emergency response mechanism (erm) afghanistan … · distributions, conduct post-distribution...

EMERGENCY RESPONSE MECHANISM

(ERM) AFGHANISTAN

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

(SOPs) for

CASH TRANSFERS

FEBRUARY 2018

2 DRAFT 2 – 7 February 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

NOTE ON ALIGNMENT WITH 2017 ECHO GUIDANCE ON CASH TRANSFERS ........................................... 4

ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................................... 5

CASH GLOSSARY .......................................................................................................................................... 6

SUMMARY OF STEPS – EMERGENCY CASH TRANSFERS .......................................................................... 8

SUMMARY OF FRAUD RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ...................................................................... 9

SUMMARY OF SAFETY & SECURITY RISKS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES ........................................... 11

STEP 1 – ASSESSMENTS, TARGETING AND SETTING THE TRANSFER VALUE ...................................... 13

1.1. Market assessment ................................................................................................................... 13

1.1.1. Purpose of market assessments ...................................................................................... 13

1.1.2. Tools .................................................................................................................................... 14

1.1.3. Market data analysis and reporting .................................................................................. 15

1.2. Needs assessment .................................................................................................................... 15

1.2.1. Meeting with local community leaders ............................................................................. 15

1.2.2. Household survey (HEAT) .................................................................................................. 16

1.3. Beneficiary selection .................................................................................................................. 16

1.3.1. Transitioning from status-based targeting to vulnerability targeting .............................. 16

1.3.2. HEAT household duplication check................................................................................... 17

1.3.3. Exclusion list ....................................................................................................................... 17

1.3.4. Phone-based beneficiary verification ............................................................................... 17

1.4. Determining the cash transfer value ....................................................................................... 18

1.4.1. Adjusting the transfer value based on household needs ................................................ 18

1.4.2. Coordinating with other humanitarian partners ............................................................... 19

STEP 2 – DISTRIBUTION PREPARATION .................................................................................................. 19

2.1. Caseload approval ..................................................................................................................... 19

2.2. Beneficiary distribution list ........................................................................................................ 20

2.3. Selecting the distribution location ............................................................................................ 20

2.4. Informing beneficiaries of distribution time and location ....................................................... 20

2.5. Delivery mechanism: hawala agent .......................................................................................... 21

2.5.1. Why hawla? ........................................................................................................................ 21

2.5.2. Hawala contracting (done annually –not before each distribution) ............................... 21

2.5.3. Informing the hawala agent before each distribution ..................................................... 22


STEP 3 – DISTRIBUTION ........................................................................................................................... 22

3.1. Who should be present at the distribution? ................................................................................. 22

3.2. Communication and interaction with beneficiaries ..................................................................... 22

3.2.1. Key messages to communicate before the distribution ....................................................... 22

3.2.2. Interaction with beneficiaries ................................................................................................. 23

3.3. Distribution process ....................................................................................................................... 23

3.3.1. Prioritization of certain beneficiary groups............................................................................ 23

3.3.2. Verification of beneficiary ID .................................................................................................. 24

3.3.3. Cash distribution ..................................................................................................................... 24

3.4. Dealing with beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries/complaints .................................................... 24

3.5. Standard security measures.......................................................................................................... 24

3.6. Evacuation from the distribution site ............................................................................................ 25

3.7. Managing large distributions ......................................................................................................... 25

3.8. Managing several rounds of distribution ...................................................................................... 25

3.9. Managing joint distributions .......................................................................................................... 26

3.10. Visibility ......................................................................................................................................... 26

STEP 4 – PAYING THE HAWALA AGENT ................................................................................................... 26

4.1. Paying the hawala agent ................................................................................................................ 26

4.2. Supporting documents ................................................................................................................... 26

STEP 5 –POST DISTRIBUTION .................................................................................................................. 26

5.1. Distribution report .......................................................................................................................... 26

5.2. Complaint and feedback mechanism ........................................................................................... 26

5.3. Post distribution monitoring (PDM) ............................................................................................... 27

5.3.1. Tool .......................................................................................................................................... 27

5.3.2 Timing ....................................................................................................................................... 27

5.3.3. Sampling .................................................................................................................................. 27

LIST OF ANNEXES ...................................................................................................................................... 28


NOTE ON ALIGNMENT WITH 2017 ECHO GUIDANCE ON CASH TRANSFERS

These standard operating procedures (SOPs) seek, as much as possible, to align with the principles

and mechanisms outlined in ECHO’s 2017 Guidance Note on cash transfers1 – and seek to enhance

the effectiveness, efficiency and transparency of the Emergency Response Mechansim (ERM)’s cash

procedures.

However, as recognized in the Guidance Note itself, transitioning to the full separation of the three

components of the cash programme cycle outlined in the Guidance Note (Component A: needs

assessment, targeting and registration; Component B: cash transfer delivery; Compinet C:

Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (MEAL)) will take time and will not always be

possible in all contexts.

Without adopting a full separation of components, the present SOPs nevertheless seek to streamline

mechanisms to ensure transparency and segregation of duties – as much as possible, given the

practical operational constraints of emergency response in Afghanistan. In particular, the present

SOPs emphasize/ introduce the following mechanisms:

Segregation of duties between the partner organization doing the analysis of needs assessment

and market assessment data (REACH), and partner doing the data collection and distribution

(other ERM partners).

Internal segregation of duties (within each ERM partner organization) between the programme

implementation staff (who do beneficiary selection and distribution), and M&E staff (who monitor

distributions, conduct post-distribution monitoring surveys, and do beneficiary list spot checks).

Introduction on mandatory phone spot checks by the M&E unit of selected and excluded

beneficiaries.

Use of hawala agents to distribute the cash instead of cash-in-envelope, to reduce the risk of

internal diversion of funds.

1 Guidance to partners funded by the Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and

Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO) to deliver large-scale cash transfers (Ref. Ares(2017)5727618

- 23/11/2017 )


ACRONYMS

ANDMA – Afghanistan National Disaster Management Authority

AOG – Armed Opposition Group

DoRR – Department of Refugees and Repatriation

ERM – Emergency Response Mechanism

HEAT – Household Emergency Assessment Tool

IDP – Internally Displaced People

M&E - Monitoring and Evaluation

MPC - Multi-Purpose Cash

NFIs – Non Food Items

PDM – Post Distribution Monitoring

SMEB – Survival Minimum Expenditure Basket


CASH GLOSSARY

TRANSFER MODALITY: the broad type of transfer. There are three main transfer modalities: cash,

voucher and in-kind.

A CONDITIONAL transfer requires beneficiaries to undertake a specific action/activity (e.g. attending

school, building a shelter, attending nutrition screenings, attend trainings, etc.) in order to receive

assistance; i.e. a condition must be fulfilled before the transfer is received (e.g. cash for Work/Cash

for Assets; Cash for Training).

Conditionality refers only to prerequisite or qualifying conditions that a beneficiary must fulfil in order

to receive a cash transfer or voucher; i.e. activities or obligations that must be met before receiving

assistance. It is distinct from restriction which pertains only to how transfers are utilized. Conditionality

can in principle be used with any kind of cash or voucher assistance (both restricted and unrestricted),

depending on the objectives and design of the programme.

A RESTRICTED transfer requires the beneficiary to use the assistance provided to purchase particular

goods or services. Restriction refers to limits on the utilization of a transfer, after it has been received

by a beneficiary. Restrictions may describe either the range of goods and services that a transfer must

be used to purchase, or the places where a transfer can be used, or both. The degree of restriction

may vary – from the requirement to buy specific items, to buying from a general category of goods or

services, or to achieve an agreed output (e.g. to repair a shelter, or start-up a livelihood activity).

Restriction is distinct from conditionality, which applies only to prerequisite conditions that a

beneficiary must fulfil in order to receive a transfer.

Restricted transfers include:

Vouchers, which by definition are always restricted, since they can only be used to buy specific

goods or services.

A few specific types of cash transfers where receipt of subsequent transfers is contingent on

spending previous transfers on particular goods or services (e.g. cash-for-rent programmes

where beneficiaries are required to show rental contracts in order to receive the next cash

installment).

In Afghanistan, the vast majority of humanitarian cash programmes are unrestricted (but there are

some (restricted) voucher programmes). Multipurpose cash (MPC) grants are by definition always

unrestricted. In Afghanistan, even sector-specific humanitarian cash grants (e.g. cash for food, or cash

for shelter) are generally in fact unrestricted. The name “cash for food” for example, only indicates

that the aid organization distributing the cash intended the transfer to be spent on food – but

beneficiaries are in fact free to spend it as they chose.

DELIVERY MECHANISM: the specific means through which beneficiaries access cash or vouchers:

Cash delivery mechanisms include: hawalas (cash distributed by hawala agent), cash-in-hand

(cash distributed directly by organization staff to beneficiaries), cash over the counter at the

bank (distributed at bank branch to beneficiaries), mobile cash (incl. mobile tokens, mobile

money), and e-cash (incl. smart cards, magnetic stripe cards).

Voucher delivery mechanisms include: paper vouchers, mobile vouchers, e-vouchers (incl.

smart cards, magnetic stripe cards).


For more information on electronic/ mobile delivery mechanisms – for both cash and vouchers –

please see CaLP’s Guidelines to e-Transfers in Emergencies

Please note that there is still a lot of variation/ confusion in the use of certain terminology –

especially related to e-transfers and mobile transfers. Various guidelines/ organizations use these

terms to refer to different things, so it’s important to be clear on the specific technical mechanism

through which the cash/ vouchers are delivered, when discussing any type of cash-based

intervention.

Multipurpose Cash (MPC): any unrestricted cash grant covering cross-sectoral needs. By definition,

MPC grants are always unrestricted - i.e. beneficiaries can spend the cash however they want. MPC

grants can be one-off (e.g. emergency relief) or regular (e.g. seasonal or annual safety nets)

Minimum Expenditure Basket (MEB): A list (‘basket’) of goods and services that a household needs

to meet its core needs – on a regular or seasonal basis – and its associated cost on the local

market. The MEB varies depending on the context, but typically includes costs related to food, water,

shelter, sanitation and hygiene, education, health, transport, and clothing.

The Survival Minimum Expenditure Basket (SMEB) is a the MEB specifically needed by a household

to meet its basic survival needs – typically in an emergency situation (e.g. conflict displacement or

natural disaster). The SMEB for a given area/ population is generally lower than the MEB, as it only

covers essential survival needs – so it might for example exclude education and communication.

The (S)MEB is a critical component in the design of Multipurpose Cash (MPC) programmes –

however, the actual transfer amount under any the MPC programme might be different from the

(S)MEB. For example, if several partners are providing emergency assistance to the same

beneficiaries, with one organization providing MPC and the other providing in-kind food, the food

component could be deducted from the total transfer value of the MPC grant.

http://www.cashlearning.org/downloads/e-transfer-guidelines-English-20-12-2013.pdf

http://www.cashlearning.org/resources/glossary#MEB


SUMMARY OF STEPS – EMERGENCY CASH TRANSFERS

Step Activities Tools and supporting docs

Step 1

Assessments,

targeting and setting

the transfer value

Carry out market assessment to

determine whether markets can

support a cash intervention

Carry out HEAT household needs

assessment

Analyze HEAT data (done by REACH),

including:

- Duplication check to identify

households were previously

assessed/ assisted by ERM

- Determine caseload size and

beneficiary list

- Determine transfer value

Write assessment report

Do phone spot checks of selected

and excluded beneficiaries (M&E)

Needs assessment:

HEAT questionnaire (annex 1)

HEAT vulnerability targeting guidelines (under

development)

HEAT data analysis excel template (under

development)

Beneficiary list

Petition exclusion list (annex 4)

Assessment report – includes both HEAT and

market assessment results (annex 5)

Market assessment:

Market assessment (trader) questionnaire

(annex 2)

Market analysis results (Excel file sent by

REACH to partners) (annex 3)

Beneficiary phone-check template (annex 6)

Step 2

Distribution

preparation

Internal or donor approval (if > 100

HHs)

Identify distribution site and time

Inform hawala agent of distribution

Inform beneficiaries of distribution

Beneficiary distribution list

Step 3

Distribution

Brief beneficiaries in groups on

selection process, purpose of cash

assistance, and complaint

mechanism

Do cash distribution

Distribute beneficiary complaint card

to each household, keeping in mind

there may be illiterate individuals who

require additional support to report

complaints.

Beneficiary distribution list

M&E complaint & feedback cards

Step 4

Payment of Hawala

agent

Request invoice from hawala

Pay Hawala agent (within 1-2 days of

receiving invoice)

Compile all hawala payment

supporting documentation

Approved hawala payment request

Distribution list, with beneficiary fingerprint

Hawala agent invoice

Proof of payment to hawala agent (copy of

check or bank transfer slip)

Hawala contract

Step 5

Post-distribution

Write distribution report

Carry out PDM survey (done by M&E)

within two months of the distribution

(if distribution was split into two

rounds, do PDM within two months of

the first distribution).

Collect and respond to beneficiary

complaints/ feedback

Distribution report template (annex 8)

Cash PDM questionnaire (annex 7)


SUMMARY OF FRAUD RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

Type of risk Specific risk Mitigation measure

Skewed

beneficiary

selection

ERM partner

staff, local

officials, or

community

leaders select

their relatives/

friends, and

exclude eligible

HHs

Transition to needs-based targeting based on analysis of HEAT data (vs. current practice

of status based targeting done on the spot by field assessment staff)

Independent phone spot checks of selected beneficiaries (by M&E or other), to ensure

that they meet vulnerability criteria reported in the HEAT assessment. Done before

caseload approval.

Independent phone spot checks of excluded HHs (e.g. by M&E), to ensure that they were

not unfairly excluded Done before caseload approval.

Beneficiaries

who already

received ERM

assistance

previously are

knowingly

selected for a

second round

of assistance

Systematic checks of beneficiary lists against previous lists, by M&E.

Diversion of

cash during

distribution

Cash is stolen

during the

distribution by

ERM partner

staff or local

official/ leader

Transition to hawala delivery mechanism, instead of cash-in-envelope – only the hawala

agent should be responsible for preparing the cash packets and transporting them to the

distribution. Hawala agent has incentive to ensure that beneficiaries receive the correct

amount, otherwise they could be held liable later on.

Presence of independent witnesses during the distribution (i.e. ERM partner staff from

units not involved in beneficiary selection, e.g. M&E or Finance).

Cash should be handed to the beneficiary by the hawala agent or ERM partner staff, not

by local officials or community leaders.

Cash should be counted at least 3 times in front of the beneficiary when he/ she

receives it: by hawala agent, by partner staff, and by beneficiary himself/ herself

(community leader should help count if beneficiary is illiterate).

Beneficiaries must fingerprint the distribution list, which should clearly state the amount

they received, next to their name.

PDM monitoring (question on what amount beneficiaries received

M&E complaint mechanism – both at the distribution site and after (through phone)

Beneficiary

extortion/

taxation

Beneficiaries

are asked to

pay a bribe to

ERM partner

staff, local

official or

community

leader, in order

to get selected

(either before

getting

selected or

Clearly explain the beneficiary selection process and criteria, during both the HEAT

assessment and during the distribution – so that beneficiaries know that they do not

have to pay bribes to get selected.

PDM monitoring (question on whether beneficiaries had to pay anyone to get selected


after the

distribution)

Beneficiaries

are taxed or

“punished” by

AOGs for

receiving

assistance

from the

government or

international

organizations

Keeping beneficiary lists strictly confidential in AOG-controlled areas

Clearly communicate to local leaders, beneficiaries and AOGs that the assistance is

being provided by an impartial, neutral humanitarian organization – not by the

government. Ensure that government officials do not claim that the assistance is

provided by the government. Do not hold distributions in government offices.

No photos allowed during distribution

PDM monitoring (question on whether beneficiaries had to pay an armed group because

they had received assistance

M&E phone complaint mechanism


SUMMARY OF SAFETY & SECURITY RISKS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES

Who is at

risk? Specific risk Mitigation measure

Beneficiaries

Getting robbed

while coming

back from the

distribution site

Only inform beneficiaries and local authorities/ leaders of the distribution time and place

24-48hours in advance

Keep beneficiary list strictly confidential.

Ensure that distribution is held in a secure location, as close as possible to beneficiaries’

homes.

In particularly insecure areas, when the total cash transfer per HH is > AFN 20,000,

assess whether it is better to distribute the whole amount in one or two distribution

rounds. Both have their advantages from a security perspective, so the chosen option will

vary depending on the specific type of security risks in that area:

- Splitting distributions in 2 rounds means beneficiaries are not carrying huge

sums with them when returning from the distribution, but exposes them to two

journeys.

- Distributing everything in one round means beneficiaries only have to do one

journey, but forces them to carry large amounts of cash.

PDM monitoring (question on whether beneficiaries felt safe while going to/ from the

distribution site, and at the distribution site)

ERM partner

staff/ hawala

agent

Getting robbed

on the way to/

at the

distribution

Only use hawala system, in which hawala agent is responsible/ liable for bringing the

cash to the distribution site (no cash-in-envelope, i.e. ERM partner staff brings the cash).

Only inform beneficiaries and local authorities/ leaders of the distribution time and place

24-48 hours in advance

Hold distribution is a safe, enclosed area (but not in a government office, and not in the

ERM partner’s office).

For large caseloads, split beneficiaries into several groups and hold separate distribution

over several days, to prevent having huge sums of cash at the distribution site at once.

Do distributions as fast as possible, to avoid being at the distribution site too long.

Measures can include:

- For large caseloads: split the task of checking beneficiary ID and distributing the

cash into two desks/ stations – that way beneficiaries have already had their ID

checked when they arrive to collect the cash, and simply need to show the

distribution card given to them by the ID check desk.

- Make sure that staff carrying out the ID check and distribution are well trained.

- Make sure that the hawala agent shows up on time, and knows that showing up

late on repeated occasions can lead to the termination of the contract.

- Instruct the halwal agent to prepare the cash “packets” for each beneficiary

household in advance. At the distribution, the packet will simply need to be

checked (in front of the beneficiary).

Crowd unrest/

outbreaks of

violence during

the distribution

No weapons should be allowed inside and around the distribution site under any

circumstances. Armed personnel should not be present or participate in the distribution

process.

Before starting distribution, identify a safe exit and hibernation location in case

emergency evacuation is needed.


Ensure that ERM partner staff have adequate tools for communication, especially in

hard to access areas, (several phones and if needed walkie-talkies, loud hailers,

whistles etc)

Inform beneficiaries and community leaders of any delays or changes in distribution

arrangements, to avoid frustration, misunderstandings and anger - which can escalate

into violence.

Ensure that staff carrying out the cash distribution do not leave their position at the

distribution desk at any time while the distribution is ongoing, unless replaced by

another staff member.


STEP 1 – ASSESSMENTS, TARGETING AND SETTING THE TRANSFER VALUE

1.1. Market assessment

1.1.1. Purpose of market assessments

Why do we do market assessments for emergency cash distributions?

The aim of the market assessment in the context of emergency assistance is to determine whether

local markets are functioning well enough to provide cash to beneficiaries – or if it is better to

provide in-kind assistance (food, NFIs, tents etc.) because beneficiaries won’t be able to buy these

items on the local markets.

What do we mean by “are local markets functioning well enough”?

There is enough supply to meet the additional demand created by our beneficiaries, once we give

them cash. This means that (a) there are currently no shortages/ all basic items are present in

sufficient quantities in the market to meet basic household needs and (b) there will still be

enough supply, even once demand increases as our beneficiaries start spending the ERM

partner Cash in the market.

Items can be bought at reasonable/ “normal” prices (i.e. similar prices to the ones used to

determine the size of the cash transfer value – if prices are much higher, people will not be able

to buy all the things the cash grant was intended to cover).

The key thing we want to know when reading the results of a market assessment is:

Are prices “normal” for this season? (i.e. they can be a bit higher than what they usually are at

this time of the year, but they shouldn’t be much higher)

Is there enough supply/ are there any shortages of food or other key items? (i.e. will our

beneficiaries be able to buy all the basic commodities in sufficient quantities?)

Will the cash injection in the local market generated by humanitarian cash grants have negative,

unintended consequences on market dynamics (inflation, shortages, traders will collude to

increase prices etc.)

How long does it take beneficiaries to reach the nearest functioning market where they can buy

most essential items? If it takes more than 1 hour (one way) – either by foot or by public

transport, depending on how they normally go to the market – then cash is probably not

appropriate.

Can beneficiaries safely access local markets – both men and women? Or do they prefer not to

come to the market because they face security concerns while travelling to/ from the market?

ERM Afghanistan market assessment approach

Market assessments/ analysis for humanitarian assistance is a whole field in itself, which has been

growing very fast in recent years, as cash programming has expanded globally. Many organizations

or groups (such as CaLP) have developed different market assessment methodologies and

questionnaires – often very time consuming and complex ones which really tried to understand

supply chains and market dynamics in depth.

However, these tools are often not practical in the field, as they are too complex and take too long to

complete (questionnaires are too long, method requires multiple different questionnaires – trader


interviews, trader focus groups, customer focus groups, key informant interviews…) and collect too

much information that is not actually used in decision making. In the context of emergency

assistance, the key question that a market assessment needs to answer is really “can we give

cash?” - or, more specifically, “if we give cash to x number of people, will they be able to buy what

they need in sufficient quantity (and quality), in the local market?” Any information that does not

directly help answer these questions, while interesting, is superfluous when it comes to informing

emergency response.

When designing market assessment for Afghanistan specifically, a number of additional context-

specific factors need to be kept in mind:

“Mini” emergencies (i.e. conflict-induced displacement) happen every week – if not every day.

Since a market assessment – or at least price collection – is needed every time one of these

mini emergencies occur, the process needs to be very simple and quick, in order not to delay

distributions.

Experience shows that markets in Afghanistan are generally highly resilient, and bounce back

from shocks (conflict, natural disasters) remarkably fast. Market systems here have evolved in

contexts of uncertainty and conflict for decades, and market supply chains are generally very well

organized, involve large volume turnovers and many traders. This is very different from rural

markets in much of sub-Saharan Africa (which most global market assessment methods and

tools were initially designed for), which are very fragile and where sudden a sudden influx of cash

(i.e. NRC cash grants) could lead to inflation, shortages or collusion amongst traders holding a

monopoly.

The volume of cash injected in the local market through the ERM is generally insignificant

relative to the volume of cash circulating in the market.

The ERM partners therefore adopted a very simple emergency market assessment approach:

Tools: (a) a short, simple trader interview, complemented with (b) information of household

access to markets (distance and security) obtained from the household needs assessment

survey (HEAT).

Sampling: 3 traders interviewed per market

1.1.2. Tools

a. Information on household access to markets (distance and security) – this is obtained from the

HEAT household needs assessment survey (see section 1.2.2)

b. Market survey:

- Three traders should be interviewed per market.

- The long survey form should always be used, The short survey will no longer be used,

because it was being systematically used by field staff even when they should have been

using the long version).

- A market survey should always be done – even if one was done less than 1 week ago in the

same location, because some partners were not doing market surveys even when the last

survey was more than 1 week before).

- IMPORTANT: when collecting prices, always ask for prices of low quality staples (rice, wheat

flour and cooking oil). This is to ensure that prices collected over several months/ years and


in different areas are comparable (prices will not be comparable if some collect high quality

prices and others collect low quality prices).

1.1.3. Market data analysis and reporting

Market survey results should be reported in the Assessment Report, along with HEAT household

needs assessment results. It is important to report in the Assessment Report whether prices are

within the “normal range” (e.g. for ERM7, partners were asked to report whether prices for (low

quality) wheat flour, rice and oil were within +/- 20% of the average national price for each of these

commodities over the period April 2017 – April 2017 (i.e. the 12-month period preceding the start of

ERM7).

If prices for one or more of these commodities are > 20% higher than the reference price, partners

should analyze market assessment data in more detail/ speak with field staff to understand the

cause for this. In some (but not all) cases, this could be a justification for replacing part (or all) or all

of the ERM cash transfer with in-kind food, shelter or NFI assistance.

See annexes for the market survey questionnaire, and an example of the analyzed market data

(analyzed by REACH and sent in Excel format to partners).

1.2. Needs assessment

This section provides a brief overview of the beneficiary selection process, without going into details

– as this is not strictly related to cash distribution mechanisms per say.

Beneficiary selection should include three layers of screening:

Petition screening committee led by the Department of Refugees and Returnees (DoRR),

attended by a variety of actors from government, national and international NGOs, and the UN.

The purpose is to screen out “fake IDPs” (i.e. households who are not IDPs or are IDPs who have

been displaced for more than 6 months).

Meeting with community leaders in the community before doing the HEAT assessment, to inform

them about the purpose of the assessment (for areas where ERM assistance has never been

provided), and to screen out fake IDPs.

Household assessment (HEAT survey): meant to screen-out fake IDPs and determine the level of

vulnerability of the household

IMPORTANT: the first two steps (petition screening committee and focus group discussion) are only

meant to determine whether or not a household is a “real” IDP (i.e. status), while the last step (HEAT

household survey) is meant to also determine the level of vulnerability of the household – which will

ultimately determine whether or not that household gets assistance. Being a “real” IDP is not enough

to qualify for assistance – the household must also meet the required vulnerability criteria.

1.2.1. Meeting with local community leaders

Right before the household assessment (on the same day), hold a quick meeting with community

leaders (IDP leaders and and host community members), jointly with DoRR and other humanitarian

partners. Make sure to include women, or to hold a separate meeting with women if necessary:

Explain the purpose of the HEAT assessment. (specify that the selection will not be done by

enumerators going to the field – it will be done in Kabul once the collected data is analyzed).


Informally ask the community leaders and host community members (shopkeepers, people

living in the neighborhood) to identify any “fake IDPs” in the DoRR/ petition list, so that the

field teams don’t waste time assessing them. However, always cross-check information given

by these informants (especially community leaders) after the meeting. This is better done

informally, not during the meeting itself. In particularly sensitive areas, it is best to omit this

altogether, if it poses a security risk to ERM staff.

1.2.2. Household survey (HEAT)

Pre-survey screening questions to screen out “fake IDPs”

Before starting to fill out the actual HEAT form, start by explaining the purpose of the assessment,

and explaining clearly that eligible households will not be selected on the spot (selection will be

made in Kabul once survey data is analyzed). Then discuss with the household (or talk to other

members of the community beforehand) to determine whether they are “real” IDPs. Potential

screening methods:

DO NOT take people’s phones and randomly call people in the contact list to check if the

beneficiary is telling the truth. This is a disrespectful and invasive tactic, used by armed

opposition groups – we do not want humanitarian actors to be associated with such tactics.

Ask for children’s UNICEF vaccine card (women will generally be the one to have it) and look

for where the card was issued and the date of recent vaccines.

Ask children if they have been going to school in this place, for how many grades/ years.

Ask local shop keepers or mullahs if this household arrived recently.

If a household passes this screening and is determined to be “real” IDPs, then fill out the entire HEAT

survey.

For “fake” IDP households:.

Do NOT fill out the entire HEAT form.

Only enter the basic information about the household which you already have from the DoRR

petition list (the key info is name, father name, phone number and province/ district of

origin).

Indicate in the HEAT form that this household was rejected, and the reason for rejection (is

actually from the host community; is a returnee rather than an IDP, is a prolonged IDP who

has been displaced for more than 6 months).

Do NOT ask for additional details (which you do not already have from the DoRR petition list),

such as tazkera number, number of household members etc. Otherwise these households

might come to the distribution asking why they are not receiving assistance even though the

assessment team collected their household details.

When the HEAT data is analyzed by REACH, a rejection list will be created, listing all the

households which have been excluded during the HEAT assessment – this will allow M&E to

do phone-based spot checks to verify that households were not unfairly excluded (see

section below on verification of beneficiary selection).

1.3. Beneficiary selection

1.3.1. Transitioning from status-based targeting to vulnerability targeting


Beneficiaries will be selected based on the HEAT data analysis, which will identify the households

eligible for ERM assistance based on specific vulnerability criteria. The use of analyzed HEAT data to

select beneficiaries is important step in moving away from STATUS-based assistance to NEEDS-

based assistance.

REACH will be responsible for carrying out the data analysis, using vulnerability criteria agreed upon

by all ERM partners and ECHO, and for sending analysis results to ERM partners.

1.3.2. HEAT household duplication check

As part of the HEAT analysis, REACH should check for duplications in the household data, to verify

that:

- Assessed households have not been assessed/ assisted previously in ERM, by comparing the

current data with the database of all past HEAT data from all partners (focusing on duplications

in one or more of the following: name, father name, telephone number, and tazkera number).

- No households are included twice in the list, under different names or different households.

Check in particular that people who should be listed under the same household are not split into

separate households (e.g. two brothers whose total combined household members are less than

14 people and who share meals should be listed under the same household. If they are more

than 14 people, they should be split in two different households). Also check that people are not

listed twice under slightly different names/ spellings (look at phone numbers and tazkera

numbers).

1.3.3. Exclusion list

As part of the HEAT data analysis, REACH should create a rejection list, listing all the households

which have excluded during the HEAT assessment – this will allow M&E to do phone-based spot

checks to verify that households were not unfairly excluded (see section below on verification of

beneficiary selection).

1.3.4. Phone-based beneficiary verification

ERM partners’ M&E unit should carry out a random spot check (by phone) to make sure that

beneficiaries were fairly selected (i.e. those selected are truly eligible, and those rejected were in fact

not eligible). During the phone call, the M&E officer should cross check whether the information

given by the respondent during the call matches what was reported in the HEAT assessment

database/ household exclusion list.

The spot check should be carried out on:

10% of the selected households (from the beneficiary list)

5% of the rejected households (from the exclusion list)

Issues to look out for in particular during the phone interview:

For selected beneficiaries:

Dates of assessment and displacement match those reported in the HEAT assessment


The assessment and displacement date are sequenced in a logical order (i.e. displacement

occurred before assessment)

The place of origin before displacement and the current location of displacement match

those reported in the HEAT assessment

The household meets required vulnerability criteria

For excluded household:

The household was excluded for good reasons (i.e. has been displaced for more than 6

months or is not an IDP).

1.4. Determining the cash transfer value

The ERM cash grant is designed as multi-purpose cash assistance. The size of this multi-purpose

cash grant is based on the Survival Minimum Expenditure Basket (SMEB) for two months, i.e. the

amount of money that allows a household to buy all the basic goods and services needed to survive

for two months. The full SMEB for two months for a household of seven people was calculated to be

AFN 30,000 (see breakdown below).

1st Month (AFN) 2nd Month (AFN) TOTAL (AFN) TOTAL (USD)

Food 6,000 6,000 12,000 180

NFIs 4,000 - 4,000 60

Shelter (incl.

access to some

WASH services)

2,500 2,500 5,000 75

Fuel 2,000 2,000 4,000 60

Health 2,000 2,000 4,000 60

Transportation 1,000 - 1,000 15

Total 17,500 12,500 30,000 450

IMPORTANT: The SMEB is the maximum possible amount that a household could receive, but

households will not always receive the full SMEB. The amount households in a given caseload will

actually receive depends on (a) household needs and (b) what other humanitarian partners are

providing (see details below).

Note that water, sanitation and health (WASH) is not included in the SMEB as a standalone

allocation, as it is partially included in the shelter and NFI allocation, and is also provided in-kind

when needed.

1.4.1. Adjusting the transfer value based on household needs

The amount of assistance that households in that caseload actually need is assessed through the

HEAT assessment. The use of the HEAT results to set the transfer amount for each caseload is an

important step in moving away from STATUS-based assistance to NEEDS-based assistance.


IMPORTANT: all selected households in the same caseload will receive the same cash amount. The

HEAT results will be used to determine the overall needs for that entire caseload (not for each

household), using the vulnerability scoring method agreed to by all ERM partners (method is under

development, led by REACH).

1.4.2. Coordinating with other humanitarian partners

If a non-ERM partner wants to give in-kind assistance (to the same beneficiaries):

Deduct the value of the in-kind assistance from the ERM partner cash grant and try to have

joint distributions (same place, same time).

e.g. if WFP is giving a 2 months food ration:

ERM partner cash grant = AFN 30,000 – (6,000 x 2)

= AFN 30,000 – 12,000

= AFN 18,000 [distributed in a single round]

If a non-ERM partner wants to give cash:

Best option: negotiate so that only one partner gives cash to this caseload (e.g. ERM partner

provides assistance for this caseload, the other organization will provide assistance for the next

caseload)

Second best option: split the caseload – ERM partner gives cash to part of the caseload and the

other partner gives cash to the rest. But make sure both organizations give the same amount if

beneficiaries all live in the same area – to avoid conflict/ confusion in the community.

Last option (to be avoided if possible): distribute a single combined cash grant (ERM partner

provides part of the grant, other partner provides rest): Subtract the value of other partner’s cash

grant from ERM partner’s standard AFN 30,000 package (same as with in-kind assistance). The

idea is that the total cash assistance received by each household should not exceed AFN

30,000.

o For example: ERM partner to give 30,000 AFA, non-ERM partner to provide 6000 AFA

contribution to cover NFIs. Beneficiaries should receive 30,000 AFA – 6000 AFA =

24,000 AFA from ERM partner (regardless of ERM SMEB that shows NFIs at 4000 AFA)

o Do a joint distribution (same time and place + try to ensure that beneficiaries don’t have

to wait in line twice – give cash from both organizations at once).

STEP 2 – DISTRIBUTION PREPARATION

2.1. Caseload approval

For each caseload, the request for approval of fund disbursement should be supported by the

following documents:

HEAT data and analysis

Market assessment data and analysis

Assessment report (including both HEAT and market assessment)

Beneficiary list

Household exclusion list (i.e. households who were on the DoRR list but were not selected

during the HEAT assessment).


If the caseload includes more than 100 households, the ERM partner must obtain the approval of

ECHO.

2.2. Beneficiary distribution list

Once the beneficiary list and transfer amount per beneficiary has been approved, the distribution list

should be prepared, including the following information:

Distribution date

Distribution location

Beneficiary current residence (province, district, city/ village)

Beneficiary name

Name of beneficiary alternate, if applicable (person authorized by the beneficiary to collect

the cash in his/ her place).

Beneficiary father name

ID number (tazkera, voter card or ERM partner ID)

Cash transfer amount for this distribution

Fingerprint

2.3. Selecting the distribution location

Things to consider when choosing the distribution location:

Safety – for beneficiaries and ERM partner staff. Consult with Security unit.

Travel time for beneficiaries: beneficiaries should not have to travel for more than 1 hour

(one way – either by foot or by transport) to reach the distribution point.

How the location may affect the community’s perception of ERM partner; in particular,

partner will not be perceived as impartial or fair if distributions take place in government

office (see below).

Types of locations:

Distributions should not be held in government offices (governor’s office, DoRR office etc.) or

in direct proximity to military facilities – ERM partner staff needs to insist on this in case of

joint distributions where other partners want to hold the distribution in a government office.

Preferred location is a safe location outside of ERM partner premises, either in the city or in

the community.

If not possible, ERM partner’s warehouse is acceptable (if it is separate from the office).

Last resort (if no other option) is ERM partner’s office – but to be avoided as much as

possible.

2.4. Informing beneficiaries of distribution time and location

Beneficiaries should be informed of the distribution 1-2 days before the distribution in order to:

Inform them of the location, date and time of distribution.

Remind them to bring their ID (original tazkera/ voter registration card)

Due to security reasons, in some areas it might be necessary to only inform them on the day of

distribution, or the evening before.


The easiest and fastest way to contact beneficiaries is through phone (phone numbers are collected

during the HEAT assessment). For beneficiaries who don’t have phones/ don’t answer the call, ask

someone else from the community to inform them.

2.5. Delivery mechanism: hawala agent

2.5.1. Why hawla?

It is recommended that ERM partners distribute cash through hawala agents, who bring the cash to

the distribution point and hand the cash to the beneficiary (in the presence of ERM partner staff).

This is to reduce the potential diversion of cash that can occur through cash-in-envelope (i.e. where

ERM partner staff brings and distributes the cash themselves), and to transfer the liability of

transporting the cash to the distribution point to the hawala agent.

2.5.2. Hawala contracting (done annually –not before each distribution)

The Logistics/ Finance unit should establish framework agreements/ contracts with one (or several)

hawala agent, who can cover the entire area of operation, and which can be used to distribute cash

for each emergency over a year or so (i.e. without having to re-sign a contract for each distribution).

Key things to negotiate with the hawala agent and include in the contract:

Period of validity of contract

Clause specifying that the hawala agent has to be present at the distribution (i.e. cannot give

the cash to ERM partner staff who then distributes it on their own – otherwise defeats the

who purpose of going through hawala, and becomes a cash-in-envelope delivery

mechanism).

Distribution locations: important to specify, as this will affect the commission fee, which

depends on whether the hawala agent does the distribution in his shop or has to travel to

another location (e.g. ERM partner warehouse or in a village), and on how insecure the

distribution location is.

Commission – by distribution location. Include the list of districts where the hawala agent is

willing to distribute at the community/ district center level – and associated fee for each; and

the list of other distribution locations (ERM partner warehouse, other locations within

provincial capital, etc.) and associated fee for each. Specify whether fee is a flat fee per

distribution/ caseload, or if it’s a percentage of the total amount of cash transferred.

Maximum amount of cash hawala agent is willing to transport/ distribute in one time.

Clause specifying that ERM partner is not responsible for any loss of cash while the hawala

agent is transporting the cash to the distribution site lies with the hawala agent, not ERM

partner.

How long in advance the ERM partner has to inform the hawala agent of the distribution

(amount of cash needed, time and location) (typically 24hrs).

Maximum delay between submission of invoice by Hawala agent and payment by ERM

partner (typically 24 hours to 2 days)

(Optional) Clause specifying if either party (hawala or ERM partner) is more than 30 min late,

for more than 3 distributions, either party is allowed to terminate the contract.


2.5.3. Informing the hawala agent before each distribution

The ERM partner should inform the Hawala agent of the location, date and time of the distribution,

the number of beneficiaries, the amount of cash per beneficiary, and total cash needed. How far in

advance the Hawala should be informed (e.g. 24 hours) should be mentioned in the contract

between the ERM partner and the Hawala agent.

STEP 3 – DISTRIBUTION

3.1. Who should be present at the distribution?

At least one emergency/ programme staff (more as needed depending on caseload size) (at

least one female, to deal with distributions to women)

One M&E staff (at least one female) to monitor the distribution process and register

complaints/ feedback from beneficiaries or non-beneficiaries

One finance staff (to ensure checks and balances within the ERM partner organization, as

finance staff are not involved in the selection of beneficiaries – unlike programme staff).

Community leader (Malek/ shura leader/ IDP representative)

DoRR or other government official (depends on the context – only if required by the local

government)

No armed group or personnel should be present.

3.2. Communication and interaction with beneficiaries 3.2.1. Key messages to communicate before the distribution

Right before starting the distribution, ERM partner staff should clearly explain to the beneficiaries, in

front of everyone (including the community leader and DoRR/ government official):

Who the ERM partner is: non-governmental humanitarian organization, independent from the

government, who provides assistance to people in need.

Selection process and criteria: beneficiaries were selected by the ERM partner (not by the

community leaders or the government) because they are IDPs who are in need of assistance,

based on the household assessment that ERM partner and other NGOs did a few days ago.

Beneficiaries do not need to pay anyone for getting selected. Protection-related

vulnerabilities should not be mentioned specifically, to avoid discrimination against these

beneficiaries.

Cash amount and purpose: clearly state how much money each household will be receiving,

and what this cash is intended for. In cases where there is also an in-kind distribution (by

ERM or non-ERM partners), explain that the cash is intended to cover the needs that are not

met in-kind.

Inform beneficiaries of how long (approximately) they can expect to wait to receive their cash.

Complaint mechanisms: tell beneficiaries that they have the right to provide feedback and

complaints at any time either on the day of the distribution, or later on using the ERM

partner’s complaint mechanism. Clearly inform beneficiaries that:

- During the distribution, they can talk to an M&E staff present during the distribution

(and show who/ where this person is) if they have any complaints or feedback.


- Each one of them will receive a card with the telephone number of a male and a

female ERM partner staff, and that they should keep this card and call the ERM

partner if they have any complaints related to the assistance (e.g. if they did not

receive the right amount, if somebody asked them for a bribe, if they faced security

issues when returning home after receiving the cash…).

- Note: In areas where with high illiteracy rates, consider providing the number to

beneficiaries verbally (as with mobile phones they may have understanding of

numbers) and/ or reminding them to go to see an ERM staff member who can help

them to add the number into their phone.

- The ERM partner will not give the names of people who call to anyone – government,

community leader etc. – their complaint will be managed internally and kept strictly

confidential.

- Calling the ERM partner to complain will not affect whether they are selected for

future assistance by the ERM partner or by any other organization – this complaint

process is completely separate from the selection of beneficiaries.

3.2.2. Interaction with beneficiaries

General guidelines on how to interact with beneficiaries:

Female staff should be the ones interacting with female beneficiaries.

ERM staff and community representatives should treat beneficiaries and community members

with respect at all times

Shouting, jostling or hitting including with sticks or any other item is not permitted at any time (by

ERM staff nor any other person allowed in the distribution site).

ERM staff should not have any physical contact with beneficiaries.

No loud talking with or shouting at beneficiaries is permitted.

No photography allowed – especially in locations where beneficiaries or their family members in

their district of origin could be targeted by armed opposition groups (AOGs) in retaliation for

receiving humanitarian aid. Exceptions can be made for specific media/communication needs,

but should be discussed beforehand internally.

Keep community leaders, hawala agent, DoRR/ ANDMA personnel (if present) informed of what

is happening at all times, especially if delays in the distributions are expected or suddenly occur.

3.3. Distribution process 3.3.1. Prioritization of certain beneficiary groups

Persons with special needs (pregnant women, people living with disabilities, elderly people,

women with children) should be assisted first.

All remaining women should then be assisted.

Finally, all remaining men should be assisted.

This can be done either by grouping beneficiaries at the beginning of the distribution, or by creating

priority lines.


3.3.2. Verification of beneficiary ID

Beneficiaries should always be asked for ID (tazkera, voter registration card). For those without ID,

the phone number should be used as identification, and the identity of the beneficiary should be

confirmed by the community/ IDP leader present at the distribution.

3.3.3. Cash distribution

For each beneficiary, the cash should be counted by three different people to make sure that the

beneficiary is given the right amount:

Hawala agent counts

ERM partner staff verifies

Ask the beneficiary to count again (if they are illiterate, community leader should help them).

Once the beneficiary has received the cash, he/ she should put his fingerprint next to his name on

the distribution list, and he/ she should be given a complaint and feedback card.

3.4. Dealing with beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries/complaints

While each ERM partner has its own compliant and feedback mechanism, it is recommended that

each beneficiary be given a complaint and feedback card, featuring the telephone number of one

male and one female M&E staff.

Set up a separate table (away from the distribution table) maned by an M&E staff, where

beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries can give feedback and raise concerns

M&E staff should utilize this space to interview beneficiaries on the process of distribution and to

conduct post-distribution exit interviews, where possible;

Non-beneficiaries who try to join the lines should be respectfully kept away from the distribution

site by ERM staff and if required, given the phone number to register their complaint.

Beneficiaries with complaints should not be allowed near the distribution waiting line, as it could

disturb proceedings. Beneficiaries who are complaining very loudly/ are creating disturbances

should be asked respectfully to leave the distribution site and be given the phone number to

register their complaint.

3.5. Standard security measures

No weapons should be allowed inside and around the distribution site under any circumstances.

Armed personnel should not be present or participate in the distribution process;

Before starting distribution, identify a safe exit and hibernation location in case emergency

evacuation is needed.

Do not change distribution arrangements or protocols without the prior approval of ERM partner

managers.

Ensure that ERM staff have adequate tools for communication, especially in hard to access areas,

(several phones and if needed satellite phones, walkie-talkies, loud hailers, whistles).

Staff carrying out the cash distribution should not leave their position at the distribution desk at

any time, unless replaced by another staff member; the distribution desk should not be left

unattended at any time while the distribution is still ongoing.

Beneficiaries and community leaders should be informed of any delays or changes in distribution

arrangements, to avoid frustration, misunderstandings and anger - which can escalate into

violence.


3.6. Evacuation from the distribution site

Preparation before the distribution:

Prior to distribution, emergency procedures and security signals or alerts for evacuation must

be in place and understood by all ERM staff.

Park vehicles close to the site or exit for rapid departure.

Ensure the driver does not leave the vehicle.

Always travel in convoy to and from the distribution.

During the distribution:

Pay attention to what is going on inside and around the distribution site

In case of total breakdown, use a previously identified emergency exit with a vehicle and driver

standing ready and knowing where to go, making sure that no one is left behind.

Aggression levels normally rise if staff are caught trying to ‘run away’. The crowd might take

this as a sign of guilt or, or focus their anger on you. So if the decision is taken to make an

emergency exit, be sure that staff can get away. If not, consider staying put and trying to

reason with the crowd and calm things down;

Life is more important than assets. If there is a need for immediate evacuation leave behind

distribution assets;

Do not resume the distribution until the situation stabilizes and a security meeting has been

held between beneficiaries and the ERM representatives.

3.7. Managing large distributions

To speed up the distribution process for large caseloads, the emergency teams can carry out an ID

check at the entrance of the distribution site, and give out a distribution card which the beneficiary

then takes to the cash distribution desk (in order to skip the ID check at the distribution desk, to

save time). This is optional, not mandatory.

3.8. Managing several rounds of distribution

The cash grant is intended to cover household needs for two months, but it can be distributed in

either a single round, or split into two rounds, depending on the context. The decisions to do only one

or two rounds is at the discretion of the ERM partner.

In cases where the distribution is done in two rounds:

Do not tell beneficiaries and community leaders that there will be a second round of

assistance – this is to avoid inadvertently encouraging prolonged displacement, by

discouraging households from returning home because they are waiting for the second

round.

Right before the second distribution, call each beneficiary to check whether they are still

displaced.

If a beneficiary is still displaced, tell him/ her (during the same phone call) the time and

location of the second distribution (and remind him to bring his ID).

If the beneficiary is no longer displaced, he/ she will not get the second round of cash.


3.9. Managing joint distributions

Timeline: as a general rule, ERM partners can delay a cash distribution by up to 3 days in order to

allow for a joint distribution with a non-ERM partner (i.e. when ERM partner is ready to distribute but

other partners ask to delay).

Location: need to find a site that can be used by several organizations in case of joint distributions

(in the case of joint-distribution with WFP, this means a site that can accommodate in-kind food

distributions).

3.10. Visibility

Place an ERM partner and ECHO banner behind the distribution desk, so that beneficiaries know that

they are receiving assistance from an NGO/ foreign country, not from the government (to ensure that

government officials are not able to extort beneficiaries by falsely claiming that they influence the

beneficiary selection process).

STEP 4 – PAYING THE HAWALA AGENT

4.1. Paying the hawala agent

The hawala agent should be asked to submit his invoice after the distribution (usually done on the

same day), and should be paid within 1-2 days of submitting the invoice (specific time frame to be

specified in the contract), through bank transfer or check.

4.2. Supporting documents

Supporting documents to be kept by Finance in their records, for each caseload

Document (hard copy or email) showing caseload approval by management/ budget holder

Distribution list, with beneficiary fingerprints. In original hard copy and soft copy

Hawala agent invoice (including commission fee)

Proof of payment from ERM partner to hawala agent (bank transfer slip or copy of check)

Framework contract between Hawala agent and ERM partner

STEP 5 –POST DISTRIBUTION

5.1. Distribution report

The distribution report should be produced within 2 days of distribution, readily available to ECHO if

requested. The report should outline the number of beneficiaries and the type of assistance provided

(cash and/ or in-kind). See annex 7 for report template.

5.2. Complaint and feedback mechanism

Each ERM partner has its own beneficiary complaint and feedback mechanism. However, one

recommended method is to distribute a Complaint & Feedback card to each beneficiary during the

distribution, at the same time as the cash. The cards should feature the telephone number of one


male and one female M&E staff. If some beneficiaries are illiterate, help them store the complaint

number into their phone.

5.3. Post distribution monitoring (PDM)

5.3.1. Tool

Post distribution monitoring (PDM) for cash should be done using the standard ERM cash PDM

(which includes all the mandatory questions from the inter-cluster cash PDM, as well as some

additional ERM-specific questions). WASH activities have a separate PDM.

5.3.2 Timing

PDM surveys should be carried out by M&E staff, not by the programme staff who selected

beneficiaries and distributed the cash– to ensure transparency. Surveys should be carried out at the

end of the intended assistance period. e.g. for a cash grant intended to cover 2 months’ needs, the

PDM should be conducted (a) two months after the distribution if the entire transfer was given in one

distribution, or (b) 1 month after the second distribution if the transfer was split over 2 distributions.

5.3.3. Sampling

Households should be selected randomly from the beneficiary list, but not all from the same village/

settlement (if beneficiaries for that caseload are spread over several settlements). The sample size

for the PDM survey depends on the caseload size, as shown below:

Caseload size # households selected for PDM

< 10 households All households

10 – 100 households 10 households

> 100 households 10% of all households


LIST OF ANNEXES

# Annex

Document type

1 HEAT (household needs assessment) questionnaire

Questionnaire

2 Market assessment (trader) questionnaire

Questionnaire

3 Market assessment analysis Sample (Excel)

4 Petition exclusion list Template (Excel)

5 Assessment Report Sample

6 Beneficiary spot check Template and sample (Excel)

7 Distribution report Template

8 Cash post distribution monitoring (PDM)

questionnaire

Questionnaire

emergency response mechanism (erm) afghanistan … · distributions, conduct post-distribution...

Documents