Use of Cash Programming in Recovery

Use of Cash Programming in Recovery

Myanmar Floods Response 2015

Version 2: 15/9/2015

Background

An interagencycash-working group has been meeting to develop cash guidelines for the floods response and has developed a guideline for cash in recovery. This version (2) proves more specific detail on costs which have been arrived at after consultation with the three key clusters.

Cash in recovery - multi sector approach

It seems highly probable that there will be modest coverage of the response areas by INGO and thus agencies may need to adopt a multi sector approach rather than focus in one or two sectors.

It also seems probable that the use of cash programming will be significant in response to this event.

The tool was shared/trialed in discussions with CBO and NGO in Chin and Kale and the feedback was that this was a very helpful approach giving agencies guidance on how to dedicate scarce resources.

Objectives for multi sector cash recovery guideline

1. To support a multi sector approach
2. To articulate an approach that acknowledges the different impacts experienced by affected households
3. To provide some guidance of levels of impact and how these might be defined
4. To provide some guidance on vales to apply to these impacts
5. To assist in a common understanding and approach to harmonize support given

Priority sectors

This guideline focuses on the 3 household (personal) priority sectors of Shelter Food and Livelihoodsacknowledging that other sectors such as WaSH, Health, and Educationexist within community/government framework.

Needs based approach and damage impact

It is clear that all householdshave not experienced the same impact from the floods or landslides. Some may have destroyed houses but relatively unaffected agriculture whilst others may have undamaged houses but paddy under a meter of silt.

The guideline suggests that the support given to households be nuanced to reflect these differing impacts.

Quantifying impact is of course difficult however it is hoped that a matrix that suggests levels of impact and indicative recovery amounts may provide useful guidance to implementing partners

Equity and transparency

By providing multi sectoral guidelines it is hoped that households in different or adjacent areas will receive a relatively consistent and transparentlevel of support avoiding social stress

Implementing partner adaptation

Whilst this document is based around an cash transfer approach it is understood that agencies may elect to deliver support via other modalities. It is still hoped that this guideline can provide a structure that will support a harmonized approach.

Multi sector matrix:

Cluster leads have suggestedvaluesand definitions (in MMK) as per the matrix below.

MMK

Impact / Shelter / Food / Agriculture/Livelihoods
High / Definition / Severe damage: Total loss or location no longer safe.
(Govt grades C & D
Sagaing) / Need for 3 months food support
13,000/person/month / 50 – 100% potential production loss
a) Livestock and land prep
b) Agricultural kit
Suggested
Value / 650,000 / 39,000/person / a) 160,000/HH
b) 110,000/HH
Medium / Definition / Moderate damage – major repairs required
(Govt grade B) / Need for 2 months food support
13,000/person/month / 25 – 50% potential production loss
a) Livestock and land prep
b) Agricultural kit
Suggested
Value / 325,000 / 26,000/person / a) 80,000/HH
b) 55,000/HH
Low / Definition / Minor Damage : Cleaning, minor repairs
(Govt grade A) / Need for 1 months food support
13,000/person/month / 0 - 25% potential production loss
a) Livestock and land prep
b) Agricultural kit
Suggested
Value / 70,000 / 13,000/person / a) 40,000/HH
b) 22,500/HH

Possible programming sequence

- Conduct sampling to determine general need and adjust matrix against budget (what level of support can be afforded?)

- If required adjust definitions and values to reflect local conditions, however bear in mind that this will

- Socialize community to the process

- Conduct assessment andfrom matrix determine the maximum impact value for each HH.

- Adjust value as appropriate: recovery underway, support available from other sources etc.

- Use vulnerability criteria to determine beneficiaries

Examples

HH A: HH B:

Shelter impact: High 650,000Shelter impact: Med 325,000

Food loss: Medium 5 HH members130,000Food loss: Low 6 HH members 78,000

Livelihoods loss: High (option b)160,000Livelihoods loss: low (option b) 22,500

Total 940,000Total425,500

Support other sources 50% so…470,000 GrantSingle headed HH add 25%531,875 Grant

1