Rapid Response Mechanism : entral African · PDF fileHealth and nutrition 69 % 88 + 58 + 91 +...

For more information, please contact:RRM Coordinator, Maurice Vanfoy: [email protected] Specialist, Eric Mpolesha: [email protected]

01 January - 31 December 2016Annual factsheetRapid Response Mechanism : Central African Republic

1

The Rapid Response Mechanism (RRM) is a tool to monitor humanitarian action, conduct multisector assessments and intervene in NFI and WASH when there is no capacity on site. The RRM is made possible through the generous support of the CERF, Denmark, European Commission’s Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection Department (ECHO), Global Thematic, CHF, IFRC, OFDA, Japan, Portugal, SDC et SIDA. ll RRM products are available on the Humanitarian Response Portal.

The Rapid Response Mechanism (RRM) program in CAR, managed by UNICEF and its partners, aims at providing emergency assistance to vulnerable population affected by shocks, in coordination with Cluster partners and others actors on the ground.

The RRM aims to respond to the urgent needs of people affected by a humanitarian shock related to an armed conflict, a natural disaster or an epidemia.

Ensure humanitarian watch through rapid sectoral and multi-sectoral assessments, in areas of displacement and return, as well as their dissemination at coordination and humanitarian community levels.

• Populations displaced or accessible since less than 3 months.• Host families living in areas assisted by RRM program, which face a significantly increased degree of vulnerability.• People returned or accessible since less than 3 months.• Spontaneous returnees accessible since less than 3 months.• People affected by an epidemic.• Particularly vulnerable groups, especially those individuals who never moved because of their vulnerability.• People affected by medium and large scale natural disasters.

Contribute to the improvement of the capacity of the affected population to carry out essential daily activities for their survival and dignity.

Ensuring access to drinking water and a healthy environment for vulnerable populations affected by shocks through water emergency, hygiene and sanitation.

Three RRM pillars are:

The RRM intervenes to support:

NB. NFI: Non Food Items - WASH: Water Sanitation and Hygiene

* The term ‘Returnees’ refers to people who have come back to their pre-crisis location following a period of internal displacement.** The term ‘repatriated’ refers to former refugees who have returned from neighbouring countries.

RRM methodology:



2

RRM coverage areas by partner

Overview of RRM activities in 2016

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE EEEE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EEEEEE

EE

EE EE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE EE

EE

EEEEEE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EEEE

EEEE

EE

EE

EEEE EE

EE

EE

EEEEEE

EE

EEEEEE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EEEE

EEEE

EE

EEEE

EEEEEE

EE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EEEE

EE

EE

EE

EE

EE

")

")")

")

")

")

")

OmbellaM'Poko

LobayeMambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham Pendé

Ouham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto

MbomouHaut-Mbomou

Kaga Bandoro

BambariSibut

Bangassou

Bouar

Bossangoa

Kabo

EE Alerte") Base du partenaire RRM

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto

MbomouHaut-Mbomou

Pas d'alertes 1 - 1011 - 2021 - 37

95

Exploratory missions(MEX) 76

Multi-sectoral assessments(MSA) 74

NFI Distributions 37

WASH Interventions 28

January - December 2016: 178

934832

Total reached in 2016: 215

0 15

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

OuhamPendé

Ouham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto

MbomouHaut-Mbomou

ACF

ACF veille humanitaire

ACTED

ACTED veille humanitaire

PU-AMI

PU-AMI veille humanitaire

SI

Zone non couverte par lespartenaires RRM

Bangui

Total number of alerts per prefecture:

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

") ")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

") ")

")

")")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")

")")")

")

")

")

")")")

")

")

")

")

#*

#*#*

#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*#*#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*#*#*

#*

#* #*

#*#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*#*

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham Pendé

Ouham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto

Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

Nombre d'activités par sous-préfecturePas d'activités

1 - 5

6 - 10

11 - 14

#* Mission exploraoire MEX

") Evaluation multisectorielle MSA

!( Intervention NFI/WASH

Sous-préfecture

In 2016, the RRM had 4 operational partners covering most of the prefectures, excepting Vakaga and a large part of Haute KottoThe prefectures of Ombella Mpoko, Bamingui-Bangoran, Haut-Mbomou and the “zone of Bria” have been put under humanitarian watch, due to a lack of funding. This geographical cover enabled the setting up of an early warning system, which has received or sent more than 170 alerts related to humanitarian shocks.

Alerts received or sent by the RRM in 2016

As reported below, the vast majority of alerts are from areas bordering Cameroon, Chad and along the conflict line crossing Nana Gribizi, Kemo and Ouaka.

Alerts received or sent monthly in 2016

RRM partnersJanuary-December 2016

Alerts density:

Distribution of RRM activities in 2016

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

OuhamPendé

Ouham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto

MbomouHaut-Mbomou

ACF

ACF veille humanitaire

ACTED

ACTED veille humanitaire

PU-AMI

PU-AMI veille humanitaire

SI

Zone non couverte par lespartenaires RRM

Bangui

AlertBase RRM partner

No alert

ACFACF-humanitarian watchACTEDACTED humanitarian watchPU-AMIPU-AMI humanitarian watchSISI humanitarian watch

Exploratory misions (MEX)Multi-sectoral assessments (MSA)WASH and NFI interventionsSub-prefecture

No activity1 - 56 - 1011 - 14

January MarchFebruarry April JuneMay July SeptemberAugust October DecemberNovember



3

Individuals affected by shocks and beneficiaries reached in 2016Number of individuals affected by shocks by status % total of individuals affected by shocks by status

Trend of population movement per month and status of areas covered by the RRM

Major returns were observed during the first trimester of 2016 due to the optimism raised by the presidential and legislative elections of the previous year. By contrast, the trend has reversed during the second semester as the proportion of displaced beneficiaries increased because of the renewed outbreak of armed conflict. Prefectures most affected by displacement were Basse-Kotto, OUaka, OUham Pende, Nana Gribizi and Mbomou

** The term ‘residents’ refers to individuals that have not been displaced as the result of a humanitarian-related event and are not hosting anyone in their home. * The term ‘host family’ refers to families who are hosting displaced, returnee or refugee persons in their home.

Beneficiaries per status per month

Displaced50 %

Returnees50 %

Displaced57 %

Returnees

43 %

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

1835

10071

23940

234719

62794

49140

55663

29829

10291

19354

23883

0

Nombre d'individus affectés

< 10000

10001 - 30000

30001 - 100000

100001 - 235000

Status d'individus affectés

Déplacés

Retournés

Familles d'accueil

Communauté hôte

During the NFI assistance, the vulnerable people from the host community were systematically targeted along with displaced people and returnees, which explains the significant proportion of RRM beneficiaries as part of the host community. However, the low percentage of assisted host families shows that most of the beneficiaries lived in their own shelters. The RRM intervened also in areas without humanitarian actors neither infrastructures or community based services.

s Statu d'individus affectést

Déplacés

Retournés

Familles d'accueil

Communauté hôte

Individuals affected by shocks per status per month

Number of indiviuals affected

Status of individual affected

MSA_idp

MSA_retournés

MSA_accueil

MSA_communauté hôte

Residents44%

Displaced21%

Returnees21%

Host families14%

2847

15357

2780

3

16799

0

3293

0 0

18900

28316

9380

1876

7500

19500

5649

0

75236612

17284

01887

4950

1110

0

10000

20000

30000

janvier février mars avril mai june juillet août septembre octobre novembre décembre

DisplacedReturneesHost familiesResidents



11608

7170

559

18049

0

24144

4471

615 1655

15895 16918

7437

20264643

42201

6695

17196

4234 36275567

12930

31290

6990

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

janvier février mars avril mai june juillet août septembre octobre novembre décembre



4

Multi-sectoral assessment results for 2016

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

0

1

4

6

1117

4

6

9

6

1

5

4

1 - 6

7 - 11

12 - 17

Nombre de MSA faites pas préfecture

préfectureProportion des MSA avec un score de consumation alimentaire > 38,5

préfectureProportion des MSA avec un score de consumation alimentaire < 38,5

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

0

1

4

6

1117

4

6

9

6

1

5

4

1 - 6

7 - 11

12 - 17


Proportion des MSA avec des écoles fonctionelles > 50%

Proportion des MSA avec des écoles fonctionelles < 50%

NB. The alert scores, which are the values from which an intervention would take place, were defined with the different Clusters

Recommended interventionsNFI & Shelters* 88 %

Water, hygiene and sanitation 91 %

Health and nutrition 69 %

88+58+91+43+69+68+81+74+9Protection 68%

Food security 81 %

Education 74%

Logistics 9 %

*% of MSA recommending an intervention for the sector concerned. **% of interventions conducted by the RRM on the number of MSA recommending an intervention for the sector concerned. ***3.5m2/person

MSA results:

Activités mises en place par le RRM:

28 569 NFI kits distributed

56 improved water sources

148 hygiene promotion sessions

92 emergency latrines installed

17 water management committees revitalized

90 % of households do not have access to hygienic latrine

30 % of households lived in a shelter below standard ***

30% of MSA reported that less than 10% of households had an improved drinking water source

57 %NFI & Shelter Intervention realized by RRM**

42 %WASH interventions realized by RRM

During the course of 2015, the RRM conducted baseline MSAs in areas where no humanitarian shocks were reported; the purpose of this exercise was to review the alert score levels. The results of these baseline MSAs were positive as the vulnerability scores were below the alert level. However, MSAs that were undertaken following a humanitarian shock and in areas with no partners present showed high scores in the different sectors. Therefore, scores have not been changed. During 2016 RRM worked with different clusters on improving the MSA tool.

Food security Education

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

0

1

4

6

1117

4

6

9

6

1

5

4

1 - 6

7 - 11

12 - 17

Proportion des MSA avec un score NFI < 3,8

Proportion des MSA avec un score NFI > 3,8


OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

0

1

4

6

1117

4

6

9

6

1

5

4

1 - 6

7 - 11

12 - 17

Proportion des MSA avec accès a un source d'eau amélioré > 30 %

Proportion des MSA avec accès a un source d'eau amélioré < 30 %


Non Food Items Water and Sanitation

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

0

1

4

6

1117

4

6

9

6

1

5

4

1 - 6

7 - 11

12 - 17

Proportion des MSA avec un score NFI < 3,8

Proportion des MSA avec un score NFI > 3,8


OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

0

1

4

6

1117

4

6

9

6

1

5

4

1 - 6

7 - 11

12 - 17

Proportion des MSA avec accès a un source d'eau amélioré > 30 %

Proportion des MSA avec accès a un source d'eau amélioré < 30 %


OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

0

1

4

6

1117

4

6

9

6

1

5

4

1 - 6

7 - 11

12 - 17


Proportion des MSA avec des écoles fonctionelles > 50%

Proportion des MSA avec des écoles fonctionelles < 50%

21 % of MSA reported more than 45% of diarrhea among children under 5 years

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

0

1

4

6

1117

4

6

9

6

1

5

4

1 - 6

7 - 11

12 - 17




OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham PendéOuham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

0

1

4

6

1117

4

6

9

6

1

5

4

1 - 6

7 - 11

12 - 17




Part of the MSA with a NFI score > 3,5 Part of the MSA with a NFI score < 3,5

Part of the MSA with access to an improved water source <30%Part of the MSA with access to an improved water source >30%

Part of the MSA with a consumption food score < 38,5

Part of the MSA with a consumption food score > 38,5

Part of the MSA with functional schools < 50%Part of the MSA with functional schools > 50%

Number of MSA per prefectureNumber of MSA per prefecture

Number of MSA per prefecture Number of MSA per prefecture



janvier février mars avril mai juin juillet août sept oct nov déc

ACF ACTED PU-AMI SI


ACF ACTED PU-AMI SI

5

Number of beneficiaries reached by NFI

Total interventions: 37 14 ACF

15 ACTED

2 PU-AMI

6 Solidarités

7 ACF

13 ACTED

4 PU-AMI

Total beneficiaries: 148,384 Total interventions: 28 Total beneficiaries: 70,81868,902

48,364

5,107

26,011

Number of beneficiaries reached by WASH

25,347

18,249

5,206

4 Solidarités 22,016

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham Pendé

Ouham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto

Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

Nombre d'individus atteints en 2016

Pas d'intervention NFI

< 10'000

10'001 - 25'000

25'001 - 51'360

OmbellaM'Poko

Lobaye

Mambéré-Kadéï

Nana-Mambéré

Sangha-Mbaéré

Ouham Pendé

Ouham

Kémo

Nana-Gribizi

Ouaka

Bamingui-Bangoran

Haute-Kotto

Vakaga

Basse-Kotto

Mbomou

Haut-Mbomou

Nombre d'individus atteints en 2016

Pas d'intervention WASH

< 3'000

3'000 - 10'000

10'001 - 19'520

Beneficiaries reached during interventions in 2016

Beneficiaries reached by NFI by sub-prefecture Beneficiaries reached by WASH by sub-prefecture

The RRM reached 148,384 personnes though NFI distributions and 70,818 through WASH interventions. The level of each RRM partner’s intervention was determined based on the context.

In order to respect the humanitarian principle of “do no harm”, but also in view of the vulnerability due to the presence of new people in a household (host families), in specific circumstances partners distributed NFIs to host communities.

WASH activities consisted mainly of borehole rehabilitations, improved water sources and hygiene awareness campaigns.

32+26+5+14 22+16+5+194 558

23 870 22 82319 868

14 129

6 8128 207

12 204

646 586

30 711

3 9706 288 7 342

5 229

1 776 2 6701 546

2 681

21 090

1 195

20 201

800janvier février mars avril mai juin juillet août sept oct nov déc

ACF ACTED PU-AMI SI


ACF ACTED PU-AMI SI

Number of beneficiaries in 2016 Number of beneficiaries in 2016

No intervention No intervention

The number of beneficiaries has been higher than expected in the prefectures of Ouaka and Mbomou. The volume reached by NFI distributions in September and October was really low due to a difficult secure access. While the RRM planned NFI fairs for 2016, this was not made possible mainly for two reasons: lack of local markets in the areas of RRM intervention and security constraints.



6

Intervention areas mostly corresponded to areas of alerts and MSA, with significant caseload in the prefectures of Mambéré-Kadéï, Ouham Pende, Ouham, Nana-Grébizi, Ouaka and Mbomou.

% total of WASH beneficiaries reached by status

Number of NFI beneficiaries reached by status Number of NFI beneficiaries reached by status

Beneficiaries reached during interventions in 2016

Photo credit: SI / RRMPhoto credit: ACTED / RRM

Returnees25 %

Displaced41 %

Residents34%

Returnees53 %

Displaced42 %

Number of WASH beneficiaries reached by status


Déplacés

Retournés

Familles d'accueil

Communauté hôte


Déplacés

Retournés

Familles d'accueil

Communauté hôte

Residents 4%

Host families 1%

Number of beneficiaries

Status of beneficiaries

Number of beneficiaries

Status of beneficiaries


No activity1 - 6 000

6 001 - 15 00015 001 - 30 00030 001 - 54 850


No activity1 - 5 000

5 001 - 10 00010 001 - 19 520



Complètement satisfaitMoyennement satisfaitPeu satisfaitPas du tout satisfait

A Temps

Trop tot

Trop tard

Ne sait pas

7

Post-distribution monitoring

Overall satisfaction level with 2016 interventions

Average distribution delay

Average use of Non Food Items

% of satisfaction with the QUALITY of:

% of satisfaction with the QUANTITY of:

% of positive perception of the USEFULNESS of an item:

During the RRM strategic workshop (June) and strategic committees (April and October), recommendations were formulated to improve response times, and undertake more Post Monitoring missions in order to analyse the quality of the response. 29 PDM exercises showed that overall the situation was deemed satisfactory.

Photo credit: PU AMI / RRM

NB: These percentages are calculated on the total of the population surveyed in the 29 PDM conducted in 2016.NB. PDM: Post Distribution Monitoring

Cooking kits52%

Tarpaulins36%

Buckets29%

Blankets13%

On time

78%

Used93%

The 29 PDMs conducted between January and December 2016 showed the fol-lowing satisfaction levels:

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

Baches Couvertures Kits de cuisine Nattes Seaux

Satisfait de la QUALITE

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

Baches Couvertures Kits de cuisine Nattes Seaux

Satisfait de la QUANTITE

Too early 3%

Too late 18%

Don’t know 1%

Completely

satisfied 84 %

Given to someone else 3%

Used for other things 2%

Sold 2%

Moderately satisfied 13%

Not satisfied at all 1%Somewhat satisfied 2%

Tarpaulins Blankets Cooking kits Mats Buckets

Tarpaulins Blankets Cooking kits Mats Buckets



Delay

Delay alert - MSA*

Delay Alert - Intervention**

182

AverageMedian

8

Major security issues related to the presence of armed groups delayed the RRM response. Despite improvements in the humanitarian access, the situation in several roads remained unstable, which caused longer delays of intervention than expected by the RRM coordination.

freq

uenc

y

Number of days

Freq

uenc

y

Number of days 212

19 26

56 60

63

78

63

15 21

MedianAverage

Freq

uenc

y

784645

Median Average

1

1 Number of days

Number of days

6

6

With all MSA

With all interventions

Without interventions over 60 days due to security constraints

AverageMedian

Without MSA over 60 days due to security-constraints

Freq

uenc

y

* Number of days between the validation of the intervention par the RRM comittee and the start date of a MSA** Number of days between the validation of the intervention par the RRM comittee and the start date of an intervention realized by the RRM

Rapid Response Mechanism : entral African · PDF fileHealth and nutrition 69 % 88 + 58 + 91 +...

Documents

Transcript of Rapid Response Mechanism : entral African · PDF fileHealth and nutrition 69 % 88 + 58 + 91 +...