ORGANISATIONS PARTICIPATING IN CONSOLIDATED APPEALS DURING 2006:
AARREC
AASAA
ABS
Abt Associates
ACF/ACH/AAH
ACTED
ADRA
Africare
AGROSPHERE
AHA
ANERA
ARCI
ARM
AVSI
CADI
CAM
CARE
CARITAS
CCF
CCIJD
CEMIR Int’l
CENAP / CESVI
CHFI
CINS
CIRID
CISV
CL
CONCERN
COOPI
CORD
CPAR
CRS
CUAMM
CW
DCA
DRC
EMSF
ERM
EQUIP
FAO
GAA (DWH)
GH / GSLG
HDO
HI
HISAN - WEPA
Horn Relief
INTERSOS
IOM
IRC
IRD
IRIN
JVSF
MALAO
MCI
MDA
MDM
MENTOR
MERLIN
NA
NNA
NRC
OA / OCHA
OCPH
ODAG
OHCHR
PARACOM
PARC
PHG
PMRS
PRCS
PSI
PU
RFEP
SADO
SC-UK
SECADEV
SFCG
SNNC
SOCADIDO
Solidarités
SP
STF / UNAIDS
UNDP
UNDSS
UNESCO
UNFPA
UN-HABITAT
UNHCR
UNICEF
UNIFEM
UNMAS
UNODC
UNRWA
UPHB
VETAID
VIA
VT
WFP
WHO
WVI
WR
ZOARC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Table I: Summary of Requirements – By Appealing Organisation and By Sector
2.2005 IN REVIEW
2.1 Protection, Coordination, and Advocacy
2.2.Reducing Longer-Term Vulnerability
2.3Ensure Guinea’s Participation in a Regional Strategy to Stabilise the Sub-Region
2.4Financial Overview
2.5Lessons Learned from the CAP 2005
3.THE 2006 COMMON HUMANITARIAN ACTION PLAN
3.1The Context and its Humanitarian Consequences
3.1. AThe Context
3.1. BThe Humanitarian Consequences
3.2Scenarios
3.3Strategic Priorities for Humanitarian Response
3.4Response Plans
3.4. A Agriculture
3.4. BCoordination and Support Services
3.4. CEducation
3.4. DHealth
3.4. EProtection/Human Rights/Rule of Law
3.4. FMuti-sectorial/Refugee Protection
3.4. GSafety and Security of Staff and Operations
3.4. HWater and Sanitation
4.STRATEGIC MONTORING PLAN
5.CRITERIA FOR PRIORITISATION OF PROJECTS
6.SUMMARY: STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK FOR HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE
Table II: Listing of Project Activities – By Sector
ANNEX I.DONOR RESPONSE TO THE 2005 APPEAL
ANNEX Ii.SOCIAL INDICATORS
ANNEX III.COORDINATION STRUCTURES IN GUINEA OCTOBER 2005
ANNEX IV.DISTRIBUTION OF ETHNIC GROUPS
ANNEX V.GUINEA FORESTIÈRE STATISTICS
ANNEX VI.GUINEA - BASIC FACT SHEET
ANNEX VII.ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Project summary sheets are in a separate volume entitled “Projects”1
1
GUINEA
1.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As a result of civil wars in the Mano River Union (MRU) countries, Guinea hosted nearly one million refugees from Sierra Leone and Liberia for over ten years. It continues to also cope with Guinean Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), following rebel attacks from 2000-2001, as well as with additional refugees and returnees from the 2002 conflict in Côte d’Ivoire. The failed coup against President Lansana Conte in January 2005 has contributed to increasing the sense of insecurity of Guineans, despite a number of measures undertaken by the Government to secure the borders. The linking of international assistance to Guinea’s compliance with good governance and output-oriented macro-economic reforms has resulted in increasing poverty, high inflation, and the breakdown of social services and infrastructure, including telecommunications and transportation.
The humanitarian situation is marked by rising mortality, morbidity and malnutrition rates. The outbreak of almost eradicated diseases such as polio and yellow fever, a 50% increase in fuel prices, and the continued inability of the Government to provide basic social services, have further contributed to a deterioration of living conditions of an already vulnerable population. Today, Guinea’s social indicators have become similar to those of countries emerging from a prolonged war.
Despite these ongoing humanitarian challenges, the Government made considerable progress throughout 2005 in meeting some of the international community’s concerns. They included the resumption of dialogue with the opposition parties, the revision of the law on decentralisation, the liberalisation of both the media and the exchange rate regime, and lastly, preparations for municipal elections. There is some hope that international cooperation will soon resume, especially after a positive evaluation by International Monetary Fund (IMF) in September 2005.
Guinea still faces some key challenges, including the following: (a) upholding free and fair municipal elections by the end of 2005, which would include the participation of opposition parties; (b) coping with potentially destabilising effects if the current political impasse in Côte d’Ivoire leads to a resumption of armed conflict in that country, which would prevent the repatriation of Liberian refugees, bring in a new influx of refugees and returnees, and pose a threat to civilian populations living along the border; (c) proceeding with the macro-economic and political reforms initiated during 2004-2005 and finding adequate and durable solutions to the critical socio-economic situation in order to prevent an increase in humanitarian needs; (d) decreasing the relatively high malnutrition, morbidity and mortality rates, improving food security, halting the spread of Human Immune-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/ Acquired Immune-Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) and the prevalence of other communicable diseases such as cholera, poliomyelitis, yellow fever and malaria; and, (e) maintaining the international community’s attention to urgent rehabilitation and development needs so as to reduce vulnerability and poverty, and to prevent an increase in tension. To assist with these challenges, the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) 2006 will strive to achieve the following strategic goals:
- Reinforce coordination, protection and advocacy on behalf of the most vulnerable;
- Enhance early warning and emergency preparedness measures;
- Reduce vulnerability through more sustainable initiatives and prepare a transition strategy from relief to early recovery.
In pursuance of these goals, 29 projects have been submitted by five non-Governmental organisations (NGO), five United Nations (UN) agencies, the UN Department of Safety and Security (DSS) and the UN Office for the Coordination for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), requesting a total of US$ 32,874,581[1] to address the humanitarian needs of nearly 630,000 people affected by malnutrition, sexual and gender based violence, and HIV/AIDS in Guinea Forestière, Haute Guinea and other areas. The majority of the projects aim at addressing food security and health, providing international protection to refugees, and responding to the most critical needs of host communities and other vulnerable groups in the same areas. The Common Humanitarian Action Plan (CHAP) for 2006 contained in this CAP will complement a number of longer-term rehabilitation and early recovery initiatives planned for 2006 by donors, NGOs, the Red Cross Movement, and individual UN agencies within the framework of the Common Country Assessment/UN Development Assistance Framework (CCA/UNDAF) for 2006-2011.
Table I: Summary of Requirements – By Appealing Organisation and By Sector
2.2005 IN REVIEW[2]
The continued deterioration of the socio-economic situation in Guinea and the inability of the Government to provide basic social services to the most vulnerable populations coupled with inadequate funding levels for humanitarian and rehabilitation programs were the major challenges facing the humanitarian community and its partners in the implementation of the CHAP in 2005. The following strategic goals were set:
- Reinforce coordination, protection and advocacy on behalf of the most vulnerable;
- Reduce vulnerability through sustainable initiatives;
- Ensure Guinea’s participation in a sub-regional strategy to stabilise the sub-region.
An overview of progress and constraints in the implementation of the CHAP is provided below.
2.1 Protection, Coordination, and Advocacy
The Government as well as the international community provided limited resources to enhance assistance and protection of vulnerable communities, including non-refugee populations. A protection working group was created, which met regularly in Conakry. It provided a framework for the development of mechanisms for reinforcing the capacity of the local authorities to better understand and address protection needs of vulnerable groups. In cooperation with partners, another important measure was the launch by the Government of a national birth registration exercise aimed at improving the 48% rate of registered births.
The National Committee on Child Protection chaired by the Minister of Social Affairs held monthly meetings to discuss issues related to unaccompanied children. In this context, the Government signed Memoranda Of Understanding (MOUs) with Mali and Côte d’Ivoire to prevent child trafficking and improve border control. As part of a reunification exercise, 60 separated refugee children were reunited with their families in Sierra Leone. Joint cross-border coordination allowed local authorities to locate, for example, an abducted child in Liberia and return the child to Guinea. Efforts have been made to reinforce security in refugee camps in order to maintain their civilian character, despite unconfirmed reports of infiltration by armed groups. The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) has also designated two reception days per week for urban refugees to report any protection related problems.
To encourage Liberian refugees to voluntary repatriation, UNHCR and other partners, including donors, carried out several campaigns to address any repatriation concerns. The Liberian refugees were provided with financial incentives and regular briefings on the security, infrastructure, social services and living conditions in the places of return. The voluntary repatriation of Liberian refugees commenced in October 2004 with an average repatriation rate of 2,000 – 3,000 refugees per month. By October 2005, about 18,000 Liberians had been repatriated. Some 59,000 Liberians and 3,500 Ivorians remain in camps. Ivorian refugees continue to wait for an improvement in the security situation of their country. A full-scale repatriation is likely to start after the October 2005 elections in Liberia. The remaining caseload of 2,060 Sierra Leonean refugees in Boreah camp continued to receive relief assistance and protection, in preparation for their local integration.
On a comparative basis, efforts to raise awareness of the needs of forgotten vulnerable groups, such as IDPs, returnees and host communities, as laid out in the CHAP 2005, yielded mixed results. Women and children in host and refugee communities benefited from the services of free legal clinics, which increased awareness of human rights and international humanitarian law instruments. However an income-generating project carried out by United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO) and a food security project implemented by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) had limited effects on their beneficiaries as insufficient resources prevented the vulnerable groups from benefiting uniformly/equally.
Inter-agency assessments of the most critical needs were carried out for the first time in Guinea Forestière and Haute Guinea in June and September 2005 respectively. These assessments evaluated the access levels to health and nutrition, water and sanitation, and education services. They also included a sample household inquiry on coping mechanisms and the impact of the prolonged presence of refugees, IDPs and returnees on host communities and the environment. The final outcome of the assessments will be presented shortly. A vulnerability assessment of food security needs was carried out by WFP in May 2005 and the results indicated increasing vulnerability due to food insecurity.
Donors, NGOs and UN agencies were regularly involved in established coordination structures, thereby enhancing inter-agency coordination at the national and regional levels. With support from the international community and national counterparts, the local authorities were able to take the lead in the coordination of humanitarian and early recovery assistance programmes. Unlike previous years, the Government, in cooperation with UN agencies, NGOs and donors, held regular consultations on the sector working groups, resulting in improved analysis of the humanitarian situation and the outstanding humanitarian needs. In an effort to reinforce inter-agency information management and sharing, an Information Management Unit (IMU) was created with support from the European Community Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO). The IMU became functional in September 2005.
2.2.Reducing Longer-Term Vulnerability
Due to limited funding, UN agencies and NGOs utilised funds from their regular country programmes to assist vulnerable groups not included in the refugee programme. Below is a summary of activities undertaken in 2005 to reduce vulnerability.
Health: Cholera affected 2,707 people with 85 deaths (case fatality rate of 3.14). Yellow fever control, and poliomyelitis immunisation were carried out as the second round of the polio vaccination campaign, launched in April 2005, reached a global coverage of 111%.[3] Efforts were made to lower malnutrition, morbidity and mortality rates through targeted programmes in water and sanitation, nutrition, and mother and child health care. An eight-month supply of essential drugs was provided to 36 health centres in N’Zerekore, Yomou, Lola and Beyla prefectures in the last quarter of 2005. Moderate and severe malnutrition rates were found to be lower in refugee camps at 0.9% and 0% respectively in comparison to the global rates of 9.4% and 1.8%[4]. The epidemiological situation remained stable in refugee camps in terms or morbidity and mortality rates. Through its sub office in N’Zerekore, World Health Organisation (WHO) has supported disease surveillance among the refuges and host communities.
Water and sanitation: N’Zerekore and Macenta prefectures benefited from the establishment of 500 latrines. 1,255 water pumps were made operational during 2005, which benefited approximately 610,000 persons, and 20 water points were constructed in Guinea Forestière.
Food aid and Agriculture: Progress has been made in the identification system of food aid beneficiaries and in the gradual reduction in food aid dependency. However, the reduction of food rations and changes in the food basket had a number of negative effects on beneficiaries. Food aid continued to be provided to moderately and severely malnourished children, their mothers and HIV/AIDS victims.
In a bid to improve coping mechanisms and food security among 10,000 returnee households from Côte d’Ivoire, Sierra Leonean refugees and the host communities, FAO undertook the provision of agricultural inputs and technical assistance in Guinea Forestière. School vegetable gardens received seeds and tools, which increased the self-reliance of school feeding programmes. A small number of income generating projects was also implemented. They helped a total of 20,000 IDPs, returnees, and host communities to increase their food security and coping mechanisms. However, in spite of carefully planned emergency agriculture response plans, food security has not improved.
Education: Host families constructed additional classrooms using local material to reduce the average class size down from 124 pupils.
Rehabilitation: As a complement to the CAP 2005, a poverty reduction programme targeting about 5,000 women in Haute Guinea has been conducted. Ex-volunteers were removed from the list of targeted beneficiaries, as there remains confusion among stakeholders on the required needs for this group. FAO used funds from its regular country program to strengthen the national capacity to respond to a locust invasion during the first half of 2005. The World Bank signed an agreement with the Government, which enabled the issuance of a US$ 25 million credit to support the national health policy.
2.3Ensure Guinea’s Participation in a Regional Strategy to Stabilise theSub-Region
In pursuit of a regional strategy to stabilise the sub-region, the UN Country Teams (UNCTs) of Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Côte d’Ivoire embarked on a joint coordination approach to address cross-border issues of common concern relating to instability in the MRU region and Côte d’Ivoire. The first consultative meeting of the MRU and Côte d’Ivoire took place early in 2005 and the meeting resulted in recommendations on the following issues: illegal traffic in small arms and light weapons, youth unemployment, child trafficking, protection of refugees, security, border management, Disarmament, Demobilisation, and Reintegration (DDR) and the risk of re-mobilisation, epidemics, HIV/AIDS, peace building, and conflict prevention. A second consultative meeting is scheduled for the end of 2005 in Conakry to approve a matrix of common cross-border initiatives within the MRU region and Côte d’Ivoire.
Other cross-border initiatives included the signing of non-aggression pacts among communities of the same ethnic groups in the MRU countries, which helped promote peace and reconciliation. MRU consultations have also contributed to solving the border issue of the Yenga enclave[5]. However, 5,000 ex-volunteers and an unknown number of ex-combatants, who fled demobilisation in Liberia, have not been demobilised/reintegrated due to lack of funds.
Regional as well as country-specific contingency planning were carried out, taking into consideration the implications of a possible resumption of armed conflict in Côte d'Ivoire and its impact on Guinea and the sub-region.
2.4Financial Overview
The original CAP 2005 requested a total of US$ 43.7 million to provide assistance to conflicted affected populations in Guinea Forestière, Haute Guinea and other areas. The request was revised downwards after the CAP Mid-Year Review to US$ 39 million (-10.5%) to address remaining humanitarian needs. Since then, new pledges/contributions have been received. As of 2 November 2005 the funding level is 51%, with US$ 19.9 million committed/contributed. The current shortfall amounts to US$ 19.2 million of the total revised budget.
Despite increased humanitarian and early recovery needs, all sectors - with the exception of the multi-sectoral program for refugees - remained critically under-funded as of end-October 2005. In total, over 81% of the allocated funds were provided for refugee assistance and only 19% for non-refugee needs. UNHCR allocated un-earmarked funds to CAP projects to benefit not only refugees but also some host communities.
Two NGOs included in the CAP received funding in the sectors of health and protection: American Refugee Committee (ARC) (79%) and Hammer Forum (100%). Contributions outside of the framework of the CAP to UN agencies, NGOs, and the Red Cross Movement amounted to US$ 2.8 million, earmarked for protection and refugees (Red Cross Movement), health and nutrition (Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)), food aid (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ)), and logistics (International Organisation of Migration (IOM)). As of 2 November 2005, uncommitted pledges by ECHO to UN agencies, NGOs and the Red Cross movement amounted at US$ 9.7 million.
Inadequate funding of humanitarian and early recovery programs contributed to a deterioration of the living conditions of beneficiaries, as relief assistance to some target groups and the implementation of some essential programs were postponed. Water and sanitation, health, agriculture, basic education, and rule of law remained critically under funded.