DEC East Africa Response Review - South Sudan

DISASTERS EMERGENCY COMMITTEE – EAST AFRICA RESPONSE REVIEW: SOUTH SUDAN

Abhijit Bhattacharjee

FINAL REPORT – RESULTS MATTER CONSULTING LIMITED August 2017

Jock Baker, Annelies Thiele, Caroline Saint-Mleux

DEC Response Review team – East Africa Crisis Appeal Name Core Team 1. Abhijit Bhattacharjee Abhijit@results-matter.co.uk

Overall Role

Specific tasks during datacollection/research

Team Leader

Inception report; lead Somalia country study.

2. Jock Baker jm.baker.ch@gmail.com

Deputy Team Leader

Lead South Sudan country study

3. Annelies Thiele anneliesthiele@gmail.com

Public Health & Nutrition Specialist

Participate in data collection in Somalia and South Sudan

4. Badra Yusuf Ali badrayusuf@gmail.com

Humanitarian Consultant

Participate in data collection in Somalia

5. Caroline Saint-Mleux carolinesaintmleux@yahoo.fr Support Team 6. Monica Blagescu MBlagescu@dec.org.uk

Senior Humanitarian Adviser

Participate in data collection in South Sudan

DEC Oversight

Conduct key informant interviews in Kenya and Ethiopia

7. Katy Bobin KBobin@dec.org.uk

DEC Manager & focal point for review team

Conduct key informant interviews in Kenya and Ethiopia

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and may not necessarily represent the views of DEC or its members.

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Abbreviations used AAP CHS DEC FEWS NET FSNAU ECHO FAO FGD GAM GFD GBV DFID HCT HRP ICRC IDP INGO IPC KII MEB MOH MOU NGO OCHA PDM POC SSHF SSP ToR UNHCR UNMISS WASH WFP WHO

Accountability to Affected Population Core Humanitarian Standard Disasters Emergency Committee Famine and Early Warning System Network Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit European Commission Humanitarian Aid Department Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Focus Group Discussion Global Acute Malnutrition General Food Distribution Gender Based Violence Department for International Development Humanitarian Country Team Humanitarian Response Plan International Committee of the Red Cross Internally Displaced Person International Non-Government Organisation Integrated Food Security Phase Classification Key Informant Interview Minimum Expenditure Basket Ministry of Health Memorandum of Understanding Non-Government Organisation Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Post-Distribution Monitoring Protection of Civilians sites South Sudan Humanitarian Fund South Sudanese Pounds Terms of Reference United Nations High Commission for Refugees United Nations Mission in South Sudan Water, Sanitation & Hygiene World Food Programme World Health Organisation

Glossary IPC Classification: The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) is a set of standardised tools that aims at providing a "common currency" for classifying the severity and magnitude of food insecurity. The IPC-Acute scale categorises the severity of acute food insecurity into Five Phases: Phase 1 – minimal; Phase 2 – stress; Phase 3 – crisis; Phase 4 – emergency; and Phase 5 – famine.

Member: Unless otherwise specified, throughout this document, this phrase means a DEC member.

Currency and exchange rates: Depending on the original currency of the donors or cited in the document referenced, three main currency symbols are used in the report: £, $ and €. The exchange rate in pound sterling is shown in the first instance when a different currency symbol appears in the text.

iii

Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... vi Section 1: Introduction, purpose and methodology of the review ............................................ 1 1.1 Background and introduction .................................................................................................... 1 1.2 The review purpose, scope and methodology ........................................................................... 1 1.3 Organisation of the review and declaration of conflict of interest ............................................... 1 4. Ethical considerations ................................................................................................................. 3 5. Challenges and limitations .......................................................................................................... 3 Section 2: Response context and content .................................................................................. 4 2.1 Overall crisis context in South Sudan ........................................................................................ 4 2.2 Members’ response, key activities and resources ..................................................................... 6 Section 3: Findings of the Review ............................................................................................... 8 3.1 Overall approach and timeliness of response............................................................................ 8 3.2 Food security ............................................................................................................................ 9 3.3 WASH ..................................................................................................................................... 12 3.4 Health & Nutrition .................................................................................................................... 12 3.5 Protection and gender-based violence .................................................................................... 13 3.6 Cross-cutting issues................................................................................................................ 15 Section 4: Assessment against review criteria......................................................................... 19 4.1 Relevance and appropriateness.............................................................................................. 19 4.2 Coverage ................................................................................................................................ 19 4.3 Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................... 20 4.4 Efficiency – operational management and coordination .......................................................... 21 4.5 Coherence and connectedness .............................................................................................. 21 Section 5: Conclusions, Lessons and Recommendations ...................................................... 23

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Tables & Figures Table 1: Results of rapid accountability assessments in South Sudan .............................................. 16 Figure 1: Map showing IPC classification and DEC members’ priority areas ....................................... x Figure 2: Phase 1 budget (£) for individual member agencies and countries ...................................... 1 Figure 3: Sector allocation - DEC funds, South Sudan (Source: DEC) ................................................ 7 Figure 4: Crop calendar for South Sudan (Source: FAO) .................................................................. 10 Figure 5: South Sudan Inflation Rates (Source: National Bureau of Statistics, S. Sudan) ................. 12

Annexes Annex 1: Disaster Emergency Committee East Africa Crisis Appeal (2017) Response Review - Terms of Reference Annex 2: DEC East Africa Crisis Response Review Inception Report Annex 3: List of Key informants and focus groups Annex 4: Itinerary of the DEC Review team, South Sudan Annex 5: List of documents consulted Annex 6: Consolidated activity plan of DEC members, South Sudan

v

Executive Summary The Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) commissioned a review of response by its members to the East Africa crisis since the appeal’s launch on 15 March 2017. The overarching purpose of this review was to provide an overview of the DEC Members’ response so far, as well as, draw initial lessons and identify priority areas for Phase 2 that will start from October 2017. The review covered Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia and South Sudan where funds raised by the appeal were being spent. Of the thirteen members, ten are responding in South Sudan utilising DEC funds. This report covers the South Sudan country study, data collection for which was carried out during June-July..

The review utilised a mixed-methods approach, using quantitative and qualitative data gathered from a carefully selected range of sources. Overall performance was assessed using the following criteria: Relevance and appropriateness, Coverage, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Connectedness and coherence.

Key findings The resurgence in the conflict in mid-2016 resulted in renewed displacement and a huge expansion in humanitarian needs. A few members established operations where needs were greatest. Most members remained in their operational areas and drew upon existing networks and relationships to support their response. Some of these areas were designated as those with high-priority needs.

Although food security was identified as a major need, South Sudan differs from the other three countries covered by the DEC Appeal since the primary underlying cause of food shortages is conflict, rather than drought-related, as highlighted by DEC in all its public communications. Most of the assistance was in-kind, in the form of food or agricultural inputs (seeds and tools), since the conflict limits opportunities for cash programming due to its adverse effects on markets. Almost all of the seed distributions were done after the usual planting period due to delayed funding; additionally, almost all procurement had to be done from outside the country, posing further challenges with procurement and transportation.

During periods when conflict and displacement intensify, there is an inflow of funding that then tails off.

Many affected communities in South Sudan are caught between a rock and a hard place since, during times of conflict, security situation constrains access by humanitarian agencies and, when funding diminishes, coverage is reduced partly due to the high cost of delivering assistance. After decades of conflict, coping and adaptation strategies have been well developed and some members have developed a good understanding of how to support these strategies to increase resilience of the population.

South Sudan is very much a protection crisis. There have been repeated deliberate attacks on civilians and other violations of international humanitarian and human rights laws, including forced recruitment of children and deliberate destruction of civilian infrastructure. Gender-Based Violence (GBV) is common and widespread. Some members provided good practice models of how integrated multisectoral interventions can strengthen protection.

While food security needs are likely to diminish somewhat during the coming weeks as the lean season comes to an end, a likely scenario is an increase in conflict, probably during the last quarter of the year, after the end of the rainy season. Based on previous experience, the resulting displacement and shift in humanitarian needs will require members to reassess these needs and reprioritise their assistance.

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Conclusions Relevance and appropriateness DEC funding was prioritised for food security and livelihood interventions which, based on needs assessments and other available evidence, appear to have been an appropriate focus. As stated above, a likely scenario in the current context is an increase in conflict, probably during the last quarter of the year, after the end of the rainy season. This is likely expected to cause additional displacement, increased insecurity and, yet again, have result in long-term negative impacts on food security and other humanitarian indicators. Resilience with specific recovery objectives may not be feasible in many parts of South Sudan, but interventions can be designed to strengthen community coping strategies and adaptation strategies when external assistance may not be available.

Coverage The DEC Appeal was launched in the beginning of the lean season after several months of conflict, insecurity and displacement that disrupted harvests and food supply chains. Food security was identified as the most critical unmet need, and nearly 70 per cent of DEC funding was allocated to address this. Given the scale of unmet needs, most of the DEC resources were used by members to meet the significant increase in humanitarian needs. There were a few cases of DEC members continuing to work with non-displaced host populations in IPC2 areas where it was difficult to find evidence that DEC funds were being used to meet urgent humanitarian needs.

DEC members prioritised targeting the most vulnerable, mostly identifying individuals based on multiple indicators for assessing household vulnerability. Beneficiary registration was susceptible to manipulation by those with power and authority. Agencies who took steps to ensure that vulnerability criteria were well-understood and selected beneficiaries through a process of validation and triangulation with other community members have usually had a satisfactory result.

Effectiveness DEC members are generally addressing Grand Bargain commitments, although there is need to improve transparency to enhance operational effectiveness by greater sharing of agency operational plans at field level, and monitoring results to help make coordination more effective.

An integrated approach linking different sectoral activities, such as protection, food security, WASH and/or protections, was observed to result in better outcomes.

Members employed different approaches for community consultation and complaints mechanism which involved sharing information and obtaining feedback. Agencies relied on verbal communication to a large extent and there was variable awareness of entitlements amongst beneficiaries. Members of beneficiary communities recruited by agencies as community mobilisers had the highest level of awareness about project design, but none of the community members interviewed had a clear perspective of the project beyond the specific intervention in their communities. When beneficiary communities were well-informed about project objectives, performance indicators and individual entitlements, they were in a much better position to monitor the quality and quantity of assistance provided.

Members were still planning or analysing their PDM data at the time this review took place - three months after DEC budgets had been approved. As a result, both the review team and agencies themselves experienced difficulties in assessing the effectiveness of interventions and key outcomes, including how cash transfers had been used. DEC budgets were approved at the start of the planting season, but in most cases agencies were not able to distribute seeds at optimal time due to the lead time required for internal financial processes, procurement and transportation.

vii

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Efficiency Humanitarian agencies are being increasingly pressed to justify their choice of assistance modalities, including being able to answer the question "why not cash?". High operating costs have become a standard challenge for all humanitarian agencies working in South Sudan due to insecurity and the poor state of infrastructure which increased the cost of procurement and transportation. Partners have tended to develop proposals based on tried and tested approaches. Two of ten DEC members operating in South Sudan with DEC funding could show evidence of a cost analysis that had informed their selection of the modality for delivery of assistance.

Lessons Two key lessons that emerged from this review were: • •

To effectively target the most vulnerable, it is critical to ensure that selection criteria is widely understood and selection is triangulated with different community groups.

Well-integrated multi-sectoral approaches can increase effectiveness of interventions, notably with regard to protection.

Recommendations Recommendations are targeted at DEC members which will require facilitation by the DEC Secretariat.

Relevance and Appropriateness R1: Employ scenario-based planning to help ensure that interventions can adapt to changing contexts according to re-prioritised needs. Help strengthen community resilience through supporting coping and adaptation strategies.

Coverage R2: Review areas of intervention and adapt operations accordingly so that humanitarian assistance is based on current and/or expected future needs, and place less emphasis on funding ongoing operations. Ensure that assistance is targeted at the most vulnerable through a combination of information campaigns and validation through triangulation with different stakeholders within the community, including elderly persons and the disabled.

Effectiveness R3: Improve information sharing with peer agencies, local authorities and affected communities to strengthen coordination and improve efficiency and effectiveness of the response.

R4: Promote sectoral integration to improve outcomes, such as linking protection, WASH and/or nutrition interventions to food security by applying learning from good practice by other DEC members.

viii

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

R5: Improve accountability to affected populations; information sharing, participation, feedback and complaints systems to facilitate a shift from “Intermediate” to “Mature”1 to improve quality and monitoring of interventions.

R6: Carry out real-time post-distribution monitoring, using a “Good Enough” approach, soon after distributions to help highlight any gaps in the design of the intervention and obtain a real-time understanding of outcomes.

Efficiency R7: Project design should illustrate how different modality options, including transportation, have taken costs into account.

ix

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Figure 1: Map showing IPC classification and DEC members’ priority areas

x

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Section 1: Introduction, purpose and methodology of the review 1.1 Background and introduction 1.

In line with the Disasters Emergency Committee’s (DEC) Accountability Framework, 2 DEC undertook a review of response to the East Africa crisis by its members since the appeal’s launch on 15 March 2017. The scope of the review covers Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia and South Sudan where the funds raised by the appeal are being spent. This report covers the South Sudan country study.

2.

The Terms of Reference (Annex 1) provide a detailed background to the appeal and response. All thirteen DEC member agencies responded to the crisis in East Africa during the first 6-month response phase. Of these, seven are responding in Ethiopia; seven in Kenya; nine in Somalia; and ten in South Sudan. Data provided by DEC show that of the £26.5 million budget for Phase 1 (March to end September 2017), the largest share (36 per cent) has been budgeted for Somalia, 25 per cent for Kenya, 25 and 15 per cent for South Sudan and Ethiopia respectively. Figure 1 below provides details of budget by member agency and country based on the Phase 1 work plans.

Confirmed phase 1 budgets by member agency & country £8,000,000 £7,000,000 £6,000,000 £5,000,000 £4,000,000 £3,000,000 £2,000,000 £1,000,000 £0

South Sudan

Somalia

Kenya

Ethiopia

Figure 2: Phase 1 budget (£) for individual member agencies and countries (Source: Terms of Reference, DEC Response Review, East Africa Crisis Appeal)

1.2 The review purpose, scope and methodology 3.

2

The overarching purpose of this review was to provide an overview of the DEC members’ response so far, as well as, draw initial lessons and identify priority areas for Phase 2 that will commence

Disaster Emergency Committee (undated). DEC Operations Manual, Accountability and Learning (Chapter 5).

1

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

from October 2017. As a review of the collective response of DEC member agencies, the exercise covered the period from March 2017 to the date of data collection. Detailed methodology and approach used for drawing review conclusions are provided in the inception report in Annex 2. The review used mixed-methods using quantitative and qualitative data gathered from a carefully selected range of sources. The data collection for this review was mainly done through documentary research, purposively selected key informant interviews (KIIs) with stakeholders, semi-structured interviews, site visits and observations, and carefully structured focus group discussions (FGD) and individual interviews with affected-communities, including local authorities in South Sudan.

4.

A rapid accountability assessment tool was used during 9 FGDs with beneficiary communities, of which 6 were solely women participants. Participants were asked to rate the DEC member based on selected indicators for information sharing, participation and feedback/complaints.3 FGDs were asked to give examples to explain why they had given the rating. In cases where ratings differed, a discussion ensued to find a consensus; where there was no consensus, an average rating was given.

5.

The review used the following criteria which were adapted for this review from the OECD/DAC criteria for evaluation of humanitarian action. The review matrix at the end of the Annex 2 provides details of questions under each criteria assessed, as well as methods of assessment and potential sources of data/evidence. ❖ ❖ ❖ ❖ ❖

Relevance and appropriateness Coverage.

Effectiveness Efficiency Connectedness and coherence

1.3 Organisation of the review and declaration of conflict of interest 6.

The review was commissioned by the DEC Secretariat and managed by its Director of Programmes. Through an international tendering process, Results Matter Consulting (UK) was awarded the contract to conduct the review. Some of the team members had worked for several DEC members in the past as staff or consultant; however, during and preceding a year before the review, no consultant had any ongoing association with any of the DEC members, or is currently being considered for any engagement as staff or consultant.

7.

Prior to the field visits, the inception report was drafted and finalised (Annex 2) in consultation with the DEC Secretariat and members. The field visits to South Sudan for the review were undertaken by three consultants4 during July 13 to July 25, 2017. A breakdown of key informant interviews and focus group discussions undertaken during data gathering is provided in Annex 3. A full itinerary of the review team and key documents consulted are attached as Annex 4 and 5 respectively. At the end of the field visit, exit debriefing was conducted in Juba which was attended by staff from DEC Secretariat and member agencies; subsequently, at a meeting in London, findings, conclusions and draft recommendations were presented to DEC members. This provided feedback on preliminary findings which have been considered in the present report.

3 4

Indicators are as per Table 1 in section 3.6.2 Jock Baker, Annelies Thiele and Caroline Saint-Mleux 2

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

4. Ethical considerations 8. The following protocol was adhered to by the review team in all interactions with stakeholders: ❖ Informed consent - all participants gave their consent to participate in any activity related to the review, and the review team was mindful of not pressing any member/participant to engage in the process, if they were not prepared to; ❖ Respect of rights of those involved in any review process or activity; participants were duly informed of the purpose so that they participate freely and equitably; ❖ Respect dignity - interviews and data-gathering were conducted in a way that respected individual’s dignity; ❖ Ensuring inclusivity – all voices were heard, ensuring respect to privacy and confidentiality.

5. Challenges and limitations 9. The visit took place during the rainy season which, along with restrictions to road travel due to insecurity and poor road infrastructure, limited access to beneficiary communities. Some members provided secondary data, but monitoring or evaluation/review reports were either still being planned or were underway, or the reports had not yet been finalised at the time this review took place, thus limiting access to triangulated data. This gap was partly filled through interviews, including phone interviews, with staff from DEC partners and external agencies and consultants commissioned to carry out reviews, and community members.

10. Given the limited time and resources for the review, it has not been possible to visit activities of all member agencies; it was only possible to visit project sites of 4 out of the 10 DEC members5 who have received DEC Appeal funds. Individual interviews with members in Juba following the site visits, along with an interactive debrief at the end of the visit, provided an opportunity to contrast and compare members’ experiences and draw out common achievements and challenges.

5

The team visited project sites of CARE, Oxfam, Plan International and World Vision.

3

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Section 2: Response context and content 2.1 Overall crisis context in South Sudan 11. The people of South Sudan have been subjected to decades of conflict, natural disasters and political upheaval. There was a period of hope for the world’s newest country during a period of political stability after independence in July 2011. This changed on 15 December 2013 when interethnic fighting broke out between government troops, following a power struggle between the President and his former deputy. Despite a functioning humanitarian coordination system and presence of a relatively large UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS), the way in which the crisis escalated into a full-blown regional humanitarian crisis was largely unexpected. Many of the national staff working for humanitarian agencies were directly threatened due to their ethnic backgrounds and were unable to work effectively. Agency compounds were looted and vehicles stolen. The consequences were widespread ethnic-based harassment, large-scale displacement, sexual and gender based violence (SGBV), forced recruitment and tens of thousands of deaths.

12. Further clashes during mid-2016 left an estimated 7.5 million people in need of humanitarian assistance and protection due to a combination of armed conflict, inter-communal violence, economic crisis, disease outbreaks and climatic shocks. One in four people in South Sudan have been forced to flee their homes, including more than 1.3 million people who have fled to neighbouring countries as refugees and nearly 1.9 million people who are internally displaced, most of whom are children.6 13. In addition to widespread violence against civilians, humanitarian agencies also became targets during the fighting during mid-2016 and there were cases of aid workers killed, wounded and raped, together with looting and extensive property damage. A report commissioned by the UN found that the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) did not respond effectively to the violence due to an overall lack of leadership and preparedness.7 Food Security 14. The food security situation in South Sudan continues to deteriorate. As of May 2017, 5.5 million people were estimated in Crisis (IPC Phase 3), Emergency (IPC Phase 4) and Catastrophe (IPC Phase 5).8 The magnitude of these food-insecure population is unprecedented for South Sudan.9 15. Conflict continues to be the main driver of food insecurity in South Sudan, causing massive internal and external displacement, preventing households from engaging in typical livelihood activities, restricting the economy, causing hyperinflation, and disrupting markets and trade routes, leading to some 6 million people being pushed into acute food insecurity. Household food access remains extremely low, and Crisis (IPC Phase 3) and Emergency (IPC Phase 4) outcomes exist in all regions during the ongoing lean season. The food security situation is expected to improve in September 2017 (improved access to milk, fish, water lilies and harvest), but with limited effect on household food access due to expected below-average production and extremely high food prices.

Further deterioration in food security is expected after January 2018 when households deplete food stock and the availability of wild foods and fish seasonally decline. The highest proportions 6

OCHA (2017) Humanitarian Needs Overview: South Sudan.

Statement by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon November 2016 https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sgsm18245.doc.htm 8 IPC Alert, Issue 8, 21 June 2017 9 IPC – 31 May 2017 7

4

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

of populations in Crisis, Emergency and Catastrophe are observed in Greater Jonglei State (63 per cent) and Unity State (61 per cent).10

WASH 16. At the beginning of 2017, it was estimated that 4.8 million of the most vulnerable people across South Sudan need support to access safe water and basic sanitation facilities.11 Some 40 per cent of the population have access to safe water supply and approximately three-quarters of the population defecate in the open. As the conflict spread to new areas in 2016, boreholes were damaged or they stopped functioning due to lack of maintenance. Urban areas have also been affected by a decline in access to safe water because of rising prices.

Nutrition 17. Famine was declared in South Sudan in February 2017. The alert was lifted in June 2017, but acute malnutrition remains a major public health emergency in several parts of the country.

Widespread fighting, displacement and poor access to services, as well as disease outbreaks, poor sanitation facilities and hygiene practices are the key drivers of the high levels of acute malnutrition seen across South Sudan. By June 2017, out of 55 planned SMART surveys, 23 (42 per cent) had been conducted and validated. Over 91 per cent showed global acute malnutrition (GAM) above the 15 per cent WHO emergency threshold. Most of the counties displaying high GAM rates were from the Unity and Jonglei states. According to UNICEF, fewer than 10 per cent of children aged 6 to 23 months received the recommended quality and quantity of a daily diet, and women’s workloads and poor household diets are key contributors to poor child feeding.

Health 18. During the past 13 months, South Sudan has experienced the deadliest cholera outbreak since its independence. A total of 18,040 cholera cases, including 328 deaths (Case Fatality Rate 1.8 per cent), have been reported in 24 counties across South Sudan between 18 June 2016 and 23 July 2017.12 19. With the onset of the rainy season, incidences of water-borne diseases including cholera are expected to increase and access to some parts of the country will be restricted due to poor road networks and airstrips.13 Health service delivery to areas with increased numbers of internally displaced persons (IDP) remains a challenge with increased risks to epidemic-prone diseases as the IDPs continuously move to locations with limited or no health services.

20. Malaria, Acute Respiratory Tract Infections, TB/HIV/AIDS, and measles continue to cause major public health morbidities and mortalities in IDP locations and surrounding host communities. 14 Susceptibility to disease has risen after three years of conflict and crisis. Since January 2017, there have been 1,894 suspected cases of measles reported and over a million malaria cases have been reported in health facilities, including 1,956 deaths, representing 76.9 per cent of all disease-related deaths recorded this year.

10

IPC Alert, Issue 8, 21 June 2017 OCHA (2017) South Sudan 2017 Humanitarian Response Plan (January - December 2017) 12 OCHA (2017) Humanitarian Bulletin: South Sudan. Issue 12 | 28 July 2017 13 Ibid 14 Health Cluster Bulletin # 6/ 30 June 2017. http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Health-Cluster-Bulletin-1to-30-June-2017.pdf 11

5

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

21. Ongoing displacement of health workers, non-functionality of health facilities due to insecurity and inaccessibility, and widespread looting continue to increase the risk of multiple outbreaks to the fleeing population with limited access to healthcare services including surveillance and health alerts. According to the health cluster, less than 50 per cent of health services in South Sudan are functioning.15 Protection and Gender Based Violence 22. Since 2013, the population has been exposed to repeated deliberate attacks on civilians and other violations of international humanitarian and human rights law, including forced recruitment of children and deliberate destruction of civilian infrastructure with no accountability mechanism in place to end it. Even those who have sought shelter in one of the Protection of Civilian (POC) sites face risks, including sexual violence and psychosocial distress. Despite attempts by humanitarians, services in the POC sites do not meet recognised humanitarian standards.

Explosive hazards curtail safe freedom of movement, preclude delivery of humanitarian aid and inhibit access to services. Solicitation of bribes and engagement in corrupt activities are rampant as the armed forces find alternative coping mechanism in the deteriorated economic situation.16 23. A gender analysis conducted during 2013-201617 highlighted the complexity of gender relations in South Sudan. Most South Sudanese (83 per cent) live in rural areas although there are significant differences between states. Gender-Based Violence (GBV), including rape, sexual assault, domestic violence, forced and early marriage, sexual exploitation and abuse, abduction, discriminatory practices within the legal system and harmful traditional practices, is a persistent and serious problem in South Sudan. 18 GBV affects men, women, boys and girls, but it disproportionally affects women and girls. According to data collected by the Gender-based Violence-Information Management System (GBV-IMS) in South Sudan during 2016, approximately 98 per cent of reported GBV incidents affected women and girls.

24. According to UNICEF, more than 1.17 million children have lost access to education due to conflict and displacement since December 2013. About 31 per cent of schools have suffered at least one or more attacks by armed actors. This has overwhelmingly been the case in Greater Upper Nile, specifically in urban areas. Over 17,000 children are estimated to have been recruited by armed actors in South Sudan and some 9,000 children were registered as unaccompanied, separated or missing.

2.2 Members’ response, key activities and resources 25. Humanitarian needs are enormous and costs of procuring and delivering assistance are high in South Sudan. Requirements in the 2017 Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) are estimated at over $1.6 billion and the UNHCR’s Regional Response Plan for the South Sudanese refugee crisis amounts to almost $1.4 billion. South Sudan’s portion of ICRC’s 2017 Appeal to cover the cost of

15

Health Cluster Bulletin # 6/ 30 June 2017. http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Health-Cluster-Bulletin-1-to30-June-2017.pdf 16 Danish Refugee Council Strategic Programme Document for South Sudan 2017 – 2019. https://drc.dk/media/3161348/drcddg-south-sudan-spd-final-27102016.pdf CARE: Inequality and injustice: The deteriorating situation for women and girls in South Sudan’s war: A Progressive Gender Analysis: 2013 – 2016. http://insights.careinternational.org.uk/media/k2/attachments/CARE_Inequality-and-injustice_SouthSudan-progressive-gender-analysis_Dec-2016.pdf 17

18

GBV sub-cluster Strategy South Sudan 2017. https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/ru/operations/southsudan/document/gender-based-violence-sub-custer-strategy-south-sudan-2017 6

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study its field operations amounts to a further $126 million.19 Current data indicates that 55 per cent of the HRP requirements are funded.20 Interviews with donors suggest that UNHCR’s Appeal is only 20 per cent funded. The largest contributors to the 2017 HRP are WFP (29 per cent) and the United States (USA, 17 per cent) as of mid-2017, with the United Kingdom’s (UK) contribution amounting to just under 8 per cent.21 26. Interviews with DEC members indicated that the proportion of DEC funding relative to their total country emergency budget varied considerably, ranging from 3 per cent for the larger agencies to 28 per cent for smaller agencies. For those agencies where DEC contributed a significant proportion of their budget, this enabled them to kick-start their emergency operations. For larger agencies, DEC funding was allocated to their overall programme. In most cases, funds were allocated to discrete activities, although in one case the DEC contribution was added to a pooled fund. As shown in Figure 3 below, 67 per cent of DEC Phase 1 funding allocated to South Sudan was focused on meeting needs relating to food security, of which in-kind food accounted for 32 per cent. Livelihood assistance was mainly in the form of seeds and tools, along with a small amount of fishing equipment. No post-distribution monitoring (PDM) data was made available to the team so it was not clear how beneficiaries had used unconditional cash assistance; however, based on FGD with communities, interviews with agency staff and feedback from one member’s complaints and feedback system, most cash was used for food.

Figure 3: Sector allocation - DEC funds, South Sudan (Source: DEC) The consolidated activity-plan of DEC members for the phase 1 period is attached as Annex 6.

19

https://www.icrc.org/en/document/icrc-appeals-2017 https://fts.unocha.org/appeals/538/summary 21 https://fts.unocha.org/countries/211/donors/2017?order=total_funding&sort=desc 20

7

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Section 3: Findings of the Review 3.1 Overall approach and timeliness of response 27. Although food security was identified as a major need, South Sudan differs from the other three countries covered by the DEC Appeal insofar as the primary underlying cause of food shortages is conflict-related, and South Sudan thus does not figure amongst countries at-risk from the extended drought.22 As described earlier, the latest in a series of humanitarian crisis dates from an escalation in conflict since mid-2016 that resulted in renewed internal and refugee displacements and deteriorated security situation that created additional obstacles and raised the costs of procurement and delivery of assistance.

28. Most members made extensive use of needs assessments and data from UN-led clusters and working groups when carrying out their own assessments and developing response strategies.

Many agencies either participated in joint assessments or contributed data to common datasets.

Some examples of assessments that were used for advocacy to influence interventions of other humanitarian actors are shown below (Box 1).

Box 1: Examples of needs assessments DEC members were involved in South Sudan Age International and its partner, ACTED, carried out assessments that revealed that most agencies working in Warrap state focused on children and women with minimal focus on inclusion of older people.

CARE International has been carrying out a progressive gender analysis since 2013 and, during April 2017, conducted a needs assessment around Koch in the Unity state that found increased Gender Based Violence (GBV) and identified significant food security needs.

Oxfam conducted several assessments that were also used for advocacy. The gender analysis during May-June 2016 in Wau, Jonglei and Juba, targeted both IDPs and host communities. There is a shift in the gendered division of labour, with more women actively engaging in roles formerly perceived as the preserve of males, such as fishing, petty trade and construction. Oxfam also carried out a rapid market assessment during March-May 2017 that indicated that markets in the Unity state were unable to absorb much cash assistance that led to a switch to WASH activities. Protection assessments conducted in early 2017 demonstrated the need for an integrated approach to protection.

World Vision participated in seven interagency assessments, mostly in the Upper Nile state. They also conducted a Juba context assessment that provided data on key economic and food security indicators for Juba’s urban population.

(Source: Member-agency narrative plans submitted to DEC for Phase 1 response and key informant interviews)

29. Many agencies have been faced with newly arriving IDPs during the implementation period. Most continued with their existing beneficiary lists using the rationale that other agencies, notably WFP, had made a commitment to prioritising the newly-displaced. A few agencies did update their needs assessments to include this population. In one case, the DEC member agency was limited in its ability to update its assessment due to another (non-DEC member) agency resisting its involvement with beneficiary communities where the other agency was already operating and only agreed that the DEC member could assist newly arrived IDPs.23 22 23

OCHA (2017) Horn of Africa: Humanitarian Impacts of Drought – Issue 8 (18 July 2017) At the time of the review, the issue had been raised with the cluster coordinator to resolve.

8

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

30. Beneficiary selection criteria usually comprised multiple indicators of vulnerability, namely IDPs, women-headed households, elderly, pregnant and lactating women and families with children. As can be expected in such selection process, inclusion errors were common, especially in cases where members relied mainly on community leadership to select beneficiaries. In some cases, members did have a validation process to check each household’s status before accepting the committee’s list but some members relied mainly on lists prepared by village committees. In one area, local chiefs said they included themselves in the beneficiary list based on the “large family” vulnerability criteria. This was freely admitted, giving the impression that it was a misunderstanding of the criteria and not a specific attempt to undermine the targeting system.

3.2 Food security 31. The humanitarian response to the crisis has focused on increasing people’s access and entitlement to lifesaving food assistance mainly through in-kind food distribution, with some unconditional cash transfers and food commodity vouchers.

32. WFP’s General Food Distribution (GFD) is the main provider of food aid in the country,24 with several international and national humanitarian agencies distributing in-kind food items. Although WFP has received over $600 million in contributions (57 per cent of total 2017 HRP requirements), during interviews WFP staff indicated that they will only be able to meet around 40 per cent of food security needs in IPC Phase 4 areas during the 2017 lean season with GFD. Five members used DEC and other funds to provide in-kind food over short periods of time during the lean season to supplement WFP efforts to assist the most vulnerable population in remote locations, as well as, in some cases, to complement emergency livelihood and nutrition programmes.

33. Procurement, importation of food items (mainly from Uganda) and transportation to field locations usually takes an average of 6 – 8 weeks. Member agencies reported food that is not procured by WFP and seeds and tools not sourced through FAO are not prioritised by the logistic cluster. Most members are obliged to charter independent flights for food and seed delivery to field locations, which substantially increases costs of in-kind food assistance and raise questions about costeffectiveness. It was not possible to assess the cost efficiency or cost effectiveness of these interventions, since only two DEC members reported that they had performed a cost analysis to justify their choice of modalities.25 Emergency livelihood 34. A second important aspect of the humanitarian response of the DEC partners (8 out of 10) is the emergency livelihood programme through the provision of unconditional cash (2 members), cash for work (1), fishing kits (4), crops and vegetable seeds and tools (5) to restore and protect households’ livelihood and assets, as well as to diversify household food and income sources. All the agencies providing livelihood assistance included a community training and mobilisation component as part of their response.

35. Insecurity is a major constraint on any organisation’s capacity to plan and implement livelihood interventions. Short-term emergency livelihood components are prioritised, and in more stable areas, market-driven pilots are considered as more feasible. Some members feel that, until people’s food needs are met, it may be problematic to invest resources in livelihoods unless they 24

WFP reported focusing on three States until mid-2016, and had to expand to all States due to the deterioration of the situation.

25 These were both livelihood examples, but the review team saw little evidence that most other DEC members were systematically analysing costs and modality options for any of their interventions.

9

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

contribute to improved access to food in the household and surpluses can be sold in the market to diversify income.

36. Although the main “trigger” for the current response was an upsurge in the conflict during mid2016, the DEC Appeal was launched just at the beginning of the lean season. The Appeal funds helped agencies take steps to mitigate impact on the population when many families had difficulties in cultivating and accessing land due to displacement, and/or were victims of cattle raiding. DEC partners started procurement shortly after the estimated funding envelope was received from DEC on the understanding that costs would be reimbursed. However, due to a combination of internal procedures, difficulties with procurement and transportation, most agencies were not able to distribute seeds and tools until mid-July, which was too late for the sowing period in most of the IPC 4 areas in the north (see Figure 4).

Figure 4: Crop calendar for South Sudan (Source: FAO) 37. Delays in seed/tool procurement and transportation have fortunately coincided with a late start of the rains for some partners in several locations, potentially limiting the negative impact on the beneficiaries. PDM results during the harvest period should show the extent to which these delays have affected productivity.

Cash based modalities 38. The deterioration in the situation since mid-2016 has limited opportunities for cash programming due to its adverse effects on markets. The main actor for cash/market-based programmes in South Sudan is WFP. They have been implementing recovery programme in specific locations that have remained relatively stable with functioning markets, including Warrap, Lakes, Juba and Northern Bahr el Ghazal where they have provided unconditional cash transfers (42,000 beneficiaries monthly), cash for assets (150,000 beneficiaries monthly), cash-for-work and conditional food vouchers (114,000 beneficiaries monthly). WFP resumed its voucher programme in Juba POC sites in January 2017 after putting it on hold in July 2016 due to protection concerns related to the inability of traders to resupply and to reduce risk to beneficiaries of gender-based violence associated with leaving the POC to purchase food in markets. Through the WFP voucher programme, beneficiaries receive a value voucher for the purchase of commodities from local traders.

10

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

39. Scale differentiates WFP from INGO in cash programming, and this has influenced the choice of modalities. Four DEC members resorted to targeted cash based interventions to meet specific needs to, for example, cover the cost of transportation of vulnerable individuals to sites where WFP is conducting registration. The choice of modality is usually based on an understanding of local dynamics as well as of the market infrastructure. Both conditional (food commodity vouchers and cash for work) and unconditional (cash and vouchers) modalities have been proposed by partner agencies, with only one agency combining modalities in the same project and location.

Only two DEC partners reported using market assessments to determine the most appropriate modality (in kind, cash, etc.) for their interventions.

40. Beneficiaries were given either vouchers or cash in South Sudanese pounds (SSP) that would allow them access pre-selected local traders. The size of transfers and number of distribution cycles varied. One member provided a one-time unconditional transfer to meet immediate needs (value $112, or 80 per cent of the Minimum Expenditure Basket (MEB) while the other three favoured monthly transfers over 2-4 months of £ 27 ($35) based on the MEB to correspond to 50 per cent of the WFP food ration.

41. Cash transfer to beneficiaries is either done through direct cash handouts (cash-in-hand) by agency staff, via government approved agencies (plus a commission) or using a paper voucher to be redeemed with pre-selected local traders. The latter modality is generally considered less risky for the agency and it functions best where banks are functioning. The use of vouchers has been justified by agencies as a direct support to the market and pre-selected traders to encourage them re-supply the market. In one location, Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed with traders included a clause to encourage them to move closer to communities in remote locations where vouchers had been distributed. According to one agency’s monitoring results, traders reported a reduction in begging and request for credit by their clients since the start of the project.

Market-based interventions

Per cent

42. For food vouchers and cash transfers to be effective, availability of food in the markets and market accessibility for the beneficiaries is crucial. Market supplies of imported goods in Juba are at precrisis levels, but supply to many other markets in the country has substantially reduced, compared to the first half of 2016 due to occasional clashes and looting. Conflict and displacements continue to limit domestic food production, thus affecting availability of local products in local markets.

Inflation for staple food prices continues to rise due to the combination of depreciation of the SSP (Figure 5.), high transportation costs, poor domestic production in 2016, and conflict-related disruptions to trade.

11

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Figure 5: South Sudan Inflation Rates (Source: National Bureau of Statistics, S. Sudan) 43. Most members have not yet undertaken post-distribution monitoring (PDM) studies and therefore, at the time of the review, reports were not available. Key informant interviews and FGD and, for one member, analysis of their feedback and complaints mechanism indicates that most of the limited amounts of cash distributed were used to buy food in local markets.

WASH 44. WASH interventions by DEC partners have mainly consisted of building infrastructure (borehole installation, latrine construction), distribution of hygiene kits and hygiene promotion. Whilst DEC funding was not used by members for directly responding to the cholera outbreak, WASH interventions by agencies was viewed by the team as an important contribution to preventing cholera and other water-borne diseases.

45. Agencies supporting WASH demonstrated gender sensitive programming: DEC members ensured that men and women were represented in Water Management Committees and provided with appropriate training. Women confirmed having been involved in decisions about where boreholes would be located. Both men and women were also represented on the hygiene promoter’s team where they disseminated messages on hygiene and encouraged other community members to participate in different WASH activities.

46. Based on observations during site visits, interviews with agency staff and FGDs with community, borehole construction and hygiene promotion have been relatively successful. Although borehole construction funded by DEC was still in the implementation phase, visits to similar previous interventions funded by other donors showed indications of good management by community water committees established by DEC partners. Boreholes appear to be much appreciated by communities, not least by women who noted the time saved and, in less secure areas, alleviating safety concerns. One of the main challenges is that, due to access constraints (especially in opposition-held areas) and transport costs, most boreholes are drilled using manual drills that have a maximum depth of only 30 metres which is too shallow for most upland areas.

47. FGD participants demonstrated good knowledge of hygiene practice although, while awaiting the results of PDM, some key informants mentioned challenges with behaviour modification – “they know they should wash their hands, but they don’t always do it”. There appear to be similar behavioural change challenges with latrine use and, in addition, some problems with construction due mainly to difficulties in transporting materials. One agency had to wait almost two months before latrine construction materials procured with DEC funding could finally be delivered to the site in insecure areas after convoys were cancelled six times. Another agency airlifted iron sheets to use as liners for latrines (funded by another donor) as a cost-saving measure. Based on FGD and observations, the liners were not suitable and latrines collapsed after a few weeks. The agency planned to use different materials for the liner for the DEC-funded latrine construction.

Health & Nutrition 48. As shown in Figure 3 (section 2), no DEC funds were allocated to health in South Sudan during the current Appeal. The lack of investment of DEC funds reflects the capacities and comparative advantage of DEC partners. With the sole exception of ICRC, which has not planned to use DEC funds for health activities, members and their local partners in South Sudan have no specialised

12

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

health expertise. Rather DEC partners are contributing to improving health status through food security, WASH and, to a lesser extent, nutritional interventions.

49. A relatively small amount was allocated to two DEC partners to support an ongoing nutrition programme. One of the DEC members has been involved in nutrition programming in Juba since July 2016 in partnership with the Ministry of Health (MOH). Children under-five years old coming for Maternal and Child Health services are screened for malnutrition and, if needed, treated. There has been a 62 per cent increase in cases, from 2,739 to 4,350, during the past four months in the eight sites, and the DEC funding was a useful and timely contribution to extend nutritional services by strengthening active case finding, early detection and community based management. No deaths have yet been registered since June 2016.

50. Insufficient investment in the public health sector (including non-payment and delayed payment of civil service and health worker salaries) is having a severe impact on delivery of services. A key informant interview with the health and nutrition coordinator of the MOH in Juba confirmed weak health services capacity of the Government and expressed concern on high turnover of trained MOH staff. Since the DEC member agency started paying for MOH staff incentives, interviews with MOH noted that “work runs in a much better manner”, although there is no clear exit strategy at present.

51. An example of good practice in nutrition programming observed during the field visit was the training of community-based mother-to-mothers support groups by the community women trained in nutrition, hygiene and protection issues. A FGD with six of these women revealed that compared with the start of the nutrition programme (July 2016), there has been increased awareness on malnutrition and increased understanding of how to prevent malnutrition.

52. Data from the DEC member’s eight supported facilities is entered into the Nutrition Information System which is accessible to partners such as UNICEF, Ministry of Health (MOH), and the Nutrition Cluster Technical Working Group. Information on malnutrition trends is shared by the project nutrition team and volunteers with the communities in meetings organised by local leaders.

Together, the communities deliberate on possible causes of the rising trends and suggest mitigation measures.

53. The nutrition intervention by one DEC member was one of the good practice examples observed of well-integrated multi-sectoral approaches, linking nutrition with protection (child protection, GBV), food security and livelihood interventions (food vouchers, home gardening); additionally, vulnerable families with admitted malnourished children in the agency’s nutrition programme are integrated into the urban poor programme (cash-for-education) implemented in Juba and supported by WFP.26 3.5 Protection and gender-based violence 54. DEC members have approached GBV in different ways. Some members have focused on GBV, while other child-focused DEC members have focused on child protection, including support to street children in Juba. Interviews with the child protection Cluster indicated a significant increase in street children in Juba and other urban areas, where it is estimated that 45 per cent of the population is less than 14 years old.27

26

Households receive $45 per month when the mother, father or the older boys and girls attend training on sanitation, hygiene, health and nutrition education, income generation activities.

27 World Vision, South Sudan. A Context Analysis Study of Juba Urban and Peri-urban Areas November 2016 13

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

55. One DEC member has mainstreamed protection into its overall programme so that protection activities are integrated into project design and implementation strategies for livelihood and WASH activities. Efforts by members to improve accountability to affected population (AAP), including establishing feedback and complaints system, are also seen as contributing to protection.

56. A GBV strategy recently developed by one of the DEC members indicates that the Government of South Sudan, the UN, INGOs, NGOs and community-based organisations are increasingly placing emphasis on the need to address GBV. There has tended to be a myopic focus on the issue of sexual violence, specifically sexual violence as a weapon of war over the past three years, with little progress made in addressing the root cause of this issue, or responding to other forms of GBV, such as forced marriages. The 2017 HRP has prioritised prevention, outreach and mitigation of sexual violence to approach GBV in a more holistic way.

57. The provision of dignity kits is used as both a prevention and response intervention for protection.

DEC members have distributed several hundreds of dignity kits, which normally include re-usable menstruation pads, soap, dresses and creams. It was not always clear how female beneficiaries had been identified and selected. Some members used distribution of dignity kits as an entry point to support protection for girls and women, whereas with other members, distribution was an end in itself.

58. In the Unity state, significant protection issues have been identified by a DEC member and its national partner. Due to deteriorated food security situation, a pattern of periodic movement to areas with food assistance was reported. Women and girls travel for 2-3 days to the Bentiu Protection of Civilians (POC) settlements or neighbouring counties and payams to receive food items, which increases their risk to GBV. Household level violence was also reported as a normal occurrence, especially when women were not able to bring home sufficient food.28 59. FGDs with committee members revealed that domestic violence often influenced by alcohol and food insecurity at household level was common in the targeted areas. As soon as domestic violence is reported to protection committees, they visit the affected households and mediate between husband and wife with, according to the FGD participants, often good results. Since the formation of trained protection committees by the DEC member and partner, fewer incidents of GBV were reported. However, the review team was informed that there were child protection issues in the communities, such as child abuse, unaccompanied children, harassment of young girls and attempts by armed groups to recruit youth, but the partner did not know how to follow up on these issues. Over 17,000 children are estimated to have been recruited by armed actors in South Sudan, and some 9,000 children were registered as unaccompanied, separated or missing.

60. One of the consequences of the upsurge in violence during 2016 was an increased incidence of rape, including of aid workers. With the rise in crime in the city, walking in the dark was cited as particularly risky for women and girls who could be sexually harassed and stood the chance of being raped. In addition, domestic violence seems to be an accepted practice, with some women respondents suggesting that domestic violence was an indicator of love between spouses. The FGD sessions and the key informants pointed out that domestic violence was an increasing challenge in Juba and was part of a wider pattern on gender-based violence in Juba. A study by a DEC member29 found that the three leading experiences of gender-based violence (GBV) in South Sudan were insults and abuse (42 per cent), physical and unwelcome touching (25 per cent) and forced sex (7 per cent). Of the women who were subjected to GBV, 57 per cent did nothing

28

Multi-sectoral Rapid Needs assessment report in Greater Koch Region in early April 2017 shared by the responsible DEC member 29 Multi-sectoral Rapid Needs assessment report in Greater Koch Region in early April 2017 shared by the responsible DEC member 14

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

because they felt there was no point in reporting cases of GBV, and 43 per cent said they decided to keep quiet out of fear. Only 7 per cent of GBV survivors reported incidents to the police.

3.6 Cross-cutting issues 3.6.1 Coordination and linkages 61. Relative to many other humanitarian crisis contexts, there is a relatively robust coordination system in place for international humanitarian agencies, with an active Humanitarian Coordination Team (HCT) and clusters, along with several sectoral and thematic working groups. NGOs are represented in the HCT and clusters, which are co-led by NGOs.30 There are various incentives to promote coordination, including access to relevant information, donor pressure to participate in coordination, donor funding for coordination and access to the South Sudan Humanitarian Fund (SSHF), which has so far allocated over $50 million during 2017 to UN agencies, INGOs and national NGOs.31 International NGOs are often the targets of criticism by the government and subject to constant pressure to increase taxes and fees,32 which have encouraged INGOs to unify behind a ‘common front’, together with donors and UN partners.

62. Larger DEC partners often play a more active role in coordination as cluster co-leads, (rotating) NGO representatives on the HCT or as members of strategic working groups. These agencies tend to view such engagements as part of their approach to advance common advocacy strategies.

63. Although coordination in Juba and in POC has been relatively consistent since 2013, coordination in other areas, including where many DEC partners are working, has been erratic. In one of the sites visited, interagency coordination had only just been restarted in July 2017. Despite aspirations of the Grand Bargain, two examples were observed where (non-DEC member) agencies were undermining coordination by ‘claiming’ certain beneficiary communities as their ‘territory’ and obstructing attempts by other agencies to fill gaps in assistance.

64. Local authorities in both government and opposition-held areas have little capacity or resources to carry out assessments or conduct monitoring, and DEC members were making efforts to share certain types of information to help mitigate these gaps. Members generally found this informationsharing mutually beneficial as it helped to maintain good relationships, although in some cases, they have had to deal with rent-seeking behaviour, a predictable effect of an underpaid/unpaid civil service.

65. The review team came across a few good practice examples of DEC members adopting an integrated approach. Two agencies had partnership and MOU in place to link food security, or integrated nutrition into protection and food security interventions. Another DEC member had integrated protection, WASH and food security activities so that activities were mutually complementing each other for enhanced outcomes.

3.6.2 Community participation, communication and feedback mechanism 66. All DEC members met during the review consulted with community committees, some of which they formed specifically to support their interventions. Besides being involved in selection process, 30

For example, World Vision co-leads the non-food items (NFI) cluster.

OCHA (2017) Humanitarian Bulletin South Sudan Issue 12 | 28 July 2017 32 Annual registration fees for INGOs were recently increased 7-fold from $500 to $3,500.

31

15

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

the committee members acted as a bridge between the agency and communities for providing information, facilitating complaints, and monitoring activities.

67. A rapid assessment tool (Table 1 below) was used during beneficiary community FGDs to provide a qualitative assessment of their relationship with agencies and/or local partners based on indicators of information sharing, participation and complaints/feedback. Most agencies were found to fall in the “Intermediate” category highlighted in green, although some examples were found that qualified as “Mature”. Examples of the latter included community mobilisers recruited by some agencies who had significant knowledge of the agency’s projects and had been involved in project planning processes or regular review meetings with all stakeholders. These included local government and representatives of the beneficiary groups. Overall, however, the perspective of communities was that agencies consulted them, but took decisions themselves and it was not necessarily clear to what extent their viewpoints had been considered. There was also variable knowledge of entitlements, which in at least one case appears to have been exploited by a contractor to provide smaller amounts.

Table 1: Results of rapid accountability assessments in South Sudan

16

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

68. Most agencies have some form of complaints and feedback mechanism that they either implement directly and/or through local partners. However, less than half have a system to track and follow up on complaints. Community interviews and FGDs showed that people knew whom to contact if they had complaints. Interviews with member-agency staff indicated that rather than written complaints, people preferred to bring their complaints in person, or raise it with village committees or leaders who passed these on to members/partners. Most of the complaints related to noninclusion in beneficiary lists, along with some complaining about pressure from authorities to give them part of their assistance. One agency had used DEC funding to set up an accountability system, and an immediate benefit was in their ability to furnish useful real-time PDM data while other agencies were still in the process of planning or analysing their PDM activities.

3.6.3 Partnership and localisation 69. Local organisations have been found to significantly contribute to relevance of the humanitarian response in South Sudan through their proximity to disaster-affected communities, although they are subject to various constraints, notably in terms of accessing funding, capacities and ability to be impartial in the South Sudanese context. South Sudan has a diverse civil society community and more than 200 national organisations are registered with the NGO Forum.33 70. Less than half of the DEC members were working with local partners, and two were implementing through an international humanitarian agency. Four agencies were working with partners making use of pre-existing relationships. Another member was using the DEC-supported interventions as a capacity-building opportunity for a local NGO so that they could expand WASH and food security activities to more remote areas.

33

Tanner, L. and Moro, L. (2016). Missed Out: The role of local actors in the humanitarian response in the South Sudan conflict.

17

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

3.6.4 Staff security and due diligence 71. A combination of escalating conflict, deteriorating economic situation and a lack of respect for the rule of law has transformed South Sudan into a dangerous place for aid workers. Although agencies have had security protocols in place for several years, the violence in July 2016 in Juba exposed how vulnerable humanitarian workers were. Gunmen, suspected to be soldiers, looted WFP’s main stores in Juba, and government soldiers subjected national and international journalists and aid workers living in the Terrain hotel compound to murder, rape and torture.

Several of these incidents took place near bases of the UN Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS), highlighting their limitations.34 72. The events in July 2016 not only provoked temporary departure of many international staff, but also caused an extensive review and tightening up of security systems and procedures and increasing investments in security capacities and equipment. Most agencies use a risk management approach and there is generally good security coordination, with regular sharing of incident information. Those members working through local partners have a practice of sharing security protocols.

73. Risk management approaches are also applied in financial management. Risks for procurement and transportation are often transferred to contractors, since payment is upon delivery. Air transportation is often preferred due to security risks and poor road infrastructure. Agencies undertake regular financial audits and, those working with partners generally monitor their accounts and carry out periodic checks.

74. Enhanced security and managing financial risk in the South Sudan context comes at a high cost, and agencies spoke of challenges when negotiating with donors to cover related costs.

34

Thomas, E. and Chan, N. (2017) The Crisis in South Sudan. Humanitarian Exchange, Number 68.

18

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Section 4: Assessment against review criteria 4.1 Relevance and appropriateness 75. DEC members’ response was based on either systematic joint needs assessments, or localised needs assessments, carried out by members themselves. These have varied in terms of scope and depth, with the most detailed assessments fulfilling advocacy objectives in addition to informing their own responses. DEC members have developed criteria to target the most vulnerable population in remote communities and, with some exceptions have tended to focus on IPC 3 or 4 areas. Over 70 per cent of DEC funding for South Sudan has focused on food security, which emerged as the most critical need given that the DEC Appeal was launched at the beginning of the lean season when the population was facing food shortages largely due to a resurgence in conflict. Most DEC members considered cash transfer options along with food distribution to overcome some of the logistical and cost challenges of transporting and distributing food and provide beneficiaries the opportunity to meet their own priority needs. In the event, however, the intensification of conflict restricted market functions and cash played a smaller role than initially foreseen.

76. An overriding focus on food security in humanitarian response was thus appropriate. WASH provided another appropriate channel for DEC funding, particularly borehole construction accompanied by capacity-building of communities in water management and hygiene promotion, which are likely to have long-term positive benefits.

77. DEC members generally gave priority to women, especially women-headed households, during selection of beneficiaries, consultations and distributions. Incorporation of inclusion (age, disabilities) and protection varied between agencies, with some DEC partners influencing practice at a regional and national level, while for others it was a component of programme quality.

4.2 Coverage 78. Despite the HRP being relatively well funded by global standards, with 6 million people living in conditions of acute food insecurity and 2 million internally displaced people, unmet humanitarian needs are widespread. 35 Observers see no end to the conflict or significant reduction in humanitarian need in the foreseeable future. A combination of continued population displacement, ongoing insecurity and economic desperation have led to an increase in the number of violent incidents targeting humanitarian personnel and assets, restricting the latter’s access to populations in need.

79. DEC members selected their geographical areas of intervention in one of four ways. Some DEC members were already working in areas, notably Unity and Upper Nile, which were designated as high-risk (IPC 4) areas. Other DEC members moved operations to priority IPC 4 areas to help respond to needs. Another DEC member prioritised the selection of a local partner and focused its interventions in an area where they were already working, even though this was designated as IPC 3. A fourth category used DEC funds to support their ongoing programme in IPC 2 and IPC 3 areas where they already had presence and an existing network. Those agencies that were already operating in IPC 4 areas had a certain advantage and the success of agencies moving to new areas is probably due to a large extent to the quality and timeliness of their surge capacities.

35

WFP (2017). WFP South Sudan Situation Report #188

19

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study While agencies may have had some reason36 for choosing to continue working in IPC 2 areas, the review team was unconvinced by the argument, given the severity of needs in IPC 3 and 4 areas and limited availability of funds.

80. DEC members have used a mixture of methods to select beneficiaries using multiple criteria of vulnerability, involving community consultations at different levels. One DEC member prioritised geographically, selecting an entire community, rather than targeting vulnerable individuals. While some used multiple forums for consultation and had their independent validation mechanisms, others delegated the task beneficiary selection to community leaders and village committees. By and large, the emphasis was on targeting the most vulnerable, although some agencies could have improved communication of criteria and increased the rigour of their validation processes to ensure that the most vulnerable were reached.

4.3 Effectiveness 81. Members’ phase 1 plans focused on meeting emergency needs of the population affected by conflict that was, in certain areas, further aggravated by drought conditions. With few exceptions, it is likely that most output objectives will be met. Since PDM results are not yet available, it is premature to make too many judgements about effectiveness. Based on the usual agricultural cycle (Figure 4), it is likely that timeliness of distributions undermined effectiveness, particularly for seed distributions that took place later than they should have during the crop planting cycle. These delays can be attributed to a combination of factors namely, the timing of DEC Appeal, delays in agency procurement process, availability of commodities, and difficulties in transporting seeds and tools to distribution sites.

82. Although some DEC members reported problems with seed quality control, KII and FGD indicated that quality of in-kind food, seeds and tools were satisfactory. Apart from the delayed distributions, late arrival of rains in certain areas may also impact harvests.

83. Cash transfers have been a partial solution to many of the challenges faced by DEC members in procuring, transporting and distributing assistance, but weak markets in many areas along with a lack of capacity within some DEC members ruled this out as a viable option in many areas where they were intervening, until conditions became conducive to market functioning.

84. WASH interventions are ongoing and are likely to show mixed results. Boreholes in low-lying areas are likely to show positive outcomes in terms of improved health status and impact on women’s time. Based on initial indicators, hygiene promotion is likely to require sustained focus to influence behaviour. Outcome monitoring will also demonstrate whether agencies have learned lessons from previous problems encountered with latrine construction.

85. Protection activities have also shown mixed results, with most evidence of positive outcomes emerging from multi-sector interventions where protection has been integrated with food security, nutrition and/or WASH activities so that it becomes a way of working not only for agency staff, but also community leaders. Protection activities that put an emphasis on distributions are seen to be less likely to achieve positive outcomes.

36

It is argued that even the IPC2 areas are vulnerable and may slip back into crisis or emergency phase, if continuing humanitarian assistance was not available. FEWS-NET lists some IPC3 areas outside of central Unity that are expected to face severe food insecurity across the February to July period, but DEC members are not all working in these areas (http://www.fews.net/east-africa/south-sudan/food-security-outlook/february-2017)

20

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

86. DEC partner staff interviewed demonstrated a general awareness of Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS) commitments; however, results of the rapid assessment indicated that communities felt they only had a limited understanding of project design and objectives and that most decisions were made by agencies, with relatively little feedback to the communities as to how their views had been considered. During FGDs it was apparent that consultations had succeeded in building trust with communities. At the same time, abilities of communities to monitor effectiveness is likely to be undermined by a lack of knowledge of project objectives and entitlements. As mentioned earlier, the only relatively systematic PDM data made available to the review team by DEC partners came from a well-functioning feedback and complaints system operated by one agency.

87. It is likely that the food security situation will improve as the lean season comes to an end in August. However, the current consensus is that renewed conflict is likely in the future that will result in increasing humanitarian needs.

4.4 Efficiency – operational management and coordination 88. High operating costs have become a standard challenge for all humanitarian agencies working in South Sudan. Insecurity and the poor state of infrastructure significantly increase costs of procurement and transportation. Most relief items must be imported, mainly from Uganda, and need to be airlifted from Juba or directly from Uganda. Insecurity also increases the cost of securing and retaining staff. A lack of functioning markets reduces scope for use of cash and vouchers. While options may be limited, the review team found only two members that had carried out a cost analysis of different modalities for transporting and distributing relief.

89. A combination of incentives and resource availability has led to a situation where there is a relatively robust coordination system in place where INGOs, including most DEC members, derive mutual benefit. Coordination tends to be best established in Juba and in POCs where there are designated leads or co-leads, and functions less well in outlying areas where NGOs need to take the initiative themselves.

90. Routine monitoring visits to ongoing activities were, according to key informants, undertaken regularly by staff from country offices and field offices. Some members have undertaken real time reviews of their response, but reports were not yet finalised and were not ready to be shared with the review team.

91. Although Sudan is on the list of “state sponsors of terrorism”, South Sudan is not considered a specific threat in this regard. A 2014 report37 found that South Sudan has a cash-based economy and has a small financial system. There is thus low probability of major financial crime although corruption is widespread. To ensure due diligence, DEC members carry out regular reviews of their partners, including financial reviews, and are themselves subject to audits.

4.5 Coherence and connectedness 4.5.1 Grand Bargain and Sphere standards 92. In line with Grand Bargain commitments, humanitarian agencies/members have in general performed well on several aspects during this response - working with national and local 37

Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (2015) 2014 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report

21

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

responders, cash programming (where markets allowed) and joint needs assessments, for examples. However, there is need to enhance transparency, and sharing beneficiary lists, agency operational plans and monitoring reports at field level.

93. Members have generally done well on Sphere core standards. Food and cash provided by agencies was usually based on WFP food basket of 2,100 kcal/person/day or referred cost of MEB, in line with Sphere standards.

4.5.2 Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS) 94. DEC members demonstrated a reasonable awareness of CHS during interviews. Members have also supported local partners with training and orientation on AAP. 95. Amongst Commitments and Quality Criteria, indicators relevant to CHS1 have been examined under Relevance, CHS2 and CHS7 under Effectiveness, CHS6 under Coordination, and CHS9 under Efficiency. The results of rapid assessments with FGD shown in Table 1 focused mainly on CHS4 and CHS5 which indicated that communities mostly view DEC partners as being at an “Intermediate” level in terms of AAP, and that the former have only a limited influence during the design and implementation of interventions 96. CHS3 “Communities and people affected by crisis are not negatively affected and are more prepared, resilient and less at-risk as a result of humanitarian action” is viewed as particularly important in South Sudan, given the consensus that the conflict is likely to continue in a context where donor support is expected to decrease over time and/or access to affected populations becomes more difficult. While actual recovery may be only an aspiration in many parts of South Sudan, increasing resilience through supporting coping and adaptation strategies of communities will be critical.

97. CHS 8 “Communities and people affected by crisis receive the assistance they require from competent and well-managed staff and volunteers” was seen to be generally respected by DEC partners. There is some variation in standards in terms of accommodation, working conditions, logistics support and security arrangements. Only one case was observed where a DEC member did not meet minimum standards.

22

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Section 5: Conclusions, Lessons and Recommendations

Conclusions Relevance and Appropriateness 98.

DEC funding was prioritised for food security and livelihood interventions which, based on needs assessments and other available evidence, appears to have been an appropriate focus. While food security needs are likely to diminish in the short term as the lean season comes to an end, a likely scenario in the current context is an increase in conflict, probably during the last quarter of the year, after the end of rainy season. This is likely to cause additional displacement, increased insecurity and, yet again, have long-term negative impacts on food security and other humanitarian indicators. Resilience with specific recovery objectives may not be feasible in many parts of South Sudan, but interventions can be designed to strengthen community coping strategies and adaptation strategies when external assistance may not be available.

Coverage 99.

The DEC Appeal was launched at the beginning of the lean season after several months of conflict, insecurity and displacement that disrupted harvests and food supply chains. Food insecurity was identified as the most critical unmet need, and nearly 70 per cent of DEC funding was allocated to address these gaps. Given the scale of unmet needs and limited resources, the rationale for some DEC members to continue working with non-displaced populations in IPC2 areas was not clear to the review team, though it is argued by some members that even the IPC 2 areas could slip back into IPC 3 or 4, if humanitarian assistance did not get to these.

100. DEC members prioritised targeting the most vulnerable, mostly identifying individuals based on multiple indicators for assessing household vulnerability. Beneficiary selection was susceptible to manipulation by those with power and authority. Agencies who have taken steps to ensure that vulnerability criteria were well-understood and selected beneficiaries through triangulation with other community members have usually had a satisfactory result.

Effectiveness 101. DEC members are generally respecting Grand Bargain commitments, although there is need to enhance transparency by way of sharing beneficiary lists, agency plans and monitoring reports to help make coordination more effective.

102. An integrated approach linking different sectoral activities, such as protection, food security, WASH and/or protections was observed to result in better outcomes.

103. Members employed different approaches for community consultation and complaints mechanism which involved sharing information and obtaining feedback. Agencies relied on verbal communication to a large extent and there was variable awareness of entitlements amongst beneficiaries. Members of beneficiary communities recruited by agencies as community mobilisers had the highest level of awareness about project design, but none of the community members interviewed had a perspective of the project beyond the specific intervention in their communities. Except for one agency, there was little evidence of a system in place where feedback and complaints were recorded and systematically followed up. When beneficiary communities were well informed about project objectives, performance indicators and individual 23

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

entitlements, they were in a much better position to monitor the quality and quantity of assistance provided.

104. Even though three months have passed since agencies were authorised to start spending DEC funds, DEC members were still planning or analysing their PDM data at the time of this review.

As a result, both the review team and agencies themselves experienced difficulties in assessing the effectiveness of interventions and key outcomes, including how cash transfers had been used. Using a “Good Enough” approach38 to PDM could help in managing interventions in real time.

Efficiency 105. Humanitarian agencies are increasingly being pressed to justify their choice of assistance modalities, including being able to answer the question "why not cash?". High operating costs have become a standard challenge for all humanitarian agencies working in South Sudan.

Insecurity and the poor state of infrastructure have significantly increased the cost of procurement and transportation and have undermined markets. Partners have tended to develop proposals based on tried and tested approaches. Two of ten DEC members operating in South Sudan with DEC funding could show evidence of a cost analysis that had informed their selection of the modality for delivery of assistance.

Key Lessons 106. To effectively target the most vulnerable, it is critical to ensure that selection criteria are widely understood and triangulated with different community groups.

107. Well-integrated multi-sectoral approaches can increase effectiveness of interventions, notably with regard to protection.

A “Good Enough” approach here means choosing a simple solution rather than an elaborate one. ‘Good enough’ does not mean second best: but rather acknowledging that, in an emergency response, adopting a quick and simple approach may be the only practical solution, and over time improve quality when possible.

38

24

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

Recommendations 108. Recommendations are targeted at DEC members which will require facilitation by the DEC Secretariat.

Relevance and Appropriateness R1: Employ scenario-based planning to help ensure that interventions can adapt to changing contexts according to re-prioritised needs. Help strengthen community resilience by ensuring that project design and aid delivery modalities support, rather than undermine, the community’s own coping and adaptation strategies.

Coverage R2: Review areas of intervention and adapt operations accordingly so that humanitarian assistance is based on current and/or expected future needs and place less emphasis on funding ongoing operations. Ensure that assistance is targeted at the most vulnerable through a combination of information campaigns and validation through triangulation with different stakeholders within the community, including elderly and the disabled.

Effectiveness R3: Improve information sharing with peer agencies, local authorities and affected communities to strengthen coordination and improve efficiency and effectiveness of the response R4: Promote sectoral integration to improve outcomes, such as linking protection, WASH and/or nutrition interventions to food security by applying learning from good practice by other DEC members.

R5: Improve accountability to affected populations; information sharing, participation, feedback and complaints systems to facilitate a shift from “Intermediate” to “Mature”39 to improve quality and monitoring of interventions.

R6: Carry out real-time post distribution monitoring using a “Good Enough” approach soon after distributions to help highlight any gaps in the design of the intervention and obtain in real-time an understanding of likely outcomes.

Efficiency R7: Project design should illustrate how different modality options, including transportation, have been taken costs into account.

39

As defined in Table 1.

25

Review of DEC Members’ Response to the East Africa Crisis – South Sudan Country Study

******ENDS*****

Results Matter Consulting Limited

45 MUNGO PARK WAY ORPINGTON, BR5 4EE

Disclaimer The report was commissioned and funded by the Disasters Emergency Committee. The UK Department for International Development has contributed to the DEC East Africa Appeal through its AidMatch scheme.

26