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