ES & NFI $100,000

171 SPEDP SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/9786 WASH $351,984

172 SPEDP SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/FSL/NGO/9789 FSL $186,071

173 SPEDP SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/E/NGO/9795 EDUCATION $411,434

174 SPOCI SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/10039 WASH $148,077

175 SSLS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9983 PROTECTION $249,999

176 SSUDA SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/NGO/8110 ES & NFI $103,699

177 SSUDA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/NGO/9924 ES & NFI $100,002

178 TEARFUND SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/9833 NUTRITION $221,432

179 TF SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/NGO/7916 ES & NFI $57,443

180 TF SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9842 PROTECTION $94,000

181 THESO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/NGO/8189 WASH $120,000

182 THESO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/8301 HEALTH $100,002

183 TRI-SS SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/7977 HEALTH $140,000

ANNEXES 53

184 TRI-SS SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/9910 HEALTH $100,000

185 UNFPA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/UN/9860 HEALTH $375,000

186 UNICEF SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/UN/8121 HEALTH $202,551

187 UNICEF SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/UN/8176 NUTRITION $424,321

188 UNICEF SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/UN/9812 PROTECTION $199,470

189 UNICEF SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/UN/9848 NUTRITION $1,083,153



192 UNIDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/NGO/7926 NUTRITION $400,000

193 UNIDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/P/NGO/7980 PROTECTION $100,000

194 UNIDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/NGO/7981 WASH $133,000

195 UNIDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/8049 HEALTH $250,000

196 UNIDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/WASH/NGO/9801 WASH $271,546

197 UNIDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/9820 HEALTH $361,400

198 UNIDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/NGO/9849 PROTECTION $275,000

199 UNIDO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/NGO/9870 NUTRITION $279,964

200 UNKEA SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/NGO/7979 HEALTH $180,000

201 UNKEA SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/NGO/8069 FSL $105,000

202 UNKEA SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/NGO/9954 HEALTH $100,000

203 VSF SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/INGO/7965 FSL $105,000

204 WFP SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/L/UN/7904 LOGISTICS $700,000

205 WFP SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/UN/8314 NUTRITION $396,901

206 WFP SSD-18/HSS10/RA1/L/UN/11248 LOGISTICS $360,000

207 WHO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/H/UN/8088 HEALTH $700,001

208 WHO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/WASH/UN/8174 WASH $76,029

209 WHO SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/UN/8178 NUTRITION $200,010



212 WHO SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/UN/10045 NUTRITION $176,015

213 World Relief SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/E/INGO/8126 EDUCATION $251,076

214 World Relief SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/9827 NUTRITION $365,262

215 World Relief SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/E/INGO/9832 EDUCATION $481,006

216 World Relief SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/INGO/9890 HEALTH $199,750

217 WV SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/N/INGO/7917 NUTRITION $370,404

218 WV SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/NFI/INGO/8009 ES & NFI $265,007

219 WV SSD-18/HSS10/SA1/FSL/INGO/8190 FSL $130,500

220 WV SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/H/INGO/9873 HEALTH $199,999

221 WV SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/NFI/INGO/9874 ES & NFI $262,674

222 WV SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/N/INGO/9944 NUTRITION $194,407

223 WV SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/INGO/10009 PROTECTION $100,008

224 WV SSD-18/HSS10/SA2/P/INGO/10034 PROTECTION $210,014

225 WV SSD-18/HSS10/RA1/H/INGO/11268 HEALTH $499,999 Total $53,365,968


ANNEX C SSHF ADVISORY BOARD

STAKEHOLDER ORGANIZATION

Chairperson Humanitarian Coordinator (HC)

NGO (International) Save the Children (SC)

NGO (National) Support for Peace and Education Development Program (SPEDP)

UN World Food Program (WFP)

UN World Health Organization (WHO)

Donor Germany

Donor Sweden (Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, SIDA)

Non-Contributing donor(observer) United States of America (Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, USAID/OFDA)

SSHF/OCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)

SSHF/UNDP United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)

The Advisory Board represents the views of the NGO community, UN Agencies and donors in providing guidance to the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC) on strategic and policy matters in pursuit of the SSHF’s overarching objectives. AB members represent their respective constituencies, not individual agency opinions. The Advisory Board is responsible for: (a) Advising the HC on the strategic direction of the SSHF and its continuous development and refinement as an effective humanitarian funding instrument. This may involve participation in occasional reviews, evaluations and other learning initiatives; (b) Analysing risks that may affect the achievement of the Fund’s objectives and advise the HC on risk management strategies; (c) Supporting the HC in the mobilisation of resources to maximise overall reach and impact of the Fund; (d) Advising the HC on the quality, transparency and equitability of SSHF processes throughout the programme cycle. Participate during the development of allocation strategies, at cluster defences, and at any other stage as may be required by the HC. Advise on monitoring and reporting arrangements; (e) Supporting the promotion of the Fund, including but not limited to the review of key information products such as Annual Reports, to ensure an accurate reflection of achievements.

ANNEXES 55

ANNEX D

ACCRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AAHI Action Africa Help International

AAP Accountability to Affected Population

AB Advisory Board

ACTED Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development

ADA African Development Aid

AFOD Action for Development

AFSS Andre Foods South Sudan

AHC African Humanitarian Corps

ARC American Relief Committee

ASCO Aid Support Community Organization

BBTT Boda Boda Talk Talk

CAFAD Community Aid for Fisheries and Agriculture Development

CAO Community Action Organisation

CARD Community Aid for Relief and Development

CARE CARE International

CASS Children Aid South Sudan

CBPFs Country Based Pooled Funds

CCCM Camp Coordination and Camp Management

CCOC Confident Children out of Conflict

CCOSS Care for Children and Old Age in South Sudan

CHADO Community Health and Development Organization

CIDO Community Initiative for Development Organisation

CINA Community in Need Aid

CMA Christian Mission Aid

CMD Christian Mission for Development

CMMB Catholic Medical Missions Board

COER Community Organization for Emergency and Rehabilitation

CORDAID Catholic Organization for Relief and Development Aid

CP Child Protection

CPF Common Performance Framework

CRADA Christian Recovery and Development Agency

CTS Common Transport Service

CUAMM Collegio Universitario Aspirante e Medici Missionari

CW Concern Worldwide


DDG Danish De-Mining Group

DRC Danish Refugee Council

DRC Democratic Republic of Congo

EVD Ebola Virus Disease

FAO Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations

FSL Food Security and Livelihoods

GBP The British Pound

GBV Gender Based Violence

GMS Grant Management System

GP General Protection

GREDA Grassroots Relief and Development Agency

HACO Humane Aid for Community Organization

HACT Humanitarian Aid for Change and Transformation

HC Humanitarian Coordinator

HCO Hold the Child Organisation

HDC Humanitarian and Development Consortium

HFU Humanitarian Financing Unit

HI Humanity & Inclusion

HLSS Health Link South Sudan

HNO Humanitarian Needs Overview

HQ Head Quarter

HRP Humanitarian Response Plan

HRSS Hope Restoration South Sudan

IAS International Aid Services

ICWG Inter-Cluster Working Group

IDP Internally Displaced Person

IHO Impact Health Organisation

IMC-UK International Medical Corps - United Kingdom

IN Internews

INGO International Non-Governmental Organization

IOM International Organization for Migration

IPMT Integrated Protection Mobile Teams

IRC International Rescue Committee

IYCF-E Infant and Young Child Feeding in Emergencies

JAM Joint Aid Management International

JUH Johanniter Unfallhilfe

LCED Lacha Community and Economic Development

ANNEXES 57

LiveWell LiveWell South Sudan

MA Mine Action

MAM Moderate Acute Malnutrition

MAYA Mundri Active Youth Association

MDM Magna Children at Risk

MHA Mobile Humanitarian Agency

MIYCN Mother, Infant and Young Children Nutrition

MPTF Multi-Partner Trust Fund

MT Metric Tonnes

MTT Mobile Theatre Team

NFI Non-Food Items

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NNGO National Non-Governmental Organization

NPP Non-Violent Peace Force

NRC Norwegian Refugee Council

NSDO Nile Sustainable Development Organization

OCHA Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

OPD Out Patient Department

OPEN Organization for Peoples' Empowerment & Needs

OTP Outpatient Therapeutic Programme

PAH Polish Humanitarian Action

PCO Peace Corps Organization

Plan Plan International

PLW Pregnant and Lactating Women

PoC Protection of Civilians

PSC Project Support Costs

PSS Psychosocial Support

RI Relief International

RMF Real Medicine Foundation

RUCAPD Rural Community Action for Peace and Development

RUSF Ready to Use Supplementary Food

RUTF Ready to Use Therapeutic Foods

RUWASSA Rural Water and Sanitation Support Agency

S/NFI Shelter and Non-Food Items

SAADO Smile Again Africa Development Organisation

SAM Severe Acute Malnutrition

SC Save the Children


SMC Sudan Medical Care

SPEDP Support for Peace and Education Development Programme

SPOCI Stop Poverty Communal Initiative

SRC Strategic Review Committee

SSHF South Sudan Humanitarian Fund

SSLI-SS Save Lives Initiative South Sudan

SSLS South Sudan Law Society

SSUDA South Sudan Development Agency

TF Titi Foundation

THESO The Health Support Organization

TRC Technical Review Committee

TRI-SS The Rescue Initiative South Sudan

TS Technical Secretariat

U5 Under Five Years

UASC Unaccompanied and Separated Children

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNFPA United Nations Population Fund

UNHAS United Nations Humanitarian Air Services

UNHCR United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees

UNICEF United Nation Children’s Fund

UNIDO Universal Intervention and Development Organization

UNKEA Universal Network for Knowledge and Empowerment Agency

USD/$ United States Dollar

VSF Vétérinaires Sans Frontières

WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

WFP World Food Programme

WHO World Health Organization

WR World Relief

WV World Vision South Sudan

ANNEXES 59

ANNEX E

REFERENCE MAP


WEB PLATFORMS unocha.org/south-

sudanchfsouthsudan.unocha.org gms.unocha.orgfts.unocha.org

mptf.undp.org/factsheet/fund/HSS10

SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS @OCHASouthSudan

@unochafacebook.com/UNOCHA Email: [email protected]

south sudan humanitarian fund annual report sudan hf... · 2019-05-01 · south sudan humanitarian...

Documents