Project Title: Building Resilience of Displaced and Most Vulnerable Populations

CHF Need

Assessment Report

Project Title: Building Resilience of Displaced and Most Vulnerable Populations

Donor: CHF

Location: Nangarhar and Faryab Provinces, Afghanistan

Photo/s

Contents

Acronyms...... 2

Executive Summary...... 3

Objectives of the Need Assessment...... 3

Methodology...... 3

Demography of Project Area...... 4

Status of Internally Displace Persons4

Water, Health and Sanitation...... 5

Status of Food Security...... 5

Needs------5

Acronyms

CIDPConflict Internally Displaced People

CDCCommunity Development Council

HHFocus Group Discussion

IDPInternally Displaced People

IGIncome Generation

SCISave the Children International

FSL Food Security and Livelihoods

CFW Cash for Work

NGO Non-Government Organization

HHsAHouseholds Assessment

Executive Summary

This Rapid Need study was undertaken by Save the Children in June 2016 to gather more information and develop a deeper understanding of Conflict Internally Displaced People (CIDP), and InternallyMost vulnerable host community living there.

The study collected qualitative and quantitative data from 24 villages/communities in six districts of two provinces (Nangarhar and Faryab), which would be targeted by the proposed CHF project. Data was collected from all 24 targeted communities where CIDP, displacedpeople are living. Data and information on community WASH and food security conditions was given focus. Household Assessment (HHAs) wasthe tools used to collect this information.

Key Findings

While conflict and insecurity are usually the main push factors to displacement, economic considerations such as food security and better employment are the main issue while displacement happening. Reasons for leaving their own communities are armed conflict, presence of armed groups and mines are the most common hazards among the surveyed areas due to these households are displaced in settled in near districts, 28 % of respondents in targeted areas in Nangarhar reported that they are conflict IDPs, 52% of respondents reported Armed groups presence in their original community and 13% of the respondents reported mines in their community while in Faryab 77 % respondents reported that they are conflict IDPs, 18% of respondents reported Armed groups presence in their original community and 5% of the respondents reported mines, natural disaster and internal conflict among the community. In fact all of them were conflict IDPs.The main sources of food and income in the project area are agriculture and casual labor. Both of these comprise 92% of total income and 8% comes from other approach such as beggary and bakery.The respondents reported an average monthly income of 2,710 Afs/month in Faryab province while in Nangarhar it has reported 3,496 Afs/month.

In Nangarhar province majority of these IDPs came from districts (Achin, Dehbala, BatiKot, Kot) where Islamic-State is active and people left their homes and lost livelihoods asset. IDPs in Faryab are faced with the same problem due to armed clash in some area people left their homes and came to near districts.

• It has also indicated that all respondents were conflictIDPs. And almost 39 family members of these IDPs HHs were killed in the conflict and some house were destroyed too.
• Local livelihood opportunities have fallen due to insecurity, unemployment, and IDPs. It is estimated that local wage has fallen by more than 50% and this may worsen due to insecurity and unemployment
• During the assessment it was found that the IDPs need urgent Food, shelter and clean drinking water support which are prioritized as bellow:

Food Security: Food was the top priority need across the areas, in Faryab the respondents reported that out of 100% only 58% have eaten meal one time, 35% two times and 7% three times during the past 24 hours, which is giving a clear picture of food insecurity among the population and in the meantime in Nangarhar province it has reported that 27% of respondents have eaten one time meal and 72% two times.

In Faryab 3% of respondents reported that they have received support of food and shelter from government, and 7% of respondents in Nangarhar province reported that they received support from UNHCR. Most of the project areas have not got external support.

WASH:Water was the second most reported priority need across two provinces on average 35% with up to 75% in both provinces indicating either that the availability of public supplies of water is insufficient or that available water considered unsafe for drinking. Shortages in non-drinking water were also generally more common amongst households living in critical shelters in the areas. Majorities in both provinces reported access to functional latrines are very limited.

Livelihoods:Employment/financial support was the third most reported priority need in the target areas, reported by 42% of households. The majority of IDP households across two provinces do not have access to any regular form of income, often as a direct result of displacement. Employment rates were generally poorer in the area. Most IDPs depend on daily wage either in agriculture or doing odd jobs in bigger market centers like, Jalalabad city and Miamana, which make 75% of the total participants interviewed.

Shelter:Shelter, cloths and NFI was also noted a need by saw a higher proportion of households living in “critical” shelters (often unfinished or abandoned buildings, and informal tented settlements). Households raised concerns regarding the current hot summer in two provinces Shelter concerns are closely related to livelihoods.

Objectives of the Need Assessment:

• Understand the current situation regarding food security and WASH in proposed project target areas
• Collect preliminaryinformation on the status of communities to aid project design

Methodology

The area for this Rapid Needs Assessment is the six districts of the provinces of Nangarhar and Faryab. The districts are as follows: 1. Nangarhar: (Rodat;Mohmandara and KuzKunar) districts. 2. Faryab:-(PashtonKot, , Khoja Sabzposh and Dawlat Abad) districts.

Household assessment was the tool used to collect data and information. HHs were conducted on the basis of pre-designed questionnaire to guide the discussion. For the purpose of rapid assessment quantitative data such as demography statistics were also estimated through HHs. Hence, such quantitative data are assumed to be estimates rather than accurate data which would have required a household survey. A total of 120HHs interview were conducted in the two provinces. Among these participants in the discussion 100% were IDPs.

Assessment Sites and Characteristics

Quantitative data collection took place in 24 communitiesof two provinces Nangarhar and Faryab of Afghanistan in June 2016. Both quantitative and qualitative data was collected from all 6districts that will be targeted by CHF project.

Province / Districts / Village/Community / No. HHs in targeted community
Faryab / Dawlat Abad /

1. Bazar Qala
2. Chaghatak
3. Shahar Dawlat Abad
4. Quzi Bai Qala

/ 20
Faryab / KhawjaSabzposh /

1. KataQeshlaq
2. Badghisi
3. Ghuzari
4. Sarai Qala

/ 20
Faryab / Pashtunkut: /

1. Imam Sahib
2. Jamshedi
3. Baloch Shahnader
4. Yaka Tot

/ 20
Nangarhar / KuzKunar /

1. Shamal
2. Sarjal
3. Kuhnada
4. Qalatak

/ 20
Nangarhar / Rodat /

1. Near Ghazi Amantwon
2. Kabul Camp
3. ShahidanoMaina
4. Hejratabad

/ 20
Nangarhar / Mohmandara /

1. HazarNaw
2. Ghwarakai
3. Dah Ka
4. Bahsawal

/ 20
Total / 6 / 24 / 120

Demography of Project Area

Data for household population was collected through HHs. Questionnaire was pre-designed on getting this data and later compiled into a database. Average household size was computed as well as average percentage of stratified population across age and gender. The findings are provided by the table below:-

Table 1.0 Demography

Province / Average Percentage of Population Categories
Adults (19-65 yrs) / Children (girls & boys) / Elderly
Male / Female / 5- 18 yrs / under 5 yrs / Above 65 yrs
Faryab / 21% / 28% / 26% / 20% / 5%
Nangarhar / 22% / 23% / 27% / 24% / 4%

The total estimated population of the project area in the two provinces is 682,500. The population was estimated for project area of the six districts in the two provinces which covers a total of 24communities. The average household size of both the provinces, Faryab and Nangarhar, in the project target areas is six persons per household. The average percentage of adults of the age 19 and above upto 65 years is 49% for Faryab and 45% for Nangarhar. Similarly, for children the average population is 46% for Faryab and 51% for Nangarhar. Average population for adult people, both male and female, who are above 65 years old is 5% for Faryab and 4% for Nangarhar. Average population, as denominated by total population of target area, for adult male and female is 21% and 28% in Faryab. Similarly, for Nangarhar it is 23% for male and 22% for female. Regarding average population for boys and girls it was found 26% and 20% respectively in Faryab and 27% and 24% in Nangarhar.

Status of conflict Internally Displaced Persons

Data for conflict Internally Displace Persons (IDPs) was collected by estimating the total numbers in the project area through HHs using a pre-designed questionnaire. Besides, estimating quantitative data on the number of IDPs and the number of months of their displacement qualitative information on potential tension and conflict with the host communities is also analyzed.

Table 2: Internal Displacement

Province / No of IDPs / No. of Months / Living / Tension
Nangarhar / 9,463 / 1-5 / Host Families / Yes
Faryab / 7,968 / 1-5 / Host Families / Yes

In both the provinces the total displaced population was estimated to be 14,431 individuals. The number of IDPs in Faryab is 7968 individuals and 9463 is in Nangarhar province. However, the IPDs in both province have been displaced for a period which is 1-5 months. Most of these IDPs are living with host families. There is also a growing tension between the IDPs and host communities because of limitation of resources. Poverty among the host communities is making it difficult for them to share resources like food and other services.

Water, Health and Sanitation

A general status of water, health and sanitation was got through the HHs. The competition for use of services because of a sudden increase in population has its immediate impact on basic local services. Through HHs the general availability and practice on water and sanitation was gauged.

Access to clean water, basic toilets and good hygiene practices are essential for the survival. There are around 45 % people who were interviewed reported that they do not have access improved water sources and 58% of respondents in both provinces reported that they do not use improved sanitation. WithouttheseI basic needs, the lives of hundreds of people are at risk. For children under five, water- and sanitation-related diseases are one of the leading causes of death. Most of the team children face with problem and even die from preventable diseases caused by poor water, and a lack of sanitation and hygiene.

The host community has provision of water either through shallow well, hand pumps, unprotected springs, piped scheme and even rivers. Water seems to be available all year round. Regarding practice for defecation communities resort to various practices of which are open pits, traditional covered latrine but many also use open fields. There is a general practice of using soap for washing. However, in almost all communities there is no proper garbage management. Garbage is thrown in the open and also in the river. Some households have been recycling garbage by making use of it as fertilizers for agriculture. Communities reported incidence of diarrhea but there is no data. It is expected that with addition of IDPs the situation regarding health and sanitation has worsened.

Status of Food Security Livelihood

IDPs have fewer labor market opportunities. This is mainly due to the lack of skills adapted to the urban economic context and lower literacy rates compared to the urban poor which translates into lower earning capacity and higher vulnerability to poverty. IDPs living in informal settlements are also extremely vulnerable to food insecurity especially for the initial years of settlement. 60% of IDPs respondents reported to have problems satisfying food needs several time every month, showing a risk of being food insecure. For the poorer groups livelihood is through daily wage laborers mostly in agriculture.

80% of all respondents had an average monthly household income of less than 3,600 AFN. Based on the global definition of extreme poverty as 1.25 USD (75AFN) or less per person per day and severe poverty as 0.70 USD (40 AFN) per person per day, 20% of household surveyed would be classified as living in extreme poverty. Financial capital is also markedly low among the target population. Nearly 75% consider themselves unemployed. On average, households derive income from 3 sources, but rely heavily on agriculture-related fields work as daily labor. 90% of respondents’ households have no savings of any kind, and 10% report that there are no sources of credit available in their community, including informal mechanisms such as friends and family.

Needs

The IDPs settled in these areas often existing on the margins of society, lacking basic protection and assistance, including inadequate access to food, water, shelter and health care and social safety. Many have also been dispossessed of property, are unable to generate incomes, and are denied basic education. They have received humanitarian assistants provided by the Government agencies, humanitarian organization, local NGOs which was not sufficient only 7% of the respondents reported that they have received support. The assistances had been significantly reduced or even stopped for the last six months exposing them to different types of shocks.

The most urgent need for IPDs is a shelter, water, cash and food. During the time of this assessment over 80 percent of these IDPs were living with host families. This was making life difficult for both the IPDs as well as the host families. Food, especially during winter becomes scarce. There is also no food distribution system of the government in these areas. Support in the community for basic services like water and sanitation facilities is also most essential. Health services especially treatment of sick children was seen to be urgent. Improvement in the water supply system not only for drinking but also for cooking and hygiene purposes will boost hygiene system in the target community.

1Need Assessment Report - DRAFT