WELCOME TO

download report

Transcript WELCOME TO

CaLP Presentation
A quick video to introduce you to
the CaLP work
Who is the CaLP ?
Coming together to:
– Build capacity,
– Support action research,
– Share information on cash
transfers as an effective tool to
deliver humanitarian assistance,
– Advocate for cash coordination
and preparedness
The Cash Learning Partnership
The CaLP believes that cash transfers and
vouchers are tools that contribute to
making humanitarian preparedness and
response more effective, meeting the
diverse needs of affected populations,
while promoting recovery. The CaLP aims to promote
appropriate, timely and quality
cash and voucher programming.
Regional Reach
Norwegian Refugee Council
Oxfam GB
British Red Cross
Save the Children
Action Against Hunger
Dakar: West Africa RFP
Bangkok: Asia RFP
Nairobi: East Africa RFP
Capacity Building Officer
Cash Focal Point Role:
Regional Focal Point (RFP)
• Coordination (e.g. TWG) & CoP
Steering Committee
member
• Gathering evidence & learning
• Capacity building
• Advocacy
• Research & case studies
How can the CaLP help you?
• Guidance tools and document (online library:
http://www.cashlearning.org/resources/library )
• Training delivery and open training material
• Lead the CoP through a Dgroup
• In regions support coordination
Research Topics
•
Following experiences in 2010/11 - 4 core research topics were identified for
2012/13
Recent CaLP research
Minimum
Requirements
for Market
Analysis
Emergencies
Fit for the future
Future trends
likely to affect
CTP and
stakeholders and
recommends to
prepare
E-transfers (1) cost efficiency
comparison,
(2) guidelines & (3)
principles and
operational
standards for
protecting
beneficiary privacy
CTP research
gap analysis
CaLP will identify research topics in response to emerging changes and gaps in the CTP environment,
and appropriate funding opportunities.
Advocacy
Advocacy focus areas
Cash coordination and
leadership
Preparedness for
delivery at scale
By working with:
Partners such as global clusters, the CaLP Community of Practice, UN
agencies (esp. OCHA) and through regional focal points
Actions and tools include:
Policy and technical inputs, targeted awareness raising
through seminars and conferences and more
Cash Atlas
What is ERC?
• Consortium composed of Oxfam, Save the
Children and Concern
• Looking at improving preparedness and
responses in slow onset or predictive crises
How can ERC help you?
• Development of market baselines and market
analysis in slow on set crisis
• Development of pre-crises market analysis
guidance
• Established a sharing platform (Dgroup):
Market in Crisis
Counting the Cost
CTP vs In Kind – the Value for
Money and Cost efficiency debate
v
OCTOBER 2013
Value for Money: what is it?
•
•
•
•
Key debate arising from the financial crisis
Accountability in the use of public funds
Sits on 2 distinct legs: efficiency and effectiveness
What is the difference between efficiency &
effectiveness?
• Effectiveness: looking at impact
• Efficiency: looking at use of resources
How does it translate to Cash
and Markets?
You are in Bangladesh looking at a shelter intervention
for a population of 500,000 affected by extreme flooding.
Markets in the area have been affected but are already
recovering.
The hidden costs to bring in the
debate
CTP
In Kind
• State of infrastructures
dvpt (banking and
communication)
• Data base
• Training
• Inflation
• Costs from service
providers
• …
•
•
•
•
Storage
Transport (agency & benef)
State of roads
Negative impact on the
markets
• Time spent by beneficiaries
queuing (and not engaging in
livelihoods activities)
• HR for Distributions
• …
Taking it forward
• In the VfM debate, emphasise on effectiveness rather
than efficiency: our accountability also lies with our
beneficiaries
• Don’t assume that ‘cheaper’ means ‘better value for
money’
• What about risks? And costs of risks?
Is CTP risky?
• Cash is not inherently more risky than in-kind assistance
« Due to the increased acceptance of cash-based responses,
the tendency to provide cash transfers via small scale, closely
monitored interventions will likely give way to more and
larger interventions that are monitored less closely, in line
with current monitoring practices of in-kind assistance. As a
result, it is inevitable that there will be more risks, for
instance, with instances of diversion, security incidents and
corruption. Yet, these risks are prevalent in crisis contexts and
affect all forms of assistance. »- Fit for the Future, CaLP
Further reading
•
•
•
•
Foreign Policy article on cash transfers cost efficiency
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141214/christopherblattman-and-paul-niehaus/show-them-the-money
For cost efficiency of E transfer- CaLP research:
http://www.cashlearning.org/resources/library/416-factorsaffecting-the-cost-efficiency-of-electronic-transfers-inhumanitarian-programmes
Value for money in international development:
http://www.nef-consulting.co.uk/wpcontent/uploads/Position-Paper-VfM-in-InternationalDevelopment-Sept-2010.pdf
On risk: CaLP Fit for the Future
research:http://www.cashlearning.org/2012-2014/-fit-for-thefuture