DRC Pooled Fund. Annual Report. January December UN Humanitarian Coordinator

Transcription

1 DRC Pooled Fund Annual Report January December 2007 UN Humanitarian Coordinator Kinshasa, March 2008

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary DRC Pooled Fund in 2007: Overview DRC Pooled Fund: Guidelines and Processes Pooled Fund allocation in accordance with needs Pooled Fund management mechanisms The role of the Humanitarian Coordinator and the Pooled Fund Board OCHA/UNDP Pooled Fund Support Unit The Technical Review Committee Procedures for Selection of Priority Projects and Fund Allocation Pooled Fund Allocations First standard allocation Second standard allocation Third standard allocation The Rapid Response Reserve Summary of 2007 fund allocations CERF allocations DRC Pooled Fund and CERF 2007: Results by cluster Overview Project Achievements Education Cluster Health Cluster Food Security Cluster Water and Sanitation Cluster Early Recovery Cluster Protection Cluster NFI Cluster Logistics Cluster Nutrition Cluster The impact of common humanitarian funding in DRC DRC Pooled Fund : Perspectives Actions taken Further steps in

3 GRAPH INDEX Graph HAP Funding: Pooled Fund contributions (in million of USD) Graph HAP Funding: Pooled Fund and CERF (in million of USD) Graph HAP Funding: Pooled Fund, Other Donors and CERF Graph 4 - OCHA/UNDP Pooled Fund Support Unit Graph Trends in Humanitarian Aid (Within and outside CAP/HAP).95 3/98

4 TABLE INDEX Table 1 - HAP Funding:Pooled Fund and E-CERF (in million of USD) Table Rapid Response Reserve: Projects funded by sector Table RRM: NGO Focal Point Activities (January February 2008) Table PF Rapid Response Reserve: Projects by type of organisation Table PF Rapid Response Reserve: Projects funded by organisation Table Rapid Response Reserve: Projects funded by province Table Pooled Fund: Allocation by province/region Table Pooled Fund: Allocation by cluster/sector Table Pooled Fund: Utilisation Rate and Expenditure rate as of 31 December Table Pooled Fund: End-year Balances Table DRC Pooled Fund - Paid Contributions (as of 31/12/2007) Table CERF Allocations to DRC Table CERF: Funds Allocated by UN Agency Table CERF - Funds allocated by cluster/sector Table Humanitarian Aid within and outside CAP/HAP...94 Table DRC Humanitarian Aid CAP/HAP against total humanitarian funding 94 4/98

5 ANNEXES Annex DRC Humanitarian Action Plan: Pooled Fund allocations by round. Annex DRC Humanitarian Action Plan: Pooled Fund and CERF breakdown of allocations by province and by sector. Annex DRC Humanitarian Action Plan: Pooled Fund and CERF - Breakdown of allocations by province and by organisation; - Detailed breakdown of allocated funds by type of organisation. Annex DRC Humanitarian Action Plan: Pooled Fund and CERF - Summary of the distribution of funds allocated by type of organisation; - Funds distribution and expenditure rate. Annex 5 Evaluation Common/Pooled Humanitarian Funds in Sudan and DRC (Executive Summary, December 2007) Annex Annual Report - Pooled Fund NGO Projects: Monitoring and Evaluation, UNDP. Annex DRC Humanitarian Action Plan: Humanitarian Coordinator allocations letters (27 February, 24 July, 23 November) Annex DRC Humanitarian Action Plan: Guidelines of the DRC Pooled Fund 2007 (second allocation) 5/98

6 Executive Summary In line with the principles of the Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) initiative and the objectives of the Humanitarian Reform launched in 2005, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) Pooled Fund mechanism was established in 2006 to strengthen funding of humanitarian aid in accordance with needs. At the beginning of 2007, based on the 2006 experience and recommendations, a variety of activities took place in order to improve and reinforce the Pooled Fund (PF) mechanism in DRC. Those activities focused mainly on: the revision of the Pooled Fund Terms of reference; the establishment of an OCHA-UNDP Joint Pooled Fund Support Unit; the strengthening of the information system on PF activities; the improvement of fund allocation guidelines for partners; the development of a project database; the establishment of a project technical review process. A second evaluation, which took place late 2007, recognized the progress of the mechanism in DRC, emphasizing the role played by the common fund in the overall humanitarian response through better planning, prioritisation and coordination. The same evaluation also concluded that it helped strengthening the role of the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC), and reinforced coordination mechanism. The first part of the report focuses on processes and mechanisms of the Pooled Fund while the second part will present the results of the projects by clusters. Achievements and constraints in the implementation of UN agency projects and programmes are found in the annual reports of UN agencies in accordance with standard reporting requirements applying to UN agencies. Pooled fund contributions Overall financial contributions to the Pooled Fund were slightly higher than the ones in 2006 for both CERF and Pooled Fund and the number of donors has increased to nine in 2007, thus demonstrating the PF s contribution to the expansion of donors participating to the humanitarian assistance in DRC through the HAP. Belgium, Canada, DfID/UK, Ireland, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain and Sweden contributed to the Pooled Fund in 2007 with USD 117,788,433. Three fund allocation rounds took place in 2007, USD was allocated to support the activities of 200 humanitarian/emergency projects implemented by 9 UN agencies (104 projects), as well as 32 INGOs and 11 National NGOs (96 projects). UN agencies received USD 75.8 million while funds allocated directly and indirectly to NGOs amounted to USD 57.9 (49.6%). Link with HAP Using the Humanitarian Action Plan (HAP) as the primary tool for strategic planning, prioritisation and fund allocation, the Pooled Fund has, in an integrated manner, significantly contributed to supporting the implementation of common priorities defined in the HAP, thus consolidating its role as a tool to strengthen linkages between funding and strategic planning. While donor contributions increased in 2007, compared to 2006, the Pooled Fund & CERF represented the same percentage of the overall funding in the HAP: 37% (HAP funding increasing from USD 354 million in 2006 up to USD 463 million in 2007). 6/98

7 Rapid Response Reserve In addition to the standard allocation procedures, the Rapid Response Reserve (USD million) was primarily used in 2007 to cover emergency projects and urgent strategic projects when support was urgently needed between each round of standard allocations. 73% of the Rapid Response Reserve funds were allocated through the UNICEF- OCHA Rapid Response Mechanism (RRM) based on the installed capacities and experience of the RRM to provide relief assistance in cases of internal displacement in DRC new developments Responding to difficulties highlighted by the Pooled Fund 2006 evaluation, special efforts were put into improving procedures for the selection of priority projects and fund allocations. Solutions to enhance coordination between Kinshasa and provinces were proposed, expanded NGO participation in CPIA was achieved. In addition, cluster lead agencies were asked to develop prioritisation criteria for their respective cluster. This resulted in the development of new guidelines including a five-step procedure for the selection of priority projects and fund allocations for the second 2007 PF allocation, which greatly improved the overall quality of the process. These guidelines provided partners with a detailed overview of all the steps of the process to be followed and the role of each of the various actors. The role of CPIAs in defining provincial strategies and priorities was key to the process, while national cluster leads were instrumental in ensuring the technical quality of the projects in line with international quality standards. Project outcomes and results In the course of 2007, the Humanitarian Coordinator had strongly advocated for improved quality of reporting on project implementation, whether funded through CERF or Pooled Fund. Specific emphasis has been put on measuring project outcomes and results. The Joint Unit has made a special effort in developing simple measuring tools. Chapter 6 of this report presents project results per clusters PF Evaluation Recommendations Based on the most recent PF evaluation, other weaknesses were highlighted, notably the need to relieve the burden and responsibilities falling under the CPIAs during the allocation process, which in some occasions resulted in conflicts of interests. Discussions and consultations to revise the process were held late in the year, resulting in reinforced role of cluster lead. Proposals were presented for the implementation during the next exercise. In the coming months, the HC will take the necessary steps to ensure that the Joint Unit is fully staffed, that project technical review processes are strengthened, and guidelines for project preparation are standardized. At the same time, the Joint Unit will provide regular training to clusters and CPIAs, in order to continue reinforcing their capacity. Increased and continuous efforts will be put on the ongoing collection of project results and outcomes reports allowing for the measurement of the impact that projects have on the humanitarian situation in DRC. Proposals to reinforce monitoring and evaluation of projects for both NGOs and UN agencies will be made. Finally, initiatives such as the Pooled Fund and the Rapid Response Mechanism progressively reinforce collaboration with development actors and ensure links with the Country Assistance Framework (CAF) and long-term reconstruction and development programmes in DRC. Means to strengthen this key collaboration will be developed. 7/98

8 1. DRC Pooled Fund in 2007: Overview In the last two years, the Pooled Fund played a crucial role in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), contributing, along with other important initiatives, to the support of the DRC Humanitarian Action Plan (HAP) and the implementation of key objectives of the Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) initiative broadly aiming at ensuring greater predictability of humanitarian funding in the country. Overall, the Fund maintained a certain level of earmarking in 2007, using the HAP as the primary framework for strategic planning, prioritisation and fund allocation in DRC. During the year, the Fund also consolidated its role as a tool to strengthen the linkages between funding and strategic planning, thus enabling the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC) to allocate funds in a timely, flexible manner and according to priorities defined within the HAP gaps by sector and region, as well as cross-sector interventions in the country. Similarly, the Fund provided sufficient flexibility to respond to sudden onset emergencies. Also, the Fund has facilitated the gradual expansion of the number of donors contributing to both HAP priorities and overall funding resources available for humanitarian assistance in DRC. Although the scope of the humanitarian and emergency needs remains a major challenge for the humanitarian community throughout the country, additional resources provided through the Pooled Fund have represented an essential contribution to support the implementation of common priorities defined in the HAP. Nine donors contributed to the DRC Pooled Fund in 2007: Belgium, Canada (CIDA), Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden (Sida), and the United Kingdom (DfID). Donor contributions to the Fund amounted to a total of USD million (including USD 5.6 million of commitments paid in early 2008). The total programmable amount was USD 123.2; including USD 4.6 million of 2006 carry over and 824,493 exchange gain and loss. Extensive support of existing coordination mechanisms such as the Provincial Inter-agency Committees (CPIA) and cluster groups continued and expanded during the year. The tables below summarize coordination responsibilities in the provinces and cluster leadership at the national level. Province/Region Bandundu Kasai Occidental Bas-Congo Kasai Oriental Province Orientale Maniema North Kivu Equateur South Kivu Ituri Katanga Kinshasa CPIA Chair UNDP MONUC/Civil Affairs Section MONUC/Civil Affairs Section MONUC/Civil Affairs Section OCHA UNDP OCHA WHO OCHA OCHA OCHA UNFPA Clusters Education Emergency Telecommunications Food Security Logistics Nutrition Protection Community reintegration NFI and Shelter Water and Sanitation Health Cluster lead UNICEF WFP/UNICEF FAO/WFP WFP UNICEF UNHCR UNHCR/UNDP UNICEF UNICEF WHO CPIAs played a central role in defining provincial strategies and priorities, supported by cluster groups at the national level. In addition, national cluster leads were more actively involved in the process in order to ensure improved quality control of technical aspects of selected projects in accordance with international standards adapted to the situation in the DRC. The continuous involvement of cluster groups at national level and in the provinces contributed to systematic and timely identification of gaps, thus providing the Fund with the necessary tools for well-informed funding decision-making on the basis of identified priority needs. 8/98

9 The year was a period of consolidation and reinforcement of Pooled Fund management and governance. A number of recommendations made by the evaluation exercise carried out in late 2006 were implemented during the first three months of the year. These included: Full establishment of the OCHA/UNDP Joint Support Unit; Improvement of fund allocation guidelines for partners; Refinement of information management tools, including the development of a Pooled Fund database, electronic project sheets for the submission of project proposals; Streamlining of fund disbursement process. In the first quarter of the year, the Humanitarian Coordinator and the Pooled Fund Board requested additional efforts from UN agencies and NGOs in order to improve the quality of project proposals. A Technical Review Committee was established to this purpose in March. Pooled Fund donors, cluster lead agencies, cluster members, NGO representatives and the team of the Joint Support Unit are members of the Committee. Committee members ensure technical expertise, balanced representation of stakeholders, overall coherence and compliance with the Pooled Fund guidelines. In 2007, the HC continued advocating for the direct involvement of donors in the work of the Pooled Fund. Improving information sharing with Fund donors not represented in the country as well as expanding the number of donors supporting this initiative were also part of these efforts. Coordination, regular information exchange and consultations on Pooled Fund strategies and fund allocation decisions with bilateral humanitarian donors outside the Pooled Fund were organised during the year. These initiatives were instrumental for the HC, Pooled Fund Board members and humanitarian donors in general to avoid major funding gaps, reduce overlaps and ensure better coordinated use of humanitarian aid. 2. DRC Pooled Fund: Guidelines and Processes In 2006, different modalities aimed at establishing a consultative decision-making process and ways in which funds were allocated to each province and cluster/sector were tested. These attempts focused on the following aspects: The largest participation of stakeholders in the decision-making process; Selected projects were part of coherent provincial strategies defined by CPIAs; Resources were allocated on the basis of priority needs of the population in each province; Identified partners possessed the right skills and competencies. While these goals were achieved to a large extent, the independent evaluation of common humanitarian funds conducted in late 2006 highlighted the need to further streamline the process and improve guidelines provided to UN agencies and NGOs. The most challenging tasks related to expanded participation and improved timing of funding allocations, which required a review of the process of fund allocation. While the involvement of organisations working in the provinces was considered essential since the establishment of the Pooled Fund, the consultation mechanisms also resulted in a lengthy process given both the size of the country and the large number of UN and NGO partners. In 2006, projects had been selected either on the basis of project sheets included in the HAP or on the basis of a new project proposal endorsed by the CPIA as priorities evolved or new priorities were identified. Then, national cluster groups were tasked to review the technical aspects of selected projects. A final step was the UNDP-led analysis of NGO 9/98

10 project proposals 1. Projects submitted by UN agencies were not required to go through a review process. These arrangements were revised in 2007 in order to improve the quality of the project selection process. To this purpose, the Joint Support Unit worked on (a) the preparation of standard guidelines detailing all steps in the process of project selection, project proposal preparation and submission, and (b) the development of a unique standard project proposal format for both UN agencies and NGOs. The establishment of the Technical Review Committee in April 2007 was also intended to strengthen project quality control. This work led to considerable improvements throughout the year, which were reflected at the time of the second standard fund allocation in July Standard guidelines now in use by DRC Pooled Fund are attached in Annex 8. In addition, at the request of the HC, the Joint Support Unit started working on the consolidation of the project reporting system. The system is aimed at providing substantive information on project implementation, including outcomes and results measured against project objectives and project constraints. The report format was developed on the basis of UNDP report requirements for NGOs and standard reporting requirements of the CERF Secretariat. The HC and the Pooled Fund Board gave special attention to existing donor reporting obligations of UN agencies to avoid excessive reporting burdens. Thus, the final report format and frequency was shared with the UN Country Team, the Humanitarian Advisory Group in Kinshasa and NGOs for comments. The reporting system, which consists of mid-year and final reports from UN agencies and NGOs, was then adopted by the HC in the last quarter of By March 2008, the system was fully functional. In addition, monitoring and evaluation activities continued in In its capacity of Participating UN Organisation, UNDP conducted approximately 165 monitoring and evaluation visits to NGO-implemented project sites. Also, the 2008 HAP introduced a set of monitoring and evaluation tools to measure progress of implementation of activities in HAP priority sectors. These tools have been developed by national and provincial clusters and it is expected that the first reporting results, which OCHA will compile by cluster/sector and province, will be available in May Pooled Fund allocation in accordance with needs During the year, the Pooled Fund further consolidated its role as the largest single funding source for the DRC Humanitarian Action Plan. The expansion of the Fund size led to the need for adjusting and upgrading Fund management instruments. Willingness to test new options, flexibility and readiness to explore alternatives at the time of considering provincial strategies, identify priority projects matching with HAP strategies, define funding needs for geographical areas, clusters/sectors, and decide on funding ceilings have characterized the approach of the Fund. Table 1 lists (a) 2007 donor contributions to the Pooled Fund and (b) funds allocated to DRC through the Under-funded or the Rapid Response Window of the CERF, the second largest common fund mechanism which contributed to the priorities of the DRC HAP during the year, and which saw its allocation processes managed in ways similar to those of the Pooled Fund. 1 In 2006, this additional layer in the process had created considerable delays in the fund disbursement for NGO projects. 10/98

11 Table 1 - HAP Funding: Pooled Fund and E-CERF (in million of USD) Donor Contribution %/Total Pooled Fund %/Total Pooled Fund and CERF Belgium 814, Canada 3,079, DFID/United Kingdom 58,592, Ireland 9,416, Luxembourg 292, Netherlands 22,228, Norway 3,303, Spain 5,295, Sweden 14,765, Total 2007 PF contributions 117,788, carry over 4,640, Exchange rate gain and losses (2006) 824, Total 2007 Pooled Fund 123,253, CERF Under-funded Window 47,506, CERF Rapid Response Window 5,000, Total 2007 CERF 52,506, Total (PF + CERF) 175,759, Sources: Financial Tracking System, OCHA-UNDP Pooled Fund Support Unit, February 2008 Graphs 1 and 2 below show donor contributions to the DRC Pooled Fund in 2007 and the comparative participation of both mechanisms within the total contribution of common funds to DRC. Graph HAP Funding: Pooled Fund contributions (in million of USD) Pooled Fund Contributions 2007 Sweden 14,765, % Spain 5,295, % Belgium 814, % Canada 3,079, % DFID/UK 58,592, % Norway 3,303, % Netherlands 22,228, % Luxembourg 292, % Ireland 9,416, % Source: OCHA-UNDP Pooled Fund Support Unit, February /98

12 Graph HAP Funding: Pooled Fund and CERF (in million of USD) Pooled Fund and CERF in 2007 CERF Under- Funded 47,506, % CERF Rapid Response 5,000, % PF 123,253, % Source: OCHA-UNDP Pooled Fund Support Unit, February 2008 Common funding has played a key role in funding the DRC Humanitarian Action Plan since Graph 3 shows contributions to the 2007 HAP by donor indicating the funds channelled through the Pooled Fund for participating donors. 12/98

13 Graph HAP Funding: Pooled Fund, Other Donors and CERF 2007 DRC Humanitarian Action Plan Funding CERF Pooled Fund Millions USD 120 Other contributions 100 United States ECHO United Kingdom CERF Netherlands Sweden Carry-over Belgium Germany Spain Ireland Others Norway Unearmarked by UN Canada France Japan Luxembourg Sources: Financial Tracking System, OCHA-UNDP Pooled Fund Support Unit, February Pooled Fund management mechanisms The large size of the Fund as well as the complexity of the humanitarian context in DRC required progressive adjustments of both the Fund management structure and allocation procedures. Among the initiatives encouraged by the HC and the Board in the course of the year 2007 the creation of the Pooled Fund Joint Unit and the establishment of the Technical Review Committee deserve particular attention The role of the Humanitarian Coordinator and the Pooled Fund Board The Humanitarian Coordinator has the overall responsibility of leading and coordinating the management of the Fund. The Pooled Fund Board, which includes representatives of the humanitarian community in country, advises the HC, ensures compliance with the agreed Terms of Reference (ToR) of the Fund and guarantees transparency in the use of funds. As defined within the ToR, the HC s main responsibilities are: Resource mobilisation Definition of standard allocation procedures Definition of the level of the Rapid Response Reserve Approval of projects in accordance with priority needs and funds allocations Approval of disbursements 13/98

14 Reporting Since the first year of implementation of the fund, the Pooled Fund Board has played an important role in advising the HC with regard to the overall management of the fund, its progressive evolution and its constant improvement. The Pooled Fund Board is chaired by the HC, local representatives of the three largest donors to the Pooled Fund, three Participating UN Organizations (representing clusters), and three representatives of the NGO community. The OCHA-UNDP PF Joint Unit is the Board secretariat. Key tasks of the Board are the following: Ensure transparent allocation of resources, based on needs, priorities and implementation capacities; Review PF guidelines and allocation procedures as necessary and advise the Humanitarian Coordinator accordingly; Review the operational activities of the PF; Advising on any issue related to the operation of the Pooled Fund. In 2007, Board members included DfID, the Netherlands and Sida, UNHCR, UNICEF, and WFP as cluster representatives (protection and community reintegration; water/sanitation, nutrition, non-food items (NFI)/shelter, education, logistics and food security, respectively); Action Contre la Faim, Save-the-Children/UK and Solidarités represented the humanitarian NGO community working in the country. The Board met eight times during the year and the work mainly focused on general Fund management, fund allocation strategies, refinement of project selection and fund allocation procedures. Special meetings with Board members also took place for each one of the three standard fund allocations made during the year. In consultation with the Board, the HC also established specific modalities of rapid consultation to respond to sudden onset emergencies. This mechanism allowed the HC to consult Board members through in order to rapidly allocate funds for specific sudden emergency situations through the Rapid Response Reserve. Ensuring transparency and broad participation in the management of the Fund was one of the priorities of the HC in In this regard, the Board supported the HC with a participatory approach to the different stakeholders involved in the process, involving other donors from time to time, including Spain, Canada and Belgium OCHA/UNDP Pooled Fund Support Unit In 2006, the HC and Pooled Fund Board approved the organisation of the OCHA/UNDP Support Unit to streamline the management process and support the governance of the Fund. Consequently, support to the HC and the Board evolved from two separate units, which had been originally set up within UNDP and OCHA, to a single dedicated unit in support to the Pooled Fund. 14/98

15 Graph 4 - OCHA/UNDP Pooled Fund Support Unit DRC Pooled Fund OCHA/UNDP Joint Support Unit Pooled Fund Board (3 Donors, 3 UN cluster lead Agencies, 2 NGOs) Humanitarian Coordinator Deputy Country Director / Operations OCHA -Field offices -Field coordination Head of OCHA UNDP Country Director UNDP -Post Conflict Unit -Sub offices Head of Joint Unit Pooled Fund assistant officer Pooled Fund Grant Officer Monitoring & Evaluation Specialist Administrative Assistant Monitoring & Evaluation Specialist Finance Specialist Pooled Fund Officer National Program Assistant National Monitoring & Evaluation (Kalemie) National Monitoring & Evaluation (Bunia) National Monitoring & Evaluation (Goma) Finance Assistant Pooled Fund Assistant Officer Main tasks of the Unit include: Improve harmonization between the functions performed by the personnel of UNDP and OCHA, supporting implementation of Pooled Fund projects cycle through disbursements, advisory services, technical reviews, etc; Enhance coordination and common understanding of the entire project cycle process; Facilitate HC management and governance role through the fund allocation process from the selection of projects (performed by OCHA personnel) until fund disbursement (performed by UNDP personnel); Facilitate communication with organisations receiving Pooled Fund contributions; Facilitate timely and efficient reporting and monitoring of Pooled Fund-resourced projects and consequently advise the HC and the Board; Support information flow and coordination with donors contributing to humanitarian programmes in DRC outside the Pooled Fund mechanism. In June, the Unit moved into a common office space, allowing the teams to work more effectively together. The Join Unit team management is ensured by an OCHA staff member. OCHA Head of Office and UNDP Country Director jointly ensure overall supervision of the team. The HC, in turn, ensures the overall guidance of the Pooled Fund Joint Unit. Additional tasks were progressively identified and assigned to the Joint Unit team during the year by both the Board and the HC. For this reason, four additional positions were added to the Unit structure to ensure the sufficient capacity to deal with the increased 15/98

16 workload. By the end of 2007, the Unit had 14 staff: 6 international staff and 8 national staff based in Kinshasa and in the provinces (Ituri, North Kivu, and Katanga). Activities such as the technical revision of projects, improvement of reporting and monitoring tasks (for both UN and NGOs implemented projects), expansion of the public information and communication tools were added responsibilities for the Unit during the reporting period. UNDP and OCHA made considerable efforts to support the progressive development and consolidation of the Fund. The support provided by other units within both organisations (OCHA Field Coordination, Humanitarian Information Services and Public Information sections in Kinshasa, Field Offices, Head of Office and UNDP Post Conflict Unit, Finance, Administration and Country Director) resulted essential to ensure the continuity and improvement in management of the Pooled Fund. More generally, the efforts of cluster groups and cluster lead agencies were instrumental in ensuring the improvement of the fund allocation process in 2007; including within the Technical Review Committee The Technical Review Committee In early 2007, donors stressed the importance of improving the overall quality control of Pooled Fund-resourced projects. Thus, two main areas of work were agreed upon among the HC and Board members: Improved selection of humanitarian activities and projects while identifying priority projects; Improved definition of project implementation strategies and quality of technical aspects of activities included in projects proposals. The first aspect was addressed through better-defined guidelines for fund allocations and reinforced support to clusters and CPIAs during the allocation process (see Section 3 below). The Joint Unit team increased the number of field missions aimed at explaining guidelines and procedures to cluster and CPIA members and organised question-andanswer sessions in the provinces on project selection criteria defined by the HC and the Board. In regard to the technical quality of project proposals, the HC in consultation with the Board tasked the Joint Unit to improve project proposal formats and organise an interagency Technical Review Committee (TRC). Upgraded formats have been in use since the first 2007 allocation for both UN Agencies and NGOs. Compared to the previous version used in 2006, the new format incorporates additional information on project objectives and activities which allows for a more in-depth technical review of proposals submitted to the HC and Board for approval. The TRC was established in April-May 2007 and Committee members include volunteer members of the Pooled Fund Board (representatives of donors and NGOs), cluster lead agencies and/or a technical expert appointed by the cluster, and members of the Pooled Fund Joint Unit. Main responsibilities of the Committee are: Verify compliance of proposed projects with fund allocation criteria as set out in the HC guidelines; Verify technical quality and feasibility of proposed projects, including accurate description of vulnerabilities of targeted beneficiaries and beneficiary identification; 16/98

17 Verify clear linkages between project objectives and relevant needs assessments; Ensure coherence between budget, activities and objectives; Verify implementation capacities of partners (based on direct experience of cluster lead agencies and members, and information available to the Pooled Fund Joint Unit on partner s previous performance); Avoid duplication and/or overlap of project activities in the same region and/or clusters/sectors funded by other donors. The Joint Unit facilitates the revision process and acts as secretariat of the TRC and is responsible for the organisation of TRC meetings by sector/cluster, compilation of project proposals per sector/clusters, follow up with cluster groups, UN Agencies and NGOs on project amendments in accordance with the recommendations made during the technical revision and transmission of reviewed projects to the HC for final approval of funding. The technical revision starts in parallel with the fund allocation process. On the basis of the lists of priority project sheets submitted by CPIAs, the HC approves a list of projects for funding pending review by the TRC. Selecting projects on the basis of project sheets allows for timeliness of the fund allocation process; thus allowing partners to focus on the preparation of the project proposal in its full format. The TRC uses a standard project review tool, which facilitates the comparative evaluation of proposed projects of all clusters/sectors. The review tool allows verification of coherence between project objectives with HAP priority strategies by cluster, technical experience of the requesting organisation by sector and geographical area, consistency of project narrative with project budget, and the overall technical quality of the project. Projects are ranked according to a scale from A to E. A projects are immediately cleared for funding, B projects are cleared for funding pending minor adjustments to be incorporated into the final project document. C and D Projects are returned to the relevant organisation for changes. Once revisions are incorporated, C projects can be cleared via exchange between TRC members, while D projects, usually requiring substantive revisions are re-submitted to the Committee for final review. E Projects are rejected and returned to the relevant organisation through cluster groups and CPIAs. Although the Committee does not challenge the validity of the project as identified priorities, but it simply states that the project proposal requires important and substantive changes before funding is approved. In this case, CPIAs and cluster groups have three options: Maintaining the proposed implementing partner, while ensuring necessary support through the cluster in order to improve quality of the proposal. Identifying a new implementing partner for project implementation. Project withdrawal. Although the process is labour intensive, it has contributed to improving the average quality of projects proposed for funding and it has been positively received by all stakeholders. However, the process delayed fund disbursement in general mostly due to lack of familiarity with the process for both partner organisations and cluster lead agencies. Pooled Fund disbursement mechanism Pooled Fund disbursement mechanisms have remained unchanged since Upon completion of the project technical review, the HC approves the project for funding. Complete project documentation and payment requests are submitted to UNDP which 17/98

18 proceed with fund disbursement. From then on, UNDP intervene either as Administrative Agent (AA), for UN Agency projects, or as Participating UN Organisation, for NGO projects. The Administrative Agent Fund disbursement to UN agencies Based on the 2006 experience, UNDP introduced a simplified procedure for fund disbursement to UN Agencies. The Request for Transfer and the Payment Order, originally issued under two separate documents and procedures, have been merged into a single format. This change has clearly accelerated the process of payments. However, further efforts are required to continue reduce delays in fund disbursement. In particular, improved tracking system of the various steps between the HC decision and the actual disbursement to Agencies needs to be systematically ensured. The mechanism for harmonizing programmatic, monitoring and reporting requirements, and obligations with the overall objective of limiting additional administrative burden of the Fund, needs to be further explored and discussed with both donors and UN Agencies. The Administrative Agent functions of UNDP are not limited to those performed in country, but also involve UNDP 2 and Agencies headquarters. Among those, submission of certified financial statements merits special attention. UN Agencies need to regularly submit to UNDP certified financial statements, in compliance with the DRC Pooled Fund MOU. In 2007, UNDP provided donors with the first certified financial statement of the DRC Pooled Fund. On the basis of the first report, it would be important that donors participating in the Fund and UNDP analyse the existing procedure in accordance with financial reporting requirements of each donor. Fund disbursement to NGOs NGOs projects are implemented in accordance with the provisions of Standard Agreements between the concerned NGOs and UNDP/DRC. UNDP country office receives advances from its HQs based on detailed fund projections in order to ensure swift fund disbursement. Payments to NGOs take approximately two to four weeks upon signature of the Project Document and the Cooperation Agreement between UNDP and NGOs and are made in two instalments. The first payment amounts to 70% of the total approved budget. Remaining 30% is paid upon submission of the following documentation: a) financial report on full utilisation of the first payment, b) project monitoring report reflecting progress in implementation, and c) submission of inventory of non expendable equipment. 3. Procedures for Selection of Priority Projects and Fund Allocation The evaluation studies carried out in 2006 and 2007 pointed out a series of difficulties and bottlenecks encountered by partners throughout the process. Thus, considerable efforts were made in 2007 to improve the content and quality of HC guidelines. Practical solutions were proposed to address most of these difficulties. Enhanced coordination between Kinshasa and the provinces was the most important step in the consultation process involving both cluster lead agencies and cluster focal points in the provinces. Expanded participation in CPIA to ensure NGO substantive participation also contributed greatly to the improvement in the process. Cluster lead agencies were asked to determine prioritisation criteria for their sector/cluster in order to facilitate the selection of priority projects. Field missions of the Joint Unit team to support common understanding on guidelines, criteria and principles of the Fund were also regularly organized. 2 Other functions performed by UNDP headquarters supporting the Administrative Agent or the Participating UN Organisation functions are not the object of this report. 18/98

19 In general, better defined guidelines improved the quality of the process considerably, especially during the second fund allocation held in July-September The new guidelines provided partners with a detailed overview of all process steps, including description of project selection criteria, formats, timing of the allocation process and role of CPIAs, cluster groups and Joint Unit. Nevertheless, some improvements are still required. In particular, modalities to determine funding ceilings allocated to provinces and sectors/clusters, and the reliance of the process on field-based coordination mechanisms (CPIA and clusters), with varying capacity levels, remain two main areas of concern. These issues are related to the management and governance of the Fund and require continuous learning and adjustment of existing working mechanisms on the part of all stakeholders participating in the Fund. In this respect, the importance of active involvement and sustained joint efforts from all actors, donors, UN Agencies and NGOs, to further consolidate and better define common approaches on common funding mechanisms cannot be underestimated. Step 1: Preparation of general guidelines In consultation with the Board, the HC defined the specific guidelines for standard fund allocation on the basis of HAP priority strategies and communicated these to all partners. The HC guidelines provided detailed description of contributions received for the Fund, priority criteria for funding submissions, general eligibility criteria for partner organisations, modalities to access the PF Rapid Response Reserve, responsibilities of CPIAs and cluster groups involved in the process, description of the Technical Review Committee work, and proposed calendar for the allocation. The team of the OCHA/UNDP Joint Unit organised field missions to introduce guidelines to partners in the provinces. OCHA/DRC teams with the support of cluster lead agencies and CPIA chair organisations facilitated the dissemination of the HC guidelines. Step 2: HAP priorities and selection of priority projects In accordance with HC guidelines, cluster groups identified most important priorities by geographical area and/or beneficiary groups in accordance with HAP strategies. On the basis of cluster priorities, CPIAs endorsed an overall provincial strategy. In accordance with the strategy priorities, provincial cluster groups identified and proposed project activities. Provincial cluster focal points consulted national lead agencies (a) to verify consistency with national cluster strategies and (b) technical project aspects. CPIAs received list of priority projects endorsed by the cluster groups and compiled a provincial inter-cluster project package, which was sent to the HC and the Pooled Fund Board for consideration. Projects were listed in order of priority as endorsed by the CPIA. The same process took place at the national level, with the role of the CPIA performed by the national inter-cluster group chaired by OCHA. At this stage, each organisation began developing final project proposals (narrative and budget) in order to avoid delays in the subsequent steps of the process. Step 3: Project proposal submission and endorsement Priority projects proposed for consideration by CPIAs and the national inter-cluster were compiled by the Pooled Fund Joint Unit. The Unit compiled the submissions of all provinces for consideration by the HC and the Board. This document summarised project expected outputs, targeted beneficiaries, geographical coverage, information on needs assessments, past performance of proposed implementing partners and comments made by cluster groups. 19/98

20 The HC, in consultation with the Board, approved projects pending final technical clearance by the TRC. Organisations, CPIAs and cluster groups were informed of HC s decisions. Final project documents were developed and submitted for technical review. Step 4: Technical review and final project approval The TRC undertook the project technical review (see Section above). The Joint Unit facilitated the process and followed up with partners and TRC members to ensure that recommended amendments were correctly integrated in the final version of project proposals. Upon completion of the process, the HC approved the final version of projects and issued a letter to the relevant organisations confirming the Pooled Fund contribution. Step 5: Fund disbursement The Joint Unit prepared Project Financial Agreements (PFA) for HC approval. UN Agencies countersigned PFA before payment of contribution was made. Upon signature of the PFA, UNDP (in its capacity of Administrative Agent) transferred allocated funds to UN Agencies. In the case of NGOs, the HC provided UNDP with complete lists of NGO projects approved for funding and a specific PFA was signed by UNDP and the HC. Then, partners signed the Project Cooperation Agreement with UNDP and first payment would be made Pooled Fund Allocations The DRC Pooled Fund 3 includes two mechanisms to allocate funds to humanitarian programmes and projects: A standard allocation mechanism to allocate PF resources, ensuring early funding for priority projects. A Rapid Response Reserve for the rapid allocation of funds in the event of unforeseen and sudden onset emergencies. The sections below summarise the results of the three standard allocations and the use of the Rapid Response Reserve in First standard allocation The HC initiated the first allocation of the year in late February for the allocation of approximately USD 60 million following confirmation of donor pledges and commitments. Approximately, 10-15% of the total amount was set aside for the Rapid Response Reserve. The need of reinforcing the consistency between strategies defined in the 2007 HAP and activities selected for funding through the Pooled Fund was the most important criteria defined in the HC guidelines for the first fund allocation round. The HC guidelines focused on the following elements governing the process: Reinforced coherence of proposed activities and 2007 HAP strategies. Improved selection of life-saving humanitarian activities. Improved identification and vulnerability analysis of targeted beneficiaries. Coordinated multi-sector approach in selecting projects. 3 Article III, 3, Terms of Reference, DR Congo Pooled Fund. 4 Annex 7, HC letter, 27 February /98

21 Reinforced cluster coordination between provincial and national level. Strengthened involvement of NGO partners in the decision-making process. Needs-based decision (objectivity and impartiality). The combination of the above criteria and HAP priorities helped defining three funding ceilings, which were used as reference for the preparation of national and provincial proposals: 50% of funds available to be allocated to priority projects in areas of acute humanitarian needs: North Kivu and South Kivu provinces, Ituri and Tanganyika districts. Priority projects in the rest of the country: Bas Congo, Bandundu, Equateur, Maniema, Kasai Occidental, Kasai Oriental, Katanga and Province Oriental. Core humanitarian programmes included in the 2007 HAP with a national scope. The OCHA/UNDP Pooled Fund Support Unit in March received project proposals in March For the most part, proposals met established criteria and were identified in line with the HC guidelines. However, as in many cases funding requested by CPIAs was higher than the total available in the Fund at the time, projects were ranked in order of priority by the CPIAs. Thus, the HC, in consultation with the Board, decided to fund projects following CPIAs ranking equivalent to the total amount available to the Fund. In some cases, the entire package of proposed projects was sent back to CPIAs for revision, in other provinces single projects were questioned and CPIAs were requested to revise them or reconsider proposed ranking. The most important innovation during the first allocation was the introduction of the technical review process to support overall improvement of quality of projects proposals (see Section above). During the first round, USD 52 5 million was allocated to 42 NGOs projects and 55 UN projects; and USD 13 million was allocated to 2 NGOs projects and 6 UN projects through the Rapid Response Reserve. At the end of the fund allocation process, comments and feedback from UN and NGO partners, CPIAs and donors was summarised for consideration by the HC and members of the Pooled Fund Board, and in preparation for future standard allocation rounds during the year. Main comments may be summarised as follows: Short timeframe (3 weeks) for project preparation and selection. Rigid interpretation and/or insufficient understanding of the HC guidelines. Lack of flexibility to respond to new emergency situation not included in the HAP. Weak coordination between provincial and national sector coordination mechanisms, including between provincial sector/cluster focal points and cluster lead agencies at the national level. Tension between NGOs and UN agencies. UN tendency to prioritize UN projects remained an issue (particularly in the western provinces). 5 See Annex I Funds Allocations by Round. 21/98

22 3.1.2 Second standard allocation The HC announced the second standard allocation in late July for an indicative of amount of USD 35 million, of which USD 5 million was allocated to the Rapid Response Reserve 6. The HC also informed the humanitarian community about the full organisation of the Joint Unit and the creation of the Technical Review Committee. In accordance with partners feedback received after the first standard allocation, the HC reminded CPIAs that the 2007 HAP strategy included the timely identification of emerging or sudden onset emergencies and requested national cluster leads to enhance their support and communication with provincial clusters, sectoral commission focal points and CPIAs. Also, on the basis of the work carried out by the TRC earlier in the year, it had become apparent that the average quality of project proposals required further improvement. Thus, an updated project sheet proposal was introduced aimed at facilitating the preparation of project proposals 7. A new, simplified project sheet format was presented to facilitate the task of CPIAs and cluster groups and to allow them to verify that minimum quality project standards were met in the early stages of the process. The HC guidelines for the second standard allocation also included more detailed information on Pooled Fund process and procedures, namely: Estimated funding availability and indicative funding ceilings by province/region. Strategic approach, project prioritisation criteria, including specific criteria for the second standard allocation on the basis of general evolution of the humanitarian situation in country. General eligibility criteria for partner organisations. Modalities of accessing the Rapid Response Reserve. Description of the technical review process and responsibilities of CPIAs and clusters participating in the process. Proposed calendar. Reporting obligations. Specific criteria for the second allocation are summarised as follows: Prioritize those projects selected during the first allocation which were not funded by the Pooled fund due to lack of resources, taking into account new priority requirements. Prioritize projects responding to recent needs assessment evaluations in Equateur and Province Orientale. Refer as much as possible to recent needs evaluation missions (particularly for western provinces). Prioritize humanitarian projects on the basis of key indicators and specific activities directly related to (a) internally displaced populations; (b) returning populations, and (c) areas of verified high malnutrition and mortality rates. Indicative funding ceilings were defined as follows: 6 Annex 7, HC letter, 24 July The format used during the first standard allocation required too many details in terms of quantitative information, while they did not lend to the integration of sufficient information describing project objectives, strategies and main activities. In addition, the original format was too complex and was not suitable for timely and regular project data collection. 22/98

23 USD 15 million for North Kivu, South Kivu, Katanga (particularly for Tanganyika district) provinces and Ituri district. USD 10 million for Bas Congo, Bandundu, Equateur, Maniema, Kasai Occidental, Kasai Oriental and Province Oriental; USD 5 million for core humanitarian programmes with a national scope. In early September, the Joint Unit received proposals which had been selected at national and provincial level. As the process was entering into the last stages, the humanitarian situation in North Kivu was rapidly deteriorating. With the support of the GHD Donor group in Kinshasa, the HC to reviewed the proposals in conjunction with the results of the updated provincial contingency plan and inter-sector rapid needs assessment being conducted in the province. The HC subsequently gave priority to use of Pooled Fund resources to support the expansion of emergency assistance to affected populations in North Kivu. The HC, in turn, informed the GHD group that the resources of the Pooled Fund would be maximised in order to ensure that priorities needs in both North Kivu province and other parts of the country would be met in a timely and appropriate manner. To this end, funds of the Rapid Response Reserve were augmented with a contribution of USD 5 million from the CERF Rapid Response Window to address the emergency in North Kivu. The four highest priorities identified by the provincial CPIA, originally submitted for the standard allocation, were met through the use of the Rapid Response Reserve and fast-track funding of key projects was approved by the HC. For the remaining provinces, project proposals went through the standard allocation procedure. By the end of the consultation process, 33 NGO projects and 33 UN projects were approved for a total of USD million (excluding the projects funded through the Rapid Response Reserve). The updated guidelines were highly appreciated by partner organisations, which could now refer to a single document detailing project eligibility criteria, procedures and processes. The second allocation also provided an opportunity to deepen discussions on policy related issues. As a result, the Board defined a framework for the selection and prioritisation of projects in the sectors of Education, Community Reintegration and Early Recovery and Logistics Third standard allocation The third 2007 standard allocation process was simplified to ensure the allocation of funds before the end of the year. According to the analysis of funding status of different clusters/sectors officially reported by the Financial Tracking System in mid-november 2007, information regularly provided by cluster groups, partner organisations and other donors, the HC proposed the following strategy for the third standard allocation: Sector showing funding disparities and gaps. Strategic projects whose continuation was regarded as essential in the first months of Newly identified emergency needs, and sudden onset emergencies. Ensure availability of funds for unforeseen emergencies between now and the beginning of next year. The following indicative funding ceilings were defined: 8 See Annex I Funds Allocations by Round. 9 DRC Pooled Fund Board, minutes of meeting 19 September /98

24 USD 4 million for ongoing strategic projects. USD 3 million for newly identified emergency needs. USD 3 million for Water and Sanitation and Education. USD 5 million for the Rapid Response Reserve. Strategic and emergency projects were presented at the Board, following consultations with national cluster lead agencies, and then submitted to cluster groups for technical clearance. Priority projects in the sectors of water and sanitation and education were identified by cluster lead and then submitted to the HC, through the Pooled Fund Joint Unit, for final approval. Three UN projects and 17 NGOs projects were approved for a total amount of USD million (excluding the Rapid Response Reserve). Eighteen projects of the 21 projects approved received their funding before the end of The Rapid Response Reserve The Rapid Response Reserve has ensured both flexibility and timeliness of emergency funding to cope with unforeseen emergencies in DRC since the establishment of the Pooled Fund. In 2007, partners requested Rapid Response Reserve funding to the HC to cover emergency projects or urgent strategic projects whose support was urgently needed in between standard allocations. A total of USD million, or 23.6% of the total funding allocated by the Pooled Fund in 2007, was allocated through the Reserve. Projects covering various sectors have benefited of the Reserve resources. The following table shows funds allocation by sector. Table Rapid Response Reserve: Projects funded by sector Sector Funding %/Rapid Response Reserve %/total 2007 PF allocation Common Services and Coordination 1,036, Food Security 2,999, Health 816, Logistics 671, Multi-sectoral 873, Protection 315, UNICEF/OCHA Rapid Response Mechanism 20,115, Water and Sanitation 753, Total 27,580, % 23.6% Source: UNDP/OCHA Pooled Fund Joint Unit Reserve funds were allocated primarily (73%) to the UNICEF/OCHA Rapid Response Mechanism (RRM), a UNICEF/OCHA managed mechanism, which has proved to be an efficient inter-agency programme meet the priority needs of internally displaced populations, natural disasters and health epidemics. Seven RRM requests were funded in 2007 for a total amount of USD 20.1 million. The HC, as it was the case in 2006, maintained the policy of ensuring adequate funding to RRM to meet immediate needs, particularly of displaced populations in the Kivu provinces. Under the umbrella of the RRM mechanism the Rapid Response Fund, the component directly managed by OCHA focused primarily focusing on the following activities: 10 See Annex I Funds Allocations by Round. 11 See Annex I Funds Allocations by Round. 24/98

25 Organisation of inter-agency rapid assessment missions. Response to natural disasters, epidemics and displacements, in areas where no standby RRM partners are present. Health, nutrition, water and sanitation, shelter and logistics emergency projects. By the end of December indirect funding to NGOs (through UNICEF and OCHA) amounted to USD 9.3 million, representing 46.3% of the total amount allocated to the RRM. The table below summarises the main interventions carried out by RRM NGO focal points in the DRC provinces. Table RRM: NGO Focal Point Activities (January February 2008) Provincial Focal Needs Number of Point Assessment Interventions Activities Beneficiaries IRC Distribution of NFI kits, emergency (North Kivu) N/A 23 water/sanitation and education, response to 122,000 health emergencies IRC (South Kivu) N/A 20 Distribution of NFI kits, emergency water/sanitation and education, response to health emergencies 100,000 Distribution of NFI kits, emergency Solidarités water/sanitation and education, response to (North Kivu) health emergencies 1,286,000 Solidarités (Ituri) Distribution of NFI kits, emergency water/sanitation and education, response to 243,000 health emergencies Total ,751,000 Source: UNICEF/OCHA, NGOs Rapid Response Mechanism Additional USD 7.5 million was allocated to emergency rapid response projects implemented by both UN agencies and NGOs. The following tables show the distribution of funds by recipient organisations. Table PF Rapid Response Reserve: Projects by type of organisation Type of organisation Funding %/Rapid # of Response Reserve projects International NGOs 1,739, United Nations 5,725, UNICEF/OCHA RRM 20,115, Total 27,580, % 17 Source: UNDP/OCHA Pooled Fund Joint Unit Table PF Rapid Response Reserve: Projects funded by organisation Organisation Funding %/Rapid Response # of Reserve projects ASF France 324, ASI 346, NRC 315, OCHA 3,172, OXFAM GB 753, UNDP 481, UNHCR 873, UNICEF 18,011, WFP 2,999, WHO 302, Total 27,580, % 17 Source: UNDP/OCHA Pooled Fund Joint Unit Two NGO projects, amounting to a total USD 0.7 million, in support to logistics services in Katanga and Equateur provinces were approved in early Two NGOs projects and 4 25/98

26 UN projects to respond to the North Kivu crisis were funded for a total of USD5.7 million in September The combined use of the Rapid Response Reserve Fund and CERF proved the considerable potential of the two fast-track funding mechanisms securing availability of resources for rapid interventions in less then 30 days. Table 6 shows the geographical distribution of funds allocated through the Reserve. Table Rapid Response Reserve: Projects funded by province Provinces Funding %/Rapid Response Reserve # of projects Equateur 324, Katanga 346, National (Eastern Provinces) 16,694, North Kivu 10,214, Total 27,580, % 17 Source: UNDP/OCHA Pooled Fund Joint Unit 4. Summary of 2007 fund allocations At the end of 2007, commitments to the DRC Pooled Fund amounted to USD 117,788,433. As of 31 December 2007 paid contributions totalled USD 112,200, Carryover was estimated at USD 4,640,081 and Exchange rate and losses (2006) 824,493, thus bringing up the total programmable 12 amount for 2007 to USD 115,363,096. Committed contributions at the end the year for the 2007 amounted at USD 5,588,316. Of the total received, USD 117,664, was allocated to 200 humanitarian projects in Ninety-six projects submitted by 11 national NGOs and 32 international NGOs have been directly funded by the Fund for a total of USD 40.9 million. 104 UN projects were been funded to nine different agencies for a total of USD 75.8 million. At the end of December 2007, indirect funding channelled through UN agencies to NGOs totalled USD 16.9 million. Direct and indirect Pooled Fund resources received by NGOs amount to USD 57.9 million, or 49.6% of the total funds allocated during the year. The Rapid Response Mechanism, given the specificity of the decision making process and the variety of sectors covered (NFI, Water and Sanitation, Emergency Health, Emergency Education), is accounted for in coordination. The tables below summarize allocated funds by the end of the year on the basis of paid contributions and commitment. 12 Contributions deducted of 1% of overhead charges recovered, as defined in the Letter of Arrangement by the Administrative Agent. 13 The amount of allocated funds is bigger than the programmable available at 31 December Projects were approved on the basis of confirmed donor pledges and commitments. Given that the payment of some donor contributions was delayed, some projects received approved funding in the following year. 26/98

27 Table Pooled Fund: Allocation by province/region Province/Region Funding %/2007 total allocation Bandundu 4,677, Bas Congo 1,030, Equateur 4,545, Ituri 13,450, Kasai Occidental 4,125, Kasai Oriental 3,103, Katanga 13,460, Maniema 3,020, National 34,189, North Kivu 20,446, Province Orientale 5,506, South Kivu 9,150, Total 116,707, % Source: UNDP/OCHA Pooled Fund Joint Unit, February 2008 Table Pooled Fund: Allocation by cluster/sector Sector/Cluster Funding %/2007 total allocation Shelter and Non Food Items 1,996, Education 4,211, Nutrition 5,542, Reintegration and Early Recovery 5,851, Protection 7,510, Logistics 10,777, Health 15,900, Water and Sanitation 17,294, Food Security 19,770, Coordination Rapid Response Mechanism 20,115, Coordination 7,735, Total 116,707, % Source: UNDP/OCHA Pooled Fund Joint Unit, February 2008 In 2007 fund utilisation has been monitored using two parameters: (a) fund utilisation; (b) expenditure rate. Fund utilisation is the percentage of funds spent (including commitments) as of 31 December against overall funding. Expenditure rate is ratio between actual expenditure (including commitments) and the amount of money that should have been spent 14 in a given time. This allows measuring progress of project implementation through expenditure rate taking into consideration project start date and total project duration at the time of reporting. Of the total USD million allocated in 2007, USD 68.4 million was spent (58.6% utilisation rate), with an overall expenditure rate of 144.1%. Table 9 provides details on utilisation and expenditure rates by type of organisation. Table Pooled Fund: Utilisation Rate and Expenditure rate as of 31 December 2007 Type of Utilisation Expenditure Funding Spent Committed organisation rate rate UN Agencies 75,793,092 40,714,174 11,810, International NGOs 37,102,695 14,055,445 1,184, National NGOs 3,811, ,531 86, Total 116,707,760 55,309,149 13,080, Source: UNDP/OCHA Pooled Fund Joint Unit, February This amount, also called theoretic expenditure rate, is calculated as total amount allocated divided by the total project duration. 27/98

28 The above table does not disaggregate data of resources that UN Agencies channel to NGOs. The Pooled Fund contributed USD 57.9 million (49%) to NGOs, of which USD 40.9 million went directly to NGOs and USD 17 million indirectly. It reasonable to expect that additional funds will be channelled through NGOs out of the remaining balances of contributions received by UN Agencies at the end of December Of the 200 projects approved in 2007, 32 projects (with a total budget equivalent to USD 11,986,613) will start in Combining these projects and balances of ongoing projects, at the end of December 2007, amounted at USD 48.3 million. Table Pooled Fund: End-year Balances Type of organisation Funding Balance UN Agencies 75,793,092 23,268,270 International NGOs 37,102,695 21,863,024 National NGOs 3,811,973 3,186,442 Total 116,707,760 48,317,736 Source: UNDP/OCHA Pooled Fund Joint Unit, February 2008 Table DRC Pooled Fund - Paid Contributions (as of 31/12/2007) Donor Currency Commitments Amount Donor Currency Collected revenue Equiv. UN Rate of exchange Exchange gain/loss USD per Treasury Belgium EUR 550, , ,507 22, ,660 Canada CDN 3,600,000 3,600,000 3,103,448-23,893 3,079,555 Ireland EUR 3,500,000 3,500,000 9,365,491 51,259 9,416,750 Netherlands USD 22,228,000 22,228,000 22,228, ,228,000 Norway NOK 20,000,000 20,000,000 3,361,345-58,289 3,303,055 Sweden SEK 100,000, ,000,000 14,285, ,882 14,765,596 United Kingdom GBP 30,000,000 30,000,000 58,453, ,635 58,592,500 Exchange rate gain and loss (2006) 824, , , , Total Income Received 113,024, UNDP Administrative Agent Fees (1%) 1,130,246 Allocations Paid to UN Agencies 74,769,169 UNDP as UN Participating Organisation (NGOs/IOM) 53,588, Opening balance 16,284, Closing Balance -178,370 Source: UNDP CERF allocations The Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC) approved two allocations of the CERF Underfunded Window for DRC in February and August 2007, of USD 36.6 million and USD 11 million, respectively 15. In addition, the ERC also approved a contribution of USD 5 million from the CERF Rapid Response Window to address the emergency needs resulting from the crisis in the province of North Kivu in September The coordinated utilisation of Pooled Fund CERF allocations has been an important part of the HC s strategy in 2006 and 2007 for the maximisation of common funds resources. Following the CERF guidelines, applying to Under-funded Window grants, criteria for 15 ERC letters to the HC of 7 February 2007 and 1 August /98

29 project selection were adjusted to the DRC context. For the two allocations of Underfunded Window received in 2007, the following DRC-based criteria were retained: Refer to sector strategic priorities identified in the 2007 DR Congo Humanitarian Action Plan. Projects focusing on funding gaps for key components of humanitarian programmes with national scope. Ensure broad consultation with NGO partners through cluster coordination mechanisms at provincial and national level and CPIAs. Agencies need to report on previous funding received by CERF and Pooled Fund, showing budget utilisation rates of CERF grants received previously. These criteria allowed the HC to support core activities of UN programmes through the CERF while the Pooled Fund could strengthen its focus provincial-based needs. The involvement of NGO partners in the elaboration of proposals to CERF was also given priority consideration. In this regard, regular inter-agency and inter-cluster group consultations during project preparation were utilized to ensure the highest implication of different stakeholders, both at national and provincial level. The tables below summarise CERF allocations by window and recipient organisation. Table CERF Allocations to DRC CERF Round UN Agency Funding %/2007 CERF allocation UNFPA 1,405, WHO 1,428, CERF Under Funded I FAO 3,711, WFP 7,819, UNHCR 7,448, UNICEF 14,773, Total Under Funded I 36,587,128 UNFPA 684, CERF Under Funded II WHO 1,219, UNHCR 4,372, UNICEF 4,643, Total Under Funded II 10,919,450 WFP 2,041, CERF Rapid Response UNHCR 1,626, UNICEF 1,332, Total CERF Rapid Response 5,000,000 Total 52,506, % Source: OCHA/DRC, February 2008 Table CERF: Funds Allocated by UN Agency UN Agency Funding %/2007 CERF allocation UNFPA 2,089, WHO 2,647, FAO 3,711, WFP 9,860, UNHCR 13,447, UNICEF 20,748, Total 52,506, % Source: OCHA/DRC, February 2008 The clusters/sectors that received the largest portion of CERF funding in 2007 were health, food security and multi-sector (IDPs and refugee-related activities), with 70% of the 2007 total Under-funded Window allocation. 29/98

30 Table CERF - Funds allocated by cluster/sector %/2007 total CERF Sector/Cluster Funding allocation Education 1,007, Early Recovery 1,852, Shelter NFI 2,812, Common Services and Coordination 16 4,419, Water and Sanitation 5,545, Protection 8,160, Multi-sector 8,342, Food Security 9,153, Health 11,213, Total 52,506, % Source: OCHA/DRC, February 2008 Despite the difficulties related to the short notice period normally provided by the CERF Secretariat for the preparation of project proposals, CERF represented an essential tool of funding to sustain core national humanitarian programmes. The considerable amount of resources received from CERF early in the year enabled recipient organisations to kick off key activities within their programmes. The CERF has also been instrumental to correct important funding gaps by sector, ensure continuity of core humanitarian programmes, and reduce the risk of food-aid pipeline disruptions, which could have had a negative impact on the continuity and efficient of humanitarian aid delivery in DRC. Finally, the CERF in conjunction with the Pooled Fund has guaranteed increased overall fund availability for humanitarian activities in the country. 6. DRC Pooled Fund and CERF 2007: Results by cluster In July 2007 the Humanitarian Coordinator initiated a series of consultations with UN Agencies aiming at improving the management of common humanitarian mechanisms in DRC. Monitoring results of humanitarian projects in DRC was identified among one of the major weakness by the independent studies on common humanitarian mechanisms in 2006 and The Humanitarian Coordinator advocated for improved quality of reporting on UN projects implementation, funded through the CERF and DRC Pooled Fund. Specific emphasis has been dedicated on measuring projects outcomes and results. At the same time, in order to avoid the duplication of monitoring tools, the Coordinator and UN agencies agreed that a special effort on harmonisation of tools should be done. The Humanitarian Coordinator tasked the UNDP/OCHA Pooled Fund Support Unit and OCHA/DRC to develop a standardised reporting system. Following the analysis of the reports submitted by UN agencies in early 2007, a revised reporting tool was proposed and adopted by the Pooled Fund Board and then shared with all PF partners in January Simultaneously, a list of result indicators was developed upon to measure progress of implementation of CERF and Pooled Fund projects implemented by both UN agencies and NGOs. The Support Unit entered all information reported by partner organisations into a database aimed at having a global and harmonized overview of achievements and output of all projects. 16 This amount covers logistics activities. 30/98

31 The reporting system adopted in consultation with UN agencies also establishes reporting deadlines twice a year. Result tables will be filled by all partners every August (for the January - June period) and February (for the July - December period). The present report summarises presents a compilation of the information collected through the result monitoring tables received in February With the support of the UNDP/OCHA Unit, which has included working sessions with UN agencies and NGOs, all partners have contributed actively to the completion and timely submission of monitoring reports. This report focuses on the results achieved and constraints faced in the implementation of projects in In regard to projects funded in the period January-December 2006, only project activities which continued in 2007 have been included in this report. Results as described in the following chapter have been achieved through 94 projects funded by the Pooled Fund in 2006, mostly implemented in 2007; and 29 projects funded by the CERF and 146 funded by Pooled Fund in 2007 (for a total of 175 projects out of the total 229 funded in year) Overview 17 More than 20 million Congolese received humanitarian and emergency assistance through projects activities funded through the Pooled Fund and CERF in Approximately 73% of the total number of beneficiaries (14.5 million) lives in Ituri, Province Orientale, North and South Kivu), while remaining 27% (5.5 million) live in the western provinces. Province/region Beneficiaries % Bandundu 215, Bas Congo 90, Equateur 824, Ituri 2,383, Kasai Occidental 258, Kasai Oriental 83, Katanga 1,513, Maniema 446, National 7,522, North Kivu 4,854, Province Orientale 554, South Kivu 1,613, Total 20,360, % 17 All data presented in this chapter have been provided by OCHA-UNDP Pooled Fund Support Unit, February All amounts are expressed in USD. 31/98

32 National 36.9% Nord Kivu 23.8% Province Orientale 2.7% Maniema 2.2% Katanga 7.4% Kasai Oriental 0.4% Kasai Occidental 1.3% Ituri 11.7% Equateur 4.1% Bas Congo 0.4% Sud Kivu 7.9% Bandundu 1.1% 145 projects have been implemented in eastern DRC with a total budget of USD 65,270,261 (or 37.4% of the total amount considered). 74 projects were implemented in the western provinces with a total budget of USD 29,557,605 (or 16.8% of the total considered). National projects received USD 81,391,793 (46% of the total annual allocation) through 50 projects. Province/Region Funding Spent # Projects Bandundu 4,733,794 2,290, Bas Congo 1,871,058 1,157,600 6 Equateur 6,328,627 5,447, Ituri 14,933,366 10,670, Kasai Occidental 3,627,258 1,939,619 7 Kasai Oriental 1,890,309 1,517,453 7 Katanga 15,500,619 12,694, Maniema 3,547,103 2,370,842 8 National 81,391,793 72,179, Nord Kivu 25,047,138 18,349, Province Orientale 7,559,457 4,124, Sud Kivu 9,789,137 7,230, Total 176,219, ,972, Sud Kivu 5.6% National 46.2% Nord Kivu 14.2% Bandundu 2.7% Katanga 8.8% Ituri 8.5% Province Orientale 4.3% Maniema 2.0% Kasai Oriental 1.1% Bas Congo 1.1% Equateur 3.6% Kasai Occidental 2.1% 32/98

33 Millions Funding Spent Millions Funding Spent National Bandundu Bas Congo Equateur Ituri Kasai Occidental Kasai Oriental Katanga Maniema Nord Kivu Province Orientale Sud Kivu 35 international NGOs, 20 national NGOs and 10 UN Agencies working in DRC received funding for the implementation of humanitarian programmes/projects. 75.5% of the funding was allocated to UN Agencies, and 24.5% to NGOs (2.5% to local NGOs and 22% to international NGOs). Organisation type Organisation Funding # Projects International NGOs AAA 761,048 2 ACF 5,298,540 8 ACTED 773,181 2 AMI 189,000 1 ASF B 510,176 2 ASF F 1,227,403 3 ASI 1,831,216 4 Association Santé Familiale 148,660 1 ATGL 983,188 3 ATLAS 1,755,327 1 CESVI 765,444 2 CISP 361,274 1 CONCERN 483,000 1 COOPI 4,321,877 8 Cordaid 630,000 2 CRAFOD 421,734 1 DCA 957,972 4 Equilibre 377,886 1 FHI 1,302,000 4 GOAL 595,395 2 HI 1,395,433 5 IFESH 357,000 1 IMC 210,000 1 IOM 549,784 1 JRS 157,500 1 LWF 909,171 4 MAG 236,250 1 Malteser 1,348,848 5 MEDAIR 440,361 1 NRC 1,002,772 4 OXFAM GB 4,321,140 5 OXFAM Q 942,449 2 SAVE CHILDREN UK 734,778 3 SOLIDARITE 2,567, /98

34 Organisation type Organisation Funding # Projects World Vision 277,900 2 Total International NGOs 39,144, National NGOs ADEPAE 77,042 1 ADI-Kivu 245,611 1 ASRAMES 276,381 1 BDD 122,215 1 BDOM 115,301 1 CARITAS DEV GOMA 264,943 2 Caritas Katanga 363,300 2 Caritas Maniema 395,669 1 CEK 105,000 1 CRAFOD 320,250 1 Croix Rouge Congo 279,494 1 DOCS 142,800 2 FOLECO 630,000 4 Fondation Femmes Plus 226,233 1 GEAD 215,343 1 ICG 348,600 2 MEMISA 73,500 1 Missionnaires du Divin Maître 33,362 1 PPSSP 105,000 1 SOCOODEFI 131,250 1 Total National NGOs 4,471, United Nations FAO 21,086, OCHA 9,172,227 5 ONUSIDA 100,000 1 UNDP 481,423 1 UNFPA 5,773, UNHCR 18,720, UNICEF 49,769, UNOPS 4,521,754 7 WFP 13,533,424 8 WHO 9,445, Total United Nations 132,603, Total 176,219, USD 176,219,659 was provided through CERF in 2007 and Pooled Fund (2006 and 2007): USD 132,603,632 for UN Agencies, USD 4,471,294 in direct funding for national NGOs and USD 39,144,734 in direct funding for international NGOs. A significant portion of the funding provided to UN agencies was passed on to national and international NGOs. At the end of December 2007, 79.4% (or $139,972,703) of the funding received by implementing organisations had been spent Project Achievements A total of 74 indicators were used to measure the results achieved through the implementation of project activities covered by all clusters. This report includes indicators used by all projects in accordance with cluster guidelines and main cluster indicators included in the 2007 HAP. Indicator Results achieved Cultivated area 9,714 De-mined area 550 Kg of airfreight transported 317,404 Nb of beneficiaries admitted in TFC/SFC 76,490 Nb of beneficiaries attending mine awareness session 267,421 Nb of camps (sites) set up 24 Nb of cattle distributed 879 Nb of certified quality manioc cutting produced 10,000 Nb of Child Friendly Spaces created 18 34/98

35 Indicator Results achieved Nb of Child Soldiers benefiting of school/economic/training support 5,281 Nb of Child Soldiers in transit centres/families 1,060 Nb of Child Soldiers released 2,095 Nb of children accessing school 116,792 Nb of children discharged by nutrition centres 49,360 Nb of children receiving school kits 32,486 Nb of children vaccinated 1,252,529 Nb of click on the Pooled Fund web page 61,700 Nb of direct beneficiaries of health services 5,623,055 Nb of displaced households receiving emergency shelter/nfi kits 215,093 Nb of donors funding Pooled Fund 17 Nb of emergency kits distributed 268,348 Nb of Field Coordination Units deployed 14 Nb of health committees created 4,925 Nb of health personnel benefiting of training 14,242 Nb of health structures rehabilitated and furnished 413 Nb of hours of flight 3,790 Nb of households receiving agriculture/fisheries/breeding supplies 301,103 Nb of IM distributed 587,079 Nb of incidents recorded 11 Nb of inter-agency missions conducted (coordination) 31 Nb of Km of road rehabilitated, built 988 Nb of latrines built (door) 7,150 Nb of maintenance committees created 162 Nb of mines/uxo destroyed 604 Nb of newly accessible people 1,443,344 Nb of NGOs projects funded 184 Nb of operational TFC/SFC 52 Nb of partners funded 5 Nb of people benefiting of transport facilitation 124,872 Nb of people receiving food ration according to identified needs 355,448 Nb of PEP kits distributed 643 Nb of personnel of TFC/SFC trained 2,430 Nb of PI material published 280 Nb of pregnant women receiving Multiple Dose Vaccinations 45,784 Nb of projects funded 236 Nb of PTA hygiene committees created 389 Nb of rapid assessments conducted 405 Nb of rehabilitated and furnished classrooms 554 Nb of returning households receiving emergency shelter/nfi kits 200 Nb of returning shelter kits distributed 75,336 Nb of surveys undertaken 37 Nb of SVV cases reported to justice 474 Nb of SVV identified 24,603 Nb of SVV medically treated 23,179 Nb of SVV psychologically treated 19,132 Nb of SVV socially and economically reintegrated 2,794 Nb of temporary labour intensive jobs created 56,665 Nb of tons transported (road, river) 17,526 Nb of trained people (Agriculture) 17,581 Nb of trained teachers 1,854 Nb of transported people (plane) 7,031 Nb of trucks available 19 Nb of unaccompanied, separated minors reunified 28 Nb of unaccompanied/separated minors identified 315 Nb of water and sanitation maintenance committees created 444 Nb of wells, sources and dwells 825 Nb of women vaccinated 222,885 Nb of persons having access to minimum WASH package 135,110 Nb of persons having access to safe water 1,049,351 Nb of structures rehabilitated and furnished 16 Tons distributed 8,028 Type and nb of rehabilitated infrastructures 116 Warehousing capacity (cubic meters) 3,400 35/98

36 6.3. Education Cluster Overview The principal objective of the cluster is to ensure access to basic education for all children affected by emergencies and crises in DRC. Activities have mainly focused on construction/rehabilitation of permanent or temporary classrooms, distribution of school supplies, teaching materials and recreational kits. These activities, along with replenishment of stocks of teaching material, ensured support for most of the provinces of the country. Most of the national activities targeted eastern provinces through emergency education interventions. National programmes have also ensured the coverage of emergency needs in western provinces addressing selected priorities identified by the Provincial Inter-agency Coordination Committees. Sixteen projects were funded and implemented in ,264 children and teachers have been assisted through these projects, the large majority living in the eastern Congolese provinces. Province/region Beneficiaries Bandundu 895 Equateur 5,741 Ituri 3,300 Katanga 3,823 National 39,969 North Kivu 26,388 Province Orientale 5,872 South Kivu 2,276 Total 88,264 Province Orientale 6.7% Sud Kivu 2.6% Bandundu 1.0% Equateur 6.5% Ituri 3.7% Katanga 4.3% Nord Kivu 29.9% National 45.3% 36/98

37 The seven projects implemented in the eastern provinces represent 25% of the funds allocated to the cluster considered under this report. Six projects were implemented in the western provinces (or 31% of the funds allocated) and three projects (44% of the funds allocated) had a national/regional coverage. The following table shows geographical coverage, project budget expenditure level by end December 2007 and number of education projects considered for this report. Province/region Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects Bandundu National NGOs 105, ,000 1 Equateur National NGOs 367, ,000 3 UN Agencies 500, ,000 1 Ituri International NGOs 291, ,840 1 Katanga National NGOs 283, ,315 1 North Kivu International NGOs 477, ,804 2 UN Agencies 102, ,300 1 Province International NGOs 455, ,440 1 Orientale National NGOs 215, ,000 1 South Kivu International NGOs 210,000 62,264 1 National International NGOs 157, ,000 1 UN Agencies 2,172,088 1,545,474 2 Total 5,337,589 4,253, The following graphs show overall distribution of funds allocated to education projects and project budget expenditure by region. Bandundu 2.0% National 43.6% Equateur 16.3% Ituri 5.5% Sud Kivu 3.9% Province Orientale 12.6% Nord Kivu 10.9% Katanga 5.3% 37/98

38 Millions Funding Spent Bandundu Equateur Ituri Katanga National Nord Kivu Province Orientale Sud Kivu The projects received USD 5,337,589 from Pooled Fund and CERF. USD 2,774,388 (or 52% of the total allocated to cluster projects) funded projects implemented by UN Agencies, and USD 2,563,201 (48% of the allocation, 30% was received by international NGOs and 18% by national NGOs) projects carried out by NGOs. Of the 16 projects considered in this summary report, 12 were selected for funding in 2006 (11 NGOs and one UN Agency) and four in 2007 (3 NGOs and one UN agency). At the end of December 2007, USD 4,253,437 had been spent, 80% of allocated funds to the projects. Year Funding source 2006 PF Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects International NGOs 1,381,951 1,127,084 5 National NGOs 971, ,315 6 UN Agencies 500, ,000 1 CERF UN Agencies 1,007, , International NGOs 210,000 62,264 1 PF UN Agencies 1,267, ,550 2 Total 5,337,589 4,253, The following tables summarize the organisations responsible for the implementation of education projects. Organisation type Organisation Funding # Projects Cordaid 210,000 1 Lutheran World Federation LWF 455,175 1 International NGOs Norwegian Refugee Council NRC 477,544 2 Solidarités 291,732 1 JRS 157,500 1 Caritas/Katanga 283,500 1 National NGOs CEK 105,000 1 FOLECO 367,500 3 ICG 215,250 1 UN Agencies UNHCR 500,000 1 UNICEF 2,274,388 3 Total 5,337, /98

39 Project Achievements Six main education indicators were selected to measure results achieved by the 16 education projects considered in this report. Two indicators were common to all projects: number of children accessing school and number of classrooms rehabilitated and equipped. Twelve projects reported on the number of parent/teacher (PTA) hygiene committees created. Specific indicators of other sectors/clusters, water and sanitation in particular, were also used to measure cross-sector project outputs. For example, number of latrines built (door) and number of wells, sources and dwells were used to ensure integrated water and sanitation components in education projects. The following table shows achievements for indicators applied to education projects and the number of projects who did report on the specific indicator (out of 16). Indicator Results achieved # Projects Nb of children accessing school 85, Nb of classrooms rehabilitated and equipped Nb of latrines built (door) Nb of PTA hygiene committees created Nb of teachers trained 1,633 9 Nb of wells, sources and dwells 26 7 Nb school population with access to safe water 6,323 2 Nb of children receiving school kits 4,903 2 Nb of school maintenance committees created Project Constraints National NGO partners faced difficulties in ensuring timely implementation of selected projects, which resulted in numerous non-cost extension requests. Common justifications of delays were: weak implementation strategy, shortfall of materials in the local markets linked to poor utilisation of locally-made materials, and insufficient participation of community in project design. Improved evaluation of partners capacities will be required for future allocations. Project quality standards vary from province to province. For example, in North Kivu, NRC built/rehabilitated classrooms and sanitation facilities combining qualitative work with efficient schooling program; while in Ituri, materials and equipment used did not reach the same quality standards. The Humanitarian Coordinator and the Pooled Fund Board endorsed the need for improved standardisation, especially in terms of rehabilitation activities (classrooms and water/sanitation facilities in schools). Additional efforts by the cluster will be required to ensure implementation of the approved approach. This was indeed the main reason why eight priority projects selected in 2007 did not start implementation until The issue of classroom rehabilitation versus construction should be further explored. The cluster should further develop technical and financial standards applicable to school rehabilitation. Maintenance of latrines and water points should be reinforced. Committees should be systematically created before the end of project implementation. Increased implication of local authorities could be explored to improve maintenance and follow up of projects. 39/98

40 Selection of structures for rehabilitation should be made in coordination with local authorities whenever possible. Improved coordination between provincial and national level have resulted necessary for the education cluster. 40/98

41 Map 1 - Education projects 41/98

42 42/98

43 6.4. Health Cluster Overview Health objectives identified in the 2007 were: Reduce the mortality and morbidity of mothers and children under 5 years of age; Improve medical and psychosocial care for victims of all kinds of violence; Improve access to primary healthcare for vulnerable people, including access to HIV/AIDS treatment. These objectives aimed at addressing major health needs of populations affected by conflict, internal displacement, epidemics and the needs of areas of population return (returning displaced and refugees). This report summarises the achievements and constraints of 22 projects funded in 2006 and 43 projects of the 44 funded in 2007 reaching more than 9 million beneficiaries. Project implementation took place in Sixty-four percent of beneficiaries reached through health projects live in Eastern DRC, 13% in the western provinces and the remaining 23% have been assisted through national projects. Maternity center before and after intervention in the Health center of Loga (Ituri). Project COOPI. Photo Province/region Beneficiaries Bandundu 88,626 Bas Congo 39,500 Equateur 512,020 Ituri 1,833,701 Kasai Occidental 127,535 Kasai Oriental 54,802 Katanga 371,501 Nord Kivu 3,190,818 Province Orientale 342,757 Sud Kivu 335,772 National 2,116,331 Total 9,013,363 Nord Kivu 35.4% Province Orientale 3.8% Sud Kivu 3.7% National 23.5% Katanga 4.1% Kasai Oriental 0.6% Kasai Occidental 1.4% Ituri 20.3% Bandundu 1.0% Bas Congo 0.4% Equateur 5.7% 43/98

44 Out of the total 65 projects considered in this report, 36 projects (or 43% of the allocated funds) were implemented in the Eastern provinces, 16 (21% of the allocation) were implemented in the western provinces, and 13 projects had national/regional coverage (36% of the allocation). It is worth noting that, 14 projects (21% of allocated funds) were carried out in Ituri, where health activities focused on expansion of healthcare services in areas of population return. The wide geographical coverage of health projects supported through CERF and Pooled Fund point to the fact that needs in this sector remain considerably important for the entire country. Province/region Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects Bandundu National NGOs 226, ,459 1 UN Agencies 250, ,200 1 Bas Congo UN Agencies 247, ,180 1 Equateur International NGOs 525, ,000 1 UN Agencies 329, ,170 2 Ituri International NGOs 2,451,101 1,238,607 4 UN Agencies 2,682,708 2,557, Kasai Occidental UN Agencies 861, ,553 2 Kasai Oriental UN Agencies 650, ,140 3 Katanga National NGOs 79,800 75,732 1 UN Agencies 400, ,250 1 International NGOs 109, ,423 1 North Kivu National NGOs 419, ,219 3 UN Agencies 2,201,577 1,711,124 7 Province Orientale International NGOs 871, ,967 2 UN Agencies 1,100, ,737 3 International NGOs 189,000 33,342 1 South Kivu National NGOs 33,362 31,773 1 UN Agencies 1,723,373 1,554,991 7 National UN Agencies 8,613,115 8,243, Total 23,965,534 19,979, The following graphs show overall distribution of funds and project budget expenditure against by region. Kasai Oriental 2.7% Katanga 2.0% Nord Kivu 11.4% Province Orientale 8.2% Sud Kivu 8.1% Kasai Occidental 3.6% Ituri 21.4% National 35.9% Equateur 3.6% Bas Congo 1.0% Bandundu 2.0% 44/98

45 Millions Funding Spent Bandundu Bas Congo Equateur Ituri Kasai Occidental Kasai Oriental Katanga National Nord Kivu Province Orientale Sud Kivu The 65 projects received USD 23,965,534 from both Pooled Fund and CERF. Projects implemented by UN Agencies received USD 19,060,221, equivalent to 80% of the total allocation; while projects implemented by national and international NGOs were allocated USD 4,905,313 (or 20% of the total allocation). Twenty-two projects were selected for funding in 2006 (9 NGOs and 13 UN agencies) and 43 in 2007 (6 NGOs and 37 UN agencies). By end December 2007, USD 19,979,715 had been spent, equivalent to 83% of allocated funds to the projects. Year Funding # Organisation type Funding Spent source Projects PF International NGOs 2,256,857 1,771, National NGOs 482, ,964 5 UN Agencies 2,216,805 2,105, CERF UN Agencies 6,713,115 6,457, International NGOs 1,889, ,237 5 PF National NGOs 276, ,219 1 UN Agencies 10,130,301 8,536, Total 23,965,534 19,979, Five international NGOs, five national NGOs and five UN agencies have implemented health projects supported by Pooled Fund and CERF. 45/98

46 Organisation type Organisation Funding # Projects AMI 189,000 1 COOPI 2,976,101 5 International NGOs LWF 109,644 1 Malteser 431,631 1 MEDAIR 440,361 1 ASRAMES 276,381 1 Caritas Katanga 79,800 1 National NGOs DOCS 142,800 2 Fondation Femmes Plus 226,233 1 Missionnaires du Divin Maître 33,362 1 WHO 9,445, UNFPA 3,769, UN Agencies UNICEF 5,318,963 9 UNOPS 426,650 1 ONUSIDA 100,000 1 Total 23,965, Project Achievements Eight indicators were defined to measure results achieved by health projects considered in this report. Fifty-four projects reported on the number of health personnel trained, 39 projects reported on the number of beneficiaries having access to health services and 36 projects reported on number of health units rehabilitated and equipped. Among the selected indicators those related to sexual and gender-based violence are of particular interest. The following table shows achievements by indicator applied to health projects and the number of projects who did report on the specific indicator (out of 65). Indicator Results # achieved Projects Nb of health personnel trained 13, Nb of beneficiaries having access to health services 5,559, Nb of health units rehabilitated and equipped Nb of health committees created 4, Nb of children vaccinated 1,252,529 9 Nb of pregnant women receiving multiple-dose vaccination 45,784 9 Nb of IM distributed 578,967 6 Nb of women vaccinated 222,885 6 Nb of victims of sexual violence medically treated 5,342 5 Nb of victims of sexual violence psychologically treated 6,109 5 Nb of victims of sexual violence participating in social/economic reintegration activities Nb of latrines built (door) 18 3 Nb of PEP kits distributed Nb of households receiving agricultural items Nb of temporary jobs created 55 2 Nb structures rehabilitated and furnished 16 2 Nb of PTA hygiene committees created 8 1 Nb of admissions at nutrition centres (TFC/SFC) 5,402 1 Nb of children discharged by nutrition centres 2,805 1 Specific Project Constraints Incomplete needs assessments and partial knowledge of specific problems in the region covered by project activities led to delays and changes of originally targeted areas of 46/98

47 project activities. This was particularly the case for projects implemented by UN Agencies. Improvements in terms of identification of targeted areas and beneficiaries are required. More precision is required in the definition of expected project outputs, including those contributing to the achievement of health programmes covering various sub-sector projects. The average quality of NGO-implemented projects was good. Health interventions mainly focused on: primary health care service delivery, provision of essential drugs and equipment, rehabilitation of health facilities and support to health supervision activities. In all target areas, the Bureau Central de Zones de Santé (BCZ) and the Bureau de District de Santé closely coordinate activities with UN and NGO partners. For projects addressing SGBV issues positive synergies have been created at the local level, to ensure a coordinated approach to health and psychosocial services. Therefore, victims benefit of integrated service packages simultaneously addressing health, psychological and social/economic reintegration opportunities. The lack of health facilities in some areas limits the impact of projects. Health implementing partners can advocate for changes in the organisation of health services, but they are not authorised to independently establish new health centres. The same applies to drugs distribution centres (centrales d achat). Given the negative impact in terms of access and service quality that these issues have on population s health needs, health cluster groups should strengthen advocacy and present proposals to national and provincial health authorities. In some areas of the country where security conditions are still volatile, health projects cannot reach vulnerable populations (particularly in North Kivu and Ituri). 47/98

48 Map 2 - Health Projects 48/98

49 49/98

50 6.5. Food Security Cluster Overview The food security cluster has developed a flexible strategy to address wide variations in levels of household food security across the country. Main cluster objectives were: At national level, to respond to emergency food aid needs and re-establish food production means in rural areas at the community level. At regional level, to support emergency food production for households of malnourished children, internally displaced people, returning refugees and IDPs and other persons with special vulnerabilities, such as Women beneficiaries of family agriculture program. Katanga Groupement de Misa. Projet Solidarités. Photo PNUD. families living with HIV/AIDS, pregnant and breastfeeding women in areas of high food insecurity and victims of SGBV. 1,942,023 persons benefited from food security projects in The table below lists the number of project beneficiaries by province and region. Province/region Beneficiaries Bandundu 96,638 Equateur 109,500 Ituri 226,020 Kasai Occidental 85,750 Kasai Oriental 23,815 Katanga 76,800 Maniema 101,000 North Kivu 324,395 Province Orientale 72,060 South Kivu 284,450 National 541,595 Total 1,942,023 National 27.9% Bandundu 5.0% Equateur 5.6% Ituri 11.6% Kasai Occidental 4.4% Sud Kivu 14.6% Province Orientale 3.7% Nord Kivu 16.7% Maniema 5.2% Kasai Oriental 1.2% Katanga 4.0% The majority of the 46 projects have been implemented in the Eastern Provinces (24) with a focus on South Kivu (8 projects) and North Kivu (5 projects and 28% of the expenditures), but a good repartition in the West (20 projects) in the West, 4 national 50/98

51 (representing 37% of the total spent). Even if not homogenous all provinces are targeted by this cluster with at least one project. The vast geographic coverage demonstrates an enormous need across the territory due to conflicts in the East but also the acute food insecurity in the whole of DRC. Province/region Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects Bandundu United Nations 1,887, ,334 4 Equateur United Nations 1,700,000 1,226,288 3 Ituri International NGOs 1,026, ,088 3 United Nations 1,820, ,987 3 Kasai Occidental United Nations 1,080, ,535 3 Kasai Oriental National NGOs 262, ,242 1 United Nations 354, ,262 1 Katanga International NGOs 556, ,919 1 United Nations 1,807,584 1,142,004 2 Maniema United Nations 1,723,725 1,304,428 3 Nord Kivu International NGOs 78,826 75,072 1 United Nations 6,900,834 6,208,379 6 Province Orientale United Nations 1,586,681 1,131,044 3 International NGOs 874, ,578 5 Sud Kivu National NGOs 131, ,000 1 United Nations 630, ,954 2 National United Nations 9,981,927 8,264,214 4 Total 32,402,496 24,732, Sud Kivu 5.0% National 30.8% Province Orientale 4.9% Bandundu 5.8% Nord Kivu 21.5% Equateur 5.2% Maniema 5.3% Ituri 8.8% Kasai Occi. 3.3% Kasai Oriental 1.9% Katanga 7.3% 51/98

52 Millions Funding Spent 2 - Bandundu Equateur Ituri Kasai Occidental Kasai Oriental Katanga Maniema National Nord Kivu Province Orientale Sud Kivu A total of $32,402,496 has been funded through CERF and Pooled Fund projects (19% of the total funding) with $29,472,683 for UN Agencies and $2,929,813 for National and International NGOs. In December 31 st 76% of the Funding or $24,732,328 has been spent targeting 46 projects, 17 in 2006 (10 NGOs & 7 Agencies) and 29 in 2007 (2 NGOs and 27 UN agency). Year 2006 PF Funding source Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects International NGOs 1,771,006 1,302,259 8 National NGOs 393, ,242 2 United Nations 2,707,000 2,707,000 7 CERF United Nations 9,153,431 9,153, International NGOs 764, ,398 2 PF United Nations 17,612,342 10,677, Total 32,402,496 24,732, Those 46 projects have been implemented by a total of 11 different organizations, 6 International NGOs, 2 National & 3 UN Agencies; 91% of the funding being allocated to UN Organizations, and 9% to NGOs with 1% to local NGOs and 8% to International NGOs. Organisation type Organisation Funding # Projects ACF 261,356 2 FHI 225,750 1 International NGOs LWF 344,352 2 Malteser 386,967 2 SOLIDARITE 556,500 1 AAA 761,048 2 National NGOs FOLECO 262,500 1 SOCOODEFI 131,250 1 FAO 20,717, United Nations WFP 8,441,294 3 UNOPS 313,735 1 Total 32,402, /98

53 Some food security projects were more focusing on logistics or water and sanitation rather than directly food security (road rehabilitation, water sources.) Projects Achievements Ten indicators were used to measure the results achieved through the implementation of the projects covered by this cluster. Eight indicators were used to measure results for agriculture, fishing and cattle breeding; two measuring purely direct food assistance. The Major indicators used was Nb of families receiving inputs & equipment for agriculture/fishing/cattle breeding have been measured by 40 projects, followed by Nb of people trained (agriculture) with 29 & Cultivated Surface (ha) (27 times). Indicator Results # achieved Projects Nb of newly accessible people 530,000 2 Nb of people receiving food ration according to identified needs 351,000 3 Nb of households receiving agriculture/fisheries/breeding supplies 286, Nb of trained people (Agriculture) 14, Nb of certified quality manioc cutting produced 10,000 1 Cultivated area 9, Tons distributed 8,028 3 Nb of displaced households receiving emergency shelter/nfi kits 3,145 1 Nb of temporary labour intensive jobs created 3,130 2 Nb of cattle distributed Nb of Km or road rehabilitated, built 78 4 Type and nb of rehabilitated infrastructures Projects constraints The main conclusions and constraints regarding the activities implemented in this clusters are the following: Most projects have reached their initial target Many projects have requested non cost extensions mainly due to adjust starting dates with seasonal constraints, efforts will need to be done in this area. In the same line an effort needs to be done for the provision of inputs to partners at the right time for the cultural season (most supplying being done by FAO or WFP). Sustainability of projects is in general secured by the supply of seeds, agricultural tools, fishing or breeding kits but local weather constraints (lack of rain during rainy season, or too much rain dry season) disturb more and more production and could prevent projects to achieve their targeted results. 53/98

54 Food cultural habits mainly based on manioc prevent the introduction of an increased diversity of alimentary sources (for example soja) in certain regions (South & North Kivu). In this case; population does not buy 100% into the project of food assistance. This has a negative impact especially because of the diseases lowering manioc production or sicknesses due to manioc improper preparation (Konzo). 54/98

55 Map 3 - Food Security

56 56/98

57 6.6. Water and Sanitation Cluster Overview In an effort to reduce the risk of diseases occurring in populations affected by war, interventions in terms of water and sanitation in the HAP 2007 will seek to: for the first goal, to ensure access to drinking water and a clean environment for victims of crises; for the second goal, to reduce the risk of contamination from water-borne diseases for returning populations, hosts and other vulnerable people by providing them with a basic water and hygiene package. Water installation in the Buhimba IDP s camp. North Kivu. Oxfam UK project. UNDP A total of 1,739,952 individuals and have been reached by those projects including 34% in the East and 30% National. Province/region Beneficiaries Bas Congo 38,511 Equateur 5,378 Ituri 123,610 Katanga 344,470 Maniema 242,310 National 520,000 Nord Kivu 156,668 Province Orientale 12,550 Sud Kivu 296,455 Total 1,739,952 National 29.9% Bas Congo 2.2% Equateur 0.3% Ituri 7.1% Katanga 19.8% Sud Kivu 17.0% Province Orientale 0.7% Nord Kivu 9.0% M aniema 13.9% The majority of the 32 projects have been implemented in the Eastern Provinces (19), and 10 in the West, 3 national. Provinces of Kinshasa, two Kasaï and Bandundu have not been identified as priorities for this cluster. The vast geographic coverage demonstrates an enormous need across the territory due to conflicts in the East but also the degradation of water infrastructures in the whole of RDC. 57/98

58 # Province/region Organisation type Funding Spent Projects International NGOs 277, ,624 1 Bas Congo National NGOs 115, ,810 1 Equateur National NGOs 279, ,223 1 Ituri International NGOs 3,061,283 2,059,064 3 Katanga International NGOs 2,919,516 2,008,470 5 Maniema International NGOs 772, ,280 2 National Nord Kivu Province Orientale Sud Kivu International NGOs 148, ,898 1 United Nations 7,045,275 4,921,600 3 International NGOs 1,775,984 1,172,206 4 National NGOs 320, ,561 2 United Nations 888, ,977 1 National NGOs 133, ,000 1 United Nations 1,008,301 74,015 1 International NGOs 1,864,220 1,278,575 5 National NGOs 322, ,076 2 Total 20,932,471 13,437, National 34.4% Nord Kivu 14.3% Maniema 3.7% Province Orientale 5.5% Sud Kivu 10.4% Katanga 13.9% Ituri 14.6% Equateur 1.3% Bas Congo 1.9% Millions Funding Spent - Bas Congo Equateur Ituri Katanga Maniema National Nord Kivu Province Orientale Sud Kivu 58/98

59 A total of $20,932,469 been funded through CERF and Pooled Fund projects (12% of the total funding) with $8,941,676 for UN Agencies and $11,990,793 for National and International NGOs. In December 31 st 64% of the Funding or $ 13,437,380 has been spent targeting 33 projects, 12 in 2006 (all NGOs) and 21 in 2007 (16 NGOs and 5 UN agencies). Year Funding source Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects International NGOs 2,590,608 2,255, PF National NGOs 633, ,032 4 CERF United Nations 5,545,275 4,921, PF International NGOs 8,229,046 5,061, National NGOs 537, ,638 3 United Nations 3,396, ,992 3 Total 20,932,471 13,437, Those 32 projects have been implemented by a total of 20 different organizations, 38% of the funding being allocated to UN Organizations, and 62% to NGOs with 6% to local NGOs and 56% to International NGOs. Organisation Type Organisation Funding # Projects ACF 1,049,701 1 Association Santé Familiale 148,660 1 ATGL 983,188 3 CISP 277,274 1 COOPI 821,973 1 International NGOs FHI 813,750 2 IMC 210,000 1 OXFAM GB 4,014,296 5 OXFAM Q 630,000 1 SOLIDARITE 1,718,793 4 World Vision 152,019 1 ADEPAE 77,042 1 ADI-Kivu 245,611 1 BDOM 115,301 1 National NGOs Croix Rouge Congo 279,494 1 GEAD 215,343 1 ICG 133,350 1 PPSSP 105,000 1 United Nations UNICEF 7,045,275 3 UNOPS 1,896,401 2 Total 20,932, Project Achievements Five indicators were used to measure the results achieved through the implementation of the projects covered by this cluster. The Major indicators Nb of people with access to potable water & Nb of wells, springs or fountains have been measured by 32 projects each, followed by Nb of latrines doors and by type (community, family ) with 28 & Nb of people with access to minimum WATSAN minimum package with 22. It is to be noted that other activities mostly sanitation and water are measured in this cluster (15) times for number of latrines and 7 times water points. 918,081 persons have gained access to potable water demonstrating the achievements of the projects; 59/98

60 Results # Indicator achieved Projects Nb of wells, sources and dwells Nb persons having access to safe water 918, Nb of latrines built (door) 4, Nb persons having access to minimum WASH package 135, Nb of water and sanitation maintenance committees created Nb of PTA hygiene committees created Nb of maintenance committees created 73 5 Nb of IM distributed 4,800 2 Nb of temporary labour intensive jobs created 1,300 2 Nb of Km or road rehabilitated, built Project constraints The main conclusions and constraints regarding the activities implemented in this clusters are the following: Water, Sanitation and Hygiene projects vary according to partners. It is interesting to notice the quality of community participation in the implementation and maintenance of projects. Some very specialized local NGOs have done a very good job due to their presence and knowledge in the field while some International NGOs are facing some problems as they face difficulties to ensure durability and maintenance of their realizations after departing the area of intervention (or due to insecurity). One can observe a lack of quality in initial assessments which have implied modifications of the sites of interventions in many cases or lack of water in sources identified. This cluster has considerable impact on other sectors, such activities being critical to the quality of other projects such as in education or health. 60/98

61 Map 4 - Water and Sanitation Projects

62 62/98

63 6.7. Early Recovery Cluster Overview The cluster goal is to support and consolidate reintegration of returning populations within their communities of origin. Cluster objectives were the following: Act as provider of last resort responding unmet needs of returning populations in the context of returning population reintegration and community recovery; Advocate for primary the needs of returning populations; Training session for candidates women to the soap factory in Songolo (Ituri). Project Oxfam Quebec. Photo PNUD. Cluster projects covered a wide range of activities, such as income-generating activities, vocational and professional skills training, community reconciliation initiatives and HIV/AIDS community-based prevention. This report summarises the results obtained through three projects funded in 2006 and 11 of the 13 projects funded in All projects were implemented in Almost 300,000 persons benefited from project activities and services. 49% of project beneficiaries live in the eastern provinces of the country, while remaining beneficiaries live in other parts of the country. Province/region Beneficiaries Equateur 10,655 Ituri 18,293 Katanga 17,394 North Kivu 100,000 National 131,212 Total 277,554 National 47.3% Equateur 3.8% Ituri 6.6% Katanga 6.3% Nord Kivu 36.0% The majority of the projects have national coverage with a special focus in areas of population return. Other areas of focus for cluster activities included Ituri, Katanga and 63/98

64 South Kivu. The following table shows the geographical coverage and project expenditure levels at end of Province/region Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects Equateur UN Agencies 800, ,000 1 Ituri International NGOs 1,077, ,274 3 UN Agencies 401, ,022 1 Katanga International NGOs 756, ,370 2 National UN Agencies 10,798,773 9,913,129 5 North Kivu UN Agencies 401, ,022 1 South Kivu UN Agencies 200, ,011 1 Total 14,436,135 12,666, National 74.8% Nord Kivu 2.8% Katanga 5.2% 2.8% Ituri 7.5% Equateur 5.5% Sud Kivu 1.4% Millions Funding Spent Equateur Ituri Katanga National Nord Kivu Sud Kivu Cluster projects received a total of USD 14,436,135 through CERF and Pooled Fund in 2007, with USD 12,601,898 received by UN Agencies and USD 1,834,237 by national and international NGOs. At the end of 2007, 88% of the funding (or USD 12,666,828) had been spent. 64/98

65 Year Funding source Organisation type Funding Spent # Project International NGOs 765, , PF UN Agencies 800, ,000 1 CERF UN Agencies 7,848,773 7,848, International NGOs 1,068, ,095 3 PF UN Agencies 3,953,125 2,724,411 5 Total 14,436,135 12,666, Organisation type Organisation Funding # Project CESVI 765,444 2 International NGOs GOAL 546,344 1 NRC 210,000 1 OXFAM Q 312,449 1 UN Agencies UNHCR 9,948,773 5 UNICEF 2,653,125 4 Total 14,436, Project Achievements A combination of inter-cluster and cluster-specific indicators was used to measure the results achieved through the implementation of cluster projects. Major indicators were developed in consultation with the NFI/shelter cluster. Indicator Results # achieved Projects Nb of returning shelter kits distributed 62,436 9 Nb of health structures rehabilitated and equipped 11 4 Nb of people transported to areas of return 124,872 4 Nb of rapid assessments conducted in areas of return Nb persons having access to safe water 124,947 3 Roads rehabilitated/ built (Km) Nb of people accessing health services 28,102 2 Nb of households receiving agriculture/livestock inputs 3,088 2 Nb of classrooms rehabilitated and equipped 81 2 Nb of persons trained in improved agriculture techniques 3,088 2 Nb of water wells/sources built/improved 6 1 Nb of latrines built (door) 8 1 Nb of IM distributed 3,312 1 Nb of temporary jobs created Nb of beneficiaries admitted to nutrition centres (TFC/SFC) Nb of livestock distributed Nb of children accessing school Nb of children discharged by nutrition centres Nb of children receiving school kits 83 1 Nb of returning households receiving shelter/nfi kits Type and nb of community infrastructures rehabilitated /98

66 Project Constraints Participatory needs assessments and community participation is essential to ensure adequacy of project activities in accordance with needs in areas of return. One weakness is the lack or weak capacity of local authorities which should be owning projects and support the sustainability of projects. 66/98

67 Map 5 Return and Community Recovery Projects 67/98

68 68/98

69 6.8. Protection Cluster Overview Based on 2007 HAP goal, the objectives of the protection cluster are: Reduce the level of violence and cases of human rights violations against communities affected by conflict and insecurity. Promote protection of civilians Develop sustainable solutions for targeted groups of population (returning IDPs and refugees, local communities in areas of population return, community-based protection services) This report summarises the results obtained through the implementation of 11 projects funded in 2006 and 20 projects funded in All projects were primarily implemented in Almost three million people in DRC benefited from services delivered through protection projects in Estimated 45% of beneficiary populations live in eastern DRC and approximately 13% in other parts of the country. The remaining 42% of targeted beneficiaries have been assisted through national projects. Province/region Beneficiaries Bas Congo 1,768 Equateur 178,412 Ituri 1,658 Kasai Oriental 1,345 Katanga 62,054 Maniema 50,000 North Kivu 203,753 Province Orientale 120,621 South Kivu 172,598 National 2,167,816 Total 2,960,025 National 73.2% Sud Kivu 5.8% Bas Congo 0.1% Province Orientale 4.1% Ituri 0.1% Equateur 6.0% Nord Kivu 6.9% Maniema 1.7% Katanga 2.1% Kasai Oriental 0.0% 69/98

70 Almost all provinces have benefited of protection projects, specifically targeted to provide assistance to vulnerable beneficiaries (SGBV victims, child soldiers, IDPs). Of the 31 protection projects implemented in 2007, funded through DRC Pooled Fund and CERF, 16 were implemented in the eastern provinces of Katanga, North Kivu, South Kivu and Ituri), nine in the western provinces of Bas Congo, Equateur, Kasai Oriental, Maniema and Province Orientale, and 6 projects covered national programmes. Province/region Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects Bas Congo UN Agencies 405, ,000 1 Equateur International NGOs 580, ,224 2 UN Agencies 20,000 39,250 1 Ituri International NGOs 309, ,451 1 UN Agencies 850, ,000 1 Kasai Oriental UN Agencies 203, ,809 1 Katanga International NGOs 672, ,578 3 UN Agencies 428, ,538 1 Maniema International NGOs 171, ,617 1 National UN Agencies 7,128,700 6,978,156 6 North Kivu International NGOs 740, ,912 3 UN Agencies 4,442,087 4,349,687 5 Province Orientale International NGOs 879, ,205 3 South Kivu International NGOs 100,502 95,717 1 UN Agencies 250, ,000 1 Total 17,182,930 16,149, The graphs below show the overall distribution of funds and total project budget expenditure by region. National 41.5% Nord Kivu 30.2% Maniema 1.0% Province Orientale 5.1% Katanga 6.4% Kasai Oriental 1.2% Ituri 6.7% Equateur 3.5% Bas Congo 2.4% Sud Kivu 2.0% 70/98

71 Millions Funding Spent Bas Congo Equateur Ituri Kasai Oriental Katanga Maniema National Nord Kivu Province Orientale Sud Kivu The combined allocations of Pooled Fund and CERF to the protection cluster projects amounted to total of USD17,182,930, of which 80% (USD 13,728,131) was allocated to UN Agencies and 20% to NGOs (USD3,454,799). At the end of December 2007, 94% of the funding (or USD 16,149,144) had been spent. Year 2006 PF Funding source Organisation type Funding Spent # Project International NGOs 1,942,870 1,804,760 8 UN Agencies 725, ,630 3 CERF UN Agencies 9,787,559 9,657, International NGOs 1,511,930 1,058,944 6 PF UN Agencies 3,215,572 2,904,175 7 Total 17,182,930 16,149, Projects were implemented by 9 organizations, 6 international NGOs and 3 UN Agencies. 80% of the total funding allocated to the cluster was received by UN Agencies and 20% by NGOs. Organisation Type Organisation Funding # Project COOPI 189,000 1 DCA 584,110 3 Handicap International 1,395,433 5 International NGOs MAG 236,250 1 Norwegian Refugee Council 315,228 1 Save the Children/UK 734,778 3 UNFPA 2,004,596 6 UN Agencies UNHCR 5,751,541 3 UNICEF 5,971,994 8 Total 17,182, /98

72 Project Achievements Seventeen indicators were used to measure the results achieved through the implementation of protection projects. Six indicators focused on sexual gender-based violence, four on mine action, one on IDP camp management, five on child protection activities and one on overall protection monitoring. Considerable emphasis was given to the use of inter-sector indicators. The following table provides an overview of results achieved through protection projects. Indicator Results achieved # Projects Mine Action Nb of beneficiaries attending mine awareness sessions 267,421 9 Nb of mines/uxos destroyed Mine cleared area (km) Sexual Gender-based Violence Nb of SGBV victims identified 24,603 2 Nb of SGBV victims receiving emergency medical treatment 17,837 8 Nb of SGBV victims receiving psychosocial assistance 13,023 7 Nb of SGBV cases reported to justice Nb of health personnel trained Nb of PEP kits distributed Nb of SGBV victims benefiting from social/economic reintegration activities 1,845 6 Child Protection and Children Associated with Armed Groups Nb of child soldiers benefiting of school services/training 5,281 8 Nb of children released from armed groups/army 2,095 5 Nb of specially vulnerable children accessing school 30,402 5 Nb of child soldiers in transit centres/families 1,060 2 Nb of unaccompanied children reunited with their families 28 1 Nb of unaccompanied/separated minors identified General Protection of Civilians and IDPs Nb of IDP camps/sites set up 24 2 Nb of latrines built (door) 1,374 2 Nb of child-friendly space created in IDP sites 18 1 Nb of IDP households receiving emergency shelter/nfi kits 9,024 1 Nb of households receiving agriculture/livestock supplies Nb of protection incidents recorded 11 1 Nb of teachers trained Project Constraints Impact of protection projects is generally difficult to measure. Improved monitoring of quality of service delivery remains necessary. Projects falling under the protection cluster covered a broad variety of activities: demining, demobilisation and reintegration of child soldier, reunification of unaccompanied and separated minors, gender based violence, camp monitoring and protection monitoring. The challenge remains to enhance harmonisation of indicators which could allow measuring overall results of protection activities. De-mining projects results are positive and met targeted objectives. Nonetheless interventions have been mainly limited to semi-urban areas and increased efforts should be made to expand coverage in high-risk rural areas. 72/98

73 Child soldier projects demand medium-term support to ensure follow up activities. Increased integration with post emergency programmes should be explored to avoid the interruption of the post reintegration support which needs to be maintained for a minimum critical period. Multi-sector projects, like camp management, need to include project indicators from different clusters in order to better measure outputs. 73/98

74 Map 6 Protection Projects

75 75/98

76 6.9. NFI Cluster Overview Cluster activities were aimed at providing emergency shelter and essential household non-food item kits to vulnerable displaced populations in areas affected by conflict or natural disasters. In line with 2007 HAP strategies, cluster main operational objectives were: were: Ensure that vulnerable families receive essential non-food items and emergency shelter. Act as provider of last resort to distribute nonfood items and emergency shelter. A family sitting in the front door of its shelter in Kabuela (Katanga). NRC Project. Photo UNDP. The activities of the UNICEF/OCHA Rapid Response Mechanism (RRM), which allocates considerable funds to the procurement and distribution of non-food items, are also included in this report. Approximately 286,273 people, mainly concentrated in the eastern part of the DRC, benefited from the implementation of shelter and NFI projects in Province/ region Beneficiaries Ituri 18,505 Katanga 93,540 Nord Kivu 18,510 Sud Kivu 9,280 National 146,438 Total 286,273 Ituri 6.5% Katanga 32.7% National 51.2% Sud Kivu 3.2% Nord Kivu 6.5% 76/98

77 Of the 7 shelter/nfi projects implemented during the year, funded through DRC Pooled Fund and CERF, two projects were implemented in the province of Katanga, one in South Kivu, one in North Kivu, one in Ituri and two projects with national/regional coverage. The table below lists the number of projects implemented by province. Province/region Organisation # Funding Spent type Projects Ituri UN Agencies 478, ,606 1 Katanga UN Agencies 2,180,960 2,089,091 2 North Kivu UN Agencies 478, ,606 1 South Kivu UN Agencies 358, ,954 1 National UN Agencies 3,532,236 3,532,236 2 Total 7,028,040 6,486,493 7 Nord Kivu 6.8% Sud Kivu 5.1% Ituri 6.8% Katanga 31.0% National 50.3% Millions Funding Spent Ituri Katanga National Nord Kivu Sud Kivu The combined allocations of Pooled Fund and CERF to cluster projects amounted to USD 7,028,040. By end December 2007, 92% of the funding (or USD 6,486,493) had been spent. 77/98

78 Funding # Year Organisation type Funding Spent source Project 2006 PF UN Agencies 1,800,000 1,798,997 1 CERF UN Agencies 3,532,236 3,532, PF UN Agencies 1,695,804 1,155,260 4 Total 7,028,040 6,486,493 7 # Organisation type Organisation Funding Project UNHCR 2,520,110 2 United Nations UNICEF 4,507,930 5 Total 7,028, Project Achievements Four indicators were used to measure the results obtained through the implementation of the shelter/nfi projects. Indicators were related either in general to the number of emergency kits distributed or more specifically to the profile of beneficiaries receiving assistance, displaced or returnees. Indicator Results # achieved Projects Nb of emergency kits distributed 51,967 6 Nb of IDP households receiving emergency shelter/nfi kits 51,967 6 Nb of returning shelter kits distributed 4,000 1 Nb of households receiving emergency agriculture kits Project Constraints Shelter and NFI activities focused on displaced population rather than returnees. Activities specifically targeting returnees have been considered under the Return and Community Recovery cluster. Given existence of the Rapid Response Mechanisms recorded under the coordination cluster, remaining activities in shelter and non food items cluster covers a relatively limited amount of activities. NGO partners although not directly benefiting of funding under this clusters, represents the major service provider under the agreement within the RRM mechanism. 4. The UNICEF/OCHA Rapid Response Mechanism In addition, activities aiming at responding to sudden onset emergencies have been also been considered as part of coordination responsibilities. This includes in particular the Rapid Response Mechanism which assisted 986,859 individuals through 11 projects. The majority of projects have been implemented at the national level. Only one Rapid Response Mechanism allocation specifically targeted North Kivu. The 11 projects received USD 27,350,968 from Pooled Fund and CERF. Almost all funding was allocated to UN Agencies and more than USD 9 million was allocated to RRM NGO partners. As of 31 st December USD 21,140,375 has been spent, equivalent to 77% of allocated funds to the projects. 78/98

79 Province Funding Spent # Project National 22,894,418 19,799, North Kivu 4,456,550 1,340,379 1 Total 27,350,968 21,140, OCHA/DRC and the Rapid Response Mechanism have been funded under the coordination sector. 11 separate allocations have been approved throughout the year under this cluster. Total funding allocated to OCHA/UNICEF Rapid Response Mechanism amount at USD 19,615,253, or 72% of overall funding for coordination. Organisation Funding Spent # Project OCHA 9,172,227 9,172,227 5 UNDP 481, ,672 1 UNICEF 17,497,335 11,564,676 4 UNOPS 199,983 31,800 1 Total 27,350,968 21,140, Twelve indicators specific to coordination and cluster activities were selected to measure achievements of the 11 projects considered in this report. Specific indicators were used to measure general coordination activities (number of public information materials published and distributed, number of inter-agency rapid assessments conducted), Rapid Response Mechanism funded projects and Pooled Fund (number of donors in the Pooled Fund, number of projects funded). Given the multi-sector nature of RRM-funded interventions, other cluster indicators were used to measure outputs of these projects such as: number of emergency kits distributed, number of displaced households receiving emergency shelter/nfi kits. The following table shows achievements for indicators applied to coordination projects and the number of projects who did report on specific indicators. Indicators Results achieved # Projects Rapid Response Mechanism Nb of emergency kits distributed 207,357 7 Nb of internally displaced households receiving emergency shelter/nfi kits 150,957 6 Nb of hits on the Pooled Fund web page 61,700 3 Nb of direct beneficiaries of health services 35,000 1 Nb of children receiving school kits 27,500 1 Nb of shelter kits distributed 8,900 1 Nb of latrines built 1,000 1 Nb of PI material published Coordination Nb of projects funded (Pooled Fund) Nb of NGOs projects funded (Pooled Fund) Nb of rapid assessments conducted 50 1 Nb of inter-agency missions conducted (coordination) 31 4 Nb of Field Coordination Units/mobile antennas deployed /98

80 Map 7 Shelter/NFI Projects 80/98

81 81/98

82 6.10. Logistics Cluster Overview The cluster goal is to ensure the delivery of humanitarian aid in a rapid and cost-efficient manner. The two main operational objectives of the cluster, in line with 2007 HAP strategies were: Ensure the transport of emergency assistance to vulnerable populations. Ensure physical access and transport to areas of population and remote areas to expand and facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance. The summary below focuses on the results achieved by nine projects funded in 2006 and implemented primarily in 2007 and 19 of the 26 projects funded in More than 2.6 million people in DRC benefited from the implementation of logistics projects in Estimated 63% of beneficiary populations live in eastern DRC and approximately 37% in other parts of the country. Province/region Beneficiaries Equateur 2,994 Ituri 50,000 Kasai Occidental 45,000 Katanga 542,627 Maniema 50,000 National 900,000 North Kivu 726,650 Province Orientale 410 South Kivu 360,593 Total 2,678,274 Province Orientale 0.0% Sud Kivu 13.5% Equateur 0.1% Ituri 1.9% Kasai Occidental 1.7% Katanga 20.3% Maniema 1.9% Nord Kivu 27.1% National 33.6% 82/98

83 The vast geographic area reached by logistics projects in 2007 shows the scope of the access problem for humanitarian interventions in DRC. Of the 28 logistics projects implemented in 2007 through the DRC Pooled Fund and CERF funding, 10 projects were implemented in the province of Katanga, seven in South Kivu where road and transport infrastructure are in extremely poor conditions. The table below lists the number of logistics projects implemented by province. Province/region Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects Equateur International NGOs 1,227,403 1,146,755 3 Ituri UN Agencies 148, ,067 1 Kasai Occidental UN Agencies 1,684, ,531 2 Katanga International NGOs 5,245,076 4,663,897 9 UN Agencies 121, ,145 1 Maniema National NGOs 395, ,669 1 North Kivu UN Agencies 188, ,448 1 Province Orientale International NGOs 510, ,585 2 International NGOs 1,565,931 1,179,948 5 South Kivu National NGOs 122, ,395 1 UN Agencies 215, ,370 1 National UN Agencies 4,419,100 4,419,100 1 Total 15,843,585 13,562, Nord Kivu 1.2% Province Orientale 3.2% Sud Kivu 12.0% Equateur 7.7% Ituri 0.9% Kasai Occidental 10.6% National 27.9% Maniema 2.5% Katanga 33.9% 83/98

84 Millions Funding Spent Equateur Ituri Kasai Occidental Katanga Maniema National Nord Kivu Province Orientale Sud Kivu The combined allocations of Pooled Fund and CERF amounted to total of USD 15,843,585; of which USD 7,294,999 was allocated to UN Agencies and USD 9,066,470 for NGOs. At the end of December 2007, 86% of the funding (or USD 13,562,910) had been spent. Funding Year Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects source International NGOs 3,539,928 3,296, PF National NGOs 517, ,064 2 CERF UN Agencies 4,419,100 4,419, International NGOs 5,008,658 4,115, PF UN Agencies 2,358,015 1,219,561 6 Total 15,843,585 13,562, Projects were implemented by 15 different organizations, 11 international NGOs, 2 national NGOs and 2 UN Agencies. 43% of the total funding allocated to the cluster was received by UN Agencies and 57% by NGOs (3% for implementation by local NGOs and 54% for international NGOs). Organisation type Organisation Funding # Projects ACTED 773,181 2 ASF F 1,227,403 3 ASF B 510,176 2 ASI 1,831,216 4 DCA 373,862 1 International NGOs Equilibre 377,886 1 FHI 262,500 1 IFESH 357,000 1 Malteser 530,250 2 ATLAS 1,755,327 1 IOM 549,784 1 National NGOs BDD 122,215 1 Caritas Maniema 395,669 1 UN Agencies WFP 5,092,130 5 UNOPS 1,684,985 2 Total 15,843, /98

85 Project Achievements Eleven indicators were used to measure the results achieved through the implementation of logistics projects. Five indicators were related to road rehabilitation projects, three for air operations and three for road transport. Thirteen projects measured results through the indicator on number of newly accessible people, 12 projects used type and number of infrastructure rehabilitated as main indicator to measure progress of implementation, and 10 projects measured results primarily through km rehabilitated and/or built. Results # Indicators achieved Projects Nb of newly accessible people 913, Type and number of rehabilitated infrastructures Kg of airfreight transported 317, Nb of Km or road rehabilitated/built Nb of temporary jobs created 51,980 9 Nb of flight hours 3,790 9 Nb of humanitarian personnel transported (air) 7,031 9 Nb of road maintenance committees created 69 8 Tons transported (road, river) 17,526 7 Nb of trucks available 19 5 Warehousing capacity (m3) 3, Project Constraints Air transport remains essential to reach remote areas given both the extremely limited capacities and poor air safety standards of domestic commercial air carriers. Thus, humanitarian air operations are making a difference in transporting humanitarian cargo and personnel to areas which would be otherwise completely inaccessible. Further harmonisation of cost recovery rates for air operations would be advisable to reach maximum cost-efficiency. Technical standards of road rehabilitation works are not sufficiently harmonised, which leads to important project quality variations in some cases. Project sustainability is not always well addressed in project proposals and/or early enough during project implementation. Community road maintenance committees are sometimes created towards the end of project activities, thus creating insufficient sense of ownership on the part of local communities. Partnership with relevant local authorities (most notably the Office des routes) should be strengthened to improve both handing over processes to authorities of work at the end of projects. 85/98

86 Map 8 Logistics Project

87 87/98

88 6.11. Nutrition Cluster Overview The objectives of the nutrition cluster were defined in accordance with the goals of the 2007 HAP: Provide curative, nutritional and medical care of children suffering from acute malnutrition in nutritional centres, in accordance with the national protocol. Provide a last-resort response where there are no humanitarian workers. Strengthen the capacity of communities to prevent acute malnutrition. Line for chicken pox screening. GOAL. Photo PNUD. Katanga. Project Strengthen local partners institutional capacity. The following results are based on reports of seven projects funded in 2006, which were implemented in the period , and 11 of the 12 projects funded and implemented in More than 380,000 people benefited from the implementation of nutrition projects in Estimated 84% of beneficiaries live in eastern DRC and approximately 12% in other parts of the country. Province/region Beneficiaries Bandundu 29,823 Bas Congo 10,331 Ituri 108,130 Kasai Oriental 3,202 Katanga 1,346 Maniema 3,268 North Kivu 62,425 Province Orientale 278 South Kivu 151,993 National 16,837 Total 387,633 National 4.3% Bandundu 7.7% Sud Kivu 39.2% Bas Congo 2.7% Ituri 27.9% Province Orientale 0.1% Nord Kivu 16.1% Maniema 0.8% Katanga 0.3% Kasai Oriental 0.8% 88/98

89 Nutrition projects funded in aimed primarily at addressing pockets of malnutrition affecting almost every single province of the DRC. Eight of the 18 nutrition projects implemented in 2007, funded through the DRC Pooled Fund and CERF, were implemented in western provinces, eight in eastern provinces and 2 national projects tackling emergencies countrywide. Province/region Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects Bandundu International NGOs 2,191, ,923 2 National NGOs 73,500 70,000 1 Bas Congo International NGOs 421, ,912 1 National NGOs 320,250 90,074 1 Ituri International NGOs 334, ,744 1 Kasai Oriental International NGOs 420, ,000 1 Katanga International NGOs 49,051 46,715 1 Maniema International NGOs 483,000 93,848 1 International NGOs 125, North Kivu National NGOs 264, ,673 2 UN Agencies 368, ,421 1 Province Orientale International NGOs 798, ,118 1 South Kivu International NGOs 997, ,583 2 National UN Agencies 4,500,001 4,276,083 2 Total 11,349,068 7,564, The graphs below show overall distribution of funds project budget expenditure by region. Nord Kivu 6.7% Province Orientale 7.0% Sud Kivu 8.8% National 39.7% Bandundu 20.0% Maniema 4.3% Katanga 0.4% Kasai Oriental 3.7% Ituri 3.0% Bas Congo 6.5% 89/98

90 Millions Funding Spent Bandundu Bas Congo Ituri Kasai Oriental Katanga Maniema National Nord Kivu Province Orientale Sud Kivu The combined allocations of Pooled Fund and CERF to nutrition cluster projects amounted to USD 11,349,068 of which USD 4,868,422 was allocated to UN Agencies and USD 6,480,646 to national and international NGOs. At the end of December 2007, 67% of the funding (or USD 7,564,094) had been spent. Year 2006 PF Funding source Organisation type Funding Spent # Projects International NGOs 649, ,715 4 National NGOs 393, ,074 2 UN Agencies 368, ,421 1 CERF UN Agencies 4,500,001 4,276, International NGOs 5,172,421 2,157,128 7 PF National NGOs 264, ,673 2 Total 11,349,068 7,564, Projects were implemented by 12 different organizations, 7 international NGOs, 3 national NGOs and 2 UN Agencies. 43% of the total funding allocated to the cluster was received by UN Agencies and 57% by NGOs (6% for implementation by local NGOs and 51% for international NGOs). Organisation type Organisation Funding # Projects ACF 3,987,484 5 CONCERN 483,000 1 COOPI 334,803 1 International NGOs Cordaid 420,000 1 CRAFOD 421,734 1 GOAL 49,051 1 World Vision 125,881 1 CARITAS DEV GOMA 264,943 2 National NGOs CRAFOD 320,250 1 MEMISA 73,500 1 UN Agencies FAO 368,421 1 UNICEF 4,500,001 2 Total 11,349, /98

91 Project Achievements Eleven indicators were used to measure the results achieved through the implementation of the cluster projects. Major indicators included number of beneficiaries admitted in nutritional centres/services (used by 13 projects) and number of children discharged by nutrition centres/services (used by 11 projects). Indicator Results # achieved Projects Nb of beneficiaries admitted in TFC/SFC (*) 70, Nb of children discharged by nutrition centres 46, Nb of TFC/SFC personnel trained 2,314 7 Nb of operational TFC/SFC 52 6 Nb of health personnel trained Nb of households receiving agriculture inputs 10,170 4 Nb of health units rehabilitated and equipped 11 3 Nb of people receiving food rations according to identified needs 4,448 2 Cultivated area Nb of nutritional rapid assessments conducted 37 1 Nb of trained people (improved feeding practices) 16 1 (*) Therapeutic feeding centres (TFC), supplementary feeding centres (SFC) Project Constraints Overall services delivered by partner organisations reached good quality standards. NGOs play a key role in direct delivery of nutritional services. Lack of funding to support follow-up and monitoring after emergency intervention has been pointed out as an important area for improvement in nutritional interventions. Inter-cluster coordination needs to be improved to address the root causes of high malnutrition rates, especially with the food security and health clusters. Project sustainability was being ensured through the gradual introduction of integrated nutrition and food security activities in As integrated activities started in the last quarter of 2007, results obtained trough the integrated approach will be included in mid-year cluster reports in /98

92 Map 9 - Nutrition Projects

93 93/98