technical annex north africa...expected results of humanitarian aid interventions” for...
TRANSCRIPT
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 1
TECHNICAL ANNEX
NORTH AFRICA
FINANCIAL, ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATIONAL INFORMATION
The provisions of the financing decision ECHO/WWD/BUD/2020/01000 and the General
Conditions of the Agreement with the European Commission shall take precedence over
the provisions in this document.
The activities proposed hereafter are subject to any terms and conditions that may be
included in the related Humanitarian Implementation Plan (HIP).
1. CONTACTS
Operational Unit in charge DG ECHO1/C4
Contact persons at HQ:
In the field:
Marco CAPURRO
(Team Leader North Africa)
Dorota KACZUBA
(Desk Officer Algeria and Morocco)
Nieves Cotero
(Desk Officer Libya)
Paolo BARABESI
(Desk Officer Egypt, co-Desk Officer Libya)
Patrick BARBIER
(Head of Office – North Africa)
Soumeiya AMRAOUI
(Program Officer Algeria)
Hend KHECHINE
(Program Officer Libya)
1 Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (DG ECHO)
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected],eumailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 2
2. FINANCIAL INFO
Indicative Allocation2: EUR 23 000 000 (of which an indicative amount of
EUR 4 500 000 for Education in Emergencies: EUR 1 500 000 for Libya, EUR 1 500
000 for Algeria and EUR 1 500 000 for Egypt).
In line with DG ECHO’s commitment to the Grand Bargain, pilot Programmatic
Partnerships are envisaged with a limited number of partners. Part of this HIP may
therefore be awarded to the selected pilot Programmatic partnerships.
Breakdown per Actions as per Worldwide Decision (in euros):
Country(ies) Action
(a)
Man-
made
crises and
natural
disasters
Action (b)
Initial
emergency
response/small-
scale/epidemic
s
Action (c)
Disaster
Preparedness
Actions (d) to
(f)
Transport /
Complementary
activities
TOTAL
ALGERIA 9 000 000 9 000 000
LIBYA 9 000 000 9 000 000
EGYPT 5 000 000 5 000 000
3. PROPOSAL ASSESSMENT
Under the EU Financial Regulation, grants must involve co-financing; as a result, the
resources necessary to carry out the action cannot be provided entirely by the grant. An
action may only be financed in full by the grant where this is essential for it to be
carried out. In such a case, justification must be provided in the Single Form (section
10.4).
3.1. Administrative info
Allocation round 1
a) Indicative amount: up to EUR 15 000 000.
b) The humanitarian aid interventions relating to this assessment round correspond to both the HIP chapters “Envisaged DG ECHO response and
2 The Commission reserves the right not to award all or part of the funds made or to be made available under
the HIP to which this Annex relates
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 3
expected results of humanitarian aid interventions” for respectively Algeria and
Libya and chapter 3.2.2 of this Technical Annex.
c) Costs will be eligible from 01/01/20203. Actions will start from 01/01/2020.
d) The initial duration for the Action may be up to 24 months, including for Actions on Education in Emergencies, Disaster Preparedness, and WASH as
well as for pilot Programmatic Partnerships. Follow-up actions, which
continue and/or extend ongoing operations, can be submitted as modification
requests for the ongoing action. Follow-up actions could be extended for up to
24 months with a total duration of the modified action of up to 48 months.
e) Potential partners4: All DG ECHO Partners
f) Information to be provided: Single Form5
g) Indicative date for receipt of the above requested information: by 14/01/20206
Allocation round 2
a) Indicative amount: up to EUR 5 000 000.
b) The humanitarian aid interventions relating to this assessment round correspond to both the HIP chapters “Envisaged DG ECHO response and
expected results of humanitarian aid interventions” for Egypt and chapter 3.2.2
of this Technical Annex.
c) Costs will be eligible from 01/01/20203. Actions will start from 01/03/2020.
d) The initial duration for the Action may be up to 24 months, including for Actions on Education in Emergencies, Disaster Preparedness, and WASH as
well as for pilot Programmatic Partnerships. Follow-up actions, which
continue and/or extend ongoing operations, can be submitted as modification
requests for the ongoing action. Follow-up actions could be extended for up to
24 months with a total duration of the modified action of up to 48 months.
e) Potential partners4: All DG ECHO Partners
f) Information to be provided: Single Form5
g) Indicative date for receipt of the above requested information: by 28/02/20206
3 The eligibility date of the Action is not linked to the date of receipt of the Single Form. It is either the
eligibility date set in the Single Form or the eligibility date of the HIP, whatever occurs later.
4 For UK Partners: Please be aware that following the entry into force of the EU-UK Withdrawal
Agreement* on 1 February 2020 and in particular Articles 127(6), 137and 138, the references to natural
or legal persons residing or established in a Member State of the European Union are to be understood
as including natural or legal persons residing or established in the United Kingdom. UK entities are
therefore eligible to participate under this HIP. * Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy
Community.
5 Single Forms will be submitted to DG ECHO using APPEL.
6 The Commission reserves the right to consider Single Forms transmitted after this date, especially in
case certain needs/ priorities are not covered by the received Single Forms.
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 4
Allocation round 3
a) Indicative amount: up to EUR 3 000 000.
b) The humanitarian aid interventions relating to this assessment round correspond to the envisaged response described in section 0 of the HIP on Libya.
c) Costs will be eligible from 01/01/2020. Actions can start from 01/01/2020 in case of top-up of ongoing actions or 01/07/2020 in case of new actions.
d) The initial duration for the Action may be up to 12 months for new actions. Follow-up actions, which continue and/or extend ongoing operations, can be
submitted as modification requests for the ongoing action.
e) Potential partners: All DG ECHO Partners operating in Libya.
f) Information to be provided: Single Form or Modification Request in case of ongoing action.
g) Indicative date for receipt of the above requested information: by 31 August 2020.
3.2. Operational requirements:
3.2.1. Assessment criteria:
1) Relevance
How relevant is the proposed intervention and its compliance with the objectives of the HIP?
Have joint needs assessments been used for the proposed intervention (if existing)
Has the proposed intervention been coordinated with other relevant humanitarian actors?
2) Capacity and expertise
Does the partner, with its implementing partners, have sufficient expertise (country /region and /or technical)?
How good is the partner’s local capacity / ability to develop local capacity?
3) Methodology and feasibility
Quality of the proposed response strategy, including intervention logic / logframe, output & outcome indicators, risks and challenges.
Feasibility, including security and access constraints.
Quality of the monitoring arrangements.
4) Coordination and relevant post-intervention elements
Extent to which the proposed intervention is to be implemented in coordination with other humanitarian actors and actions (including, where relevant, the use
of single interoperable registries of beneficiaries).
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 5
Extent to which the proposed intervention contributes to resilience and sustainability.
5) Cost-effectiveness/efficiency/transparency
Does the proposed intervention display an appropriate relationship between the resources to be employed, the activities to be undertaken and the objectives to
be achieved?
Is the breakdown of costs sufficiently documented/explained?7
In case of actions ongoing in the field, where DG ECHO is requested to fund the
continuation thereof, a field visit may be conducted by DG ECHO field expert (TA) to
determine the feasibility and quality of the follow-up action proposed.
3.2.2. Specific operational guidelines and operational assessment criteria:
This section outlines the specific operational guidelines that DG ECHO partners need to
take into account in the design of humanitarian operations supported by DG ECHO. It also
lists and explains the assessment criteria – based on those outlined in section 3.2.1 - that
DG ECHO will apply in the specific context of the HIP to which this Technical Annex
relates when assessing proposals submitted in response to the related HIP.
The HIP Policy Annex should be consulted in parallel.
LIBYA
A) Actions falling under the following sectors, and based on sound needs assessments will be prioritized:
Protection mainstreaming as a pre-requirement:
Protection mainstreaming is about putting protection at the centre of the humanitarian
action. It is the responsibility of all humanitarian actors to consider protection in all
interventions funded by DG ECHO. Protection mainstreaming can be broken down into
four basic elements: 1) Prioritise safety and dignity while avoiding harm; 2) Meaningful
access; 3) Accountability and 4) Participation and empowerment. These four elements
should be respected in all submitted project proposals.
Protection risk analysis must be carried out and used as an entry-point for the design of all
proposed interventions. It shall be included in the section “Problem, needs and risk
analysis”. Under the section “Response analysis” partners should explain how the
designed intervention intends to reduce the identified protection risks. Section 4
“Assumptions and risks” should describe protection and gender-related adverse effects of
the humanitarian intervention. Contingency measures should be clearly identified.
7 In accordance with the relevant section of the Single Form guidelines (section10)
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 6
Due to the semi-remote management context, increasing the support to local partners on
protection mainstreaming and protection principles is paramount to ensure minimum
standards. Partners need a set up with a specific emphasis on Protection from Sexual
Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA).
DG ECHO will consider only those proposals indicating the compliance with protection
mainstreaming principles at the log-frame level. Using DG ECHO key objectives
indicators (KOI) on protection mainstreaming is strongly encouraged.
Protection activities:
Reinforce the provision of specialized protection services remains a priority for DG
ECHO. That includes the subsectors of Mental Health and Psychosocial Support (MHPSS)
and legal assistance to all type of victims of the conflict. Actions focused on Gender Based
Violence (GBV) and Child Protection (CP) should be components of integrated protection
programming under the health or education in emergency sectors. Protection monitoring
will be considered only if a response component is ensured.
Promotion of the International Humanitarian Law and principles for both community and
armed actors (state and non-state) will be considered.
Health:
Support will focus primarily on conflict-affected zones where basic health services are
unavailable or inaccessible to vulnerable populations. The objective is to save lives and
prevent permanent disability and diseases associated with humanitarian crises. Health
services funded by the EU should be free of charge for beneficiaries and made available to
all, including refugees, internally displaced persons, vulnerable migrants and third-country
nationals, without discrimination.
The following activities are prioritized: emergency health care, including trauma care and
war surgery, rehabilitation services including prosthesis and orthopaedics, restoration/
provision of primary healthcare services in conflict affected areas (through mobile teams if
needed) and supporting referral to the secondary health care level. They may include the
provision of essential medicines, medical equipment and temporary deployment of
medical staff in support of humanitarian health activities where most needed.
The provision of integrated essential health services that include maternal and child health
and nutrition, psychosocial support, gender-based violence post exposure prophylaxis,
non-communicable disease management and a robust referral system should be prioritized.
Community-based health promotion activities will be considered according to identified
needs.
Attention to the specific needs of highly vulnerable groups (children, women, disabled,
elderly, discriminated minorities) is encouraged.
Education in Emergencies (EiE):
Actions to increase access to safe and quality education at primary and secondary school
levels will be considered for conflict-affected children. EiE support may focus on formal
or non-formal education, where non-formal education is required to support crisis-affected
children to transition into the formal system. An analysis of the crisis-related barriers to
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 7
education is required. Access barriers such as lack of transport, availability of safe
drinking water and adequate gender sensitive WASH facilities in schools need to be
addressed through flexible solutions. Catch-up classes, accelerated learning programmes
and homework support to enable displaced and out-of-school children to enter and be
retained in school will be considered. EiE responses are expected to include an analysis
and response to child protection needs, in addition to the academic needs of children. The
protection of education spaces from attacks and child protection on the way to/from school
and while at school will be prioritised.
ECHO funding will target the most vulnerable children of conflict affected communities in
hard to reach areas, support to out of schoolchildren (OOSC) to enable them to re-enter the
formal system. Partners should consider rehabilitation/repair of schools only if necessary
to ensure safe and conducive learning spaces.
Partners should design an exit strategy describing how and when they will handover
activities to local actors and/or stabilization/development donors, to the extent possible.
Food Assistance:
Emergency food assistance could be considered in conflict affected areas based on solid
needs assessments and proven need for food aid. It should be targeting the most vulnerable
people affected by the conflict. In particular, partners should focus on the recently forcibly
displaced persons excluded from national and local aid responses. Using the common
vulnerability criteria such as Food Consumption Score and Coping Strategy Index is
recommended. Cash will be the preferred transfer option, wherever feasible.
Where assistance is to be delivered in the form of cash transfers, particular attention will
be paid to the principles laid down in DG ECHO's cash guidance note8, which will form
the basis for the assessment and selection of proposals, in particular in case of large-scale
transfers. Partners will be expected to demonstrate a satisfactory efficiency ratio and will
be assessed on their ability to work based on the common targeting criteria. Partners need
to consider using single or interoperable beneficiary registries, single payment mechanism,
common feedback mechanism and a common results framework. In line with the cash
guidance note, DG ECHO will expect partners to strive for segregation of duties and full
transparency on the costs of implementation. For the delivery of smaller-scale cash
transfers, DG ECHO will assess proposals paying particular attention to the guidance
note's principles of coordination, harmonisation and multi-partner approach. A good
efficiency ratio will also be expected for small-scale projects.
Coordination and Support Services:
Strengthening of existing coordination mechanism through ssupport for dedicated
coordination staff can be envisaged with the objective to uphold humanitarian principles
and the centrality of protection in the response, enhance evidence based needs analysis,
improve operational coordination with Libyans stakeholders, reinforce capacity of local
responders, increase access and accountability to affected population and to address gaps
in assistance provision, including underserved or otherwise neglected communities.
8 https://ec.europa.eu/echo/sites/echo-site/files/guidance_note_cash_23_11_2017.pdf
https://ec.europa.eu/echo/sites/echo-site/files/guidance_note_cash_23_11_2017.pdf
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 8
B) Actions falling under the following sectors could be considered in case of
budgetary reinforcement or under the crisis modifier, when relevant:
Shelter and non-food items (NFIs): NFIs and shelter emergency assistance to the most
vulnerable forcibly displaced persons and returnees could be considered. Support will need
to be targeted according to documented vulnerability criteria and will require measurable
technical outcome indicators specific to shelter and settlement to ensure that outputs can
be traced. It also has to be complemented with quality assurance activities. Multi-Purpose
Cash Transfer will be the preferred option where feasible9.
Water, Sanitation and Hygiene: Support could be considered in conflict - affected zones
or in high IDPs concentration areas according to evidence based assessment. Specific
WASH activities can be planned to complement health interventions in order to ensure the
delivery of adequate health services in the facilities supported.
C) Other Operational Considerations
Stand-alone Rapid Response Mechanism will not be considered for funding under
HIP 2020.
Crisis modifier / flexibility embedded into the actions: Whenever relevant, partners
should introduce flexibility to mobilize resources from on-going actions and swiftly
respond to any new emerging shocks occurring in the area of their operations (a crisis
within a crisis). Flexibility measures can be triggered to provide initial lifesaving
multipurpose response in the aftermath of a rapid onset crisis; the two main scenarios
are: i) to fill the time gap while waiting for additional resources; ii) to respond to small
scale humanitarian needs which would otherwise remain unattended.
The application of flexibility measures should be based on a multi-risk analysis and the
development of scenarios. Partners should develop a detailed plan considering
prepositioning of stocks, surge staff, triggers and sectors of intervention.
Remote management: Please note that DG ECHO considers remote management as the
last resort option. Remote management entails transferring operational responsibilities
usually carried out by expatriate staff to national and local employees or external partners.
DG ECHO considers that remote management and outsourcing might entail transferring
security risks, managerial and monitoring responsibilities from international to national
staff. Remote management may also compromise commonly accepted accountability
standards. DG ECHO will thus consider funding actions that involve remote management
only pending the following conditions:
1. Access problems: Access issues should be sufficiently serious to prevent humanitarian assistance delivery. Partners should explain access issues under section 3.1.3 or 6.6 (in
case of security problems) of the Single Form.
9 See DG ECHO Settlements and Shelter Thematic Policy http://ec.europa.eu/echo/what/humanitarian-
aid/emergency-shelter_en
http://ec.europa.eu/echo/what/humanitarian-aid/emergency-shelter_enhttp://ec.europa.eu/echo/what/humanitarian-aid/emergency-shelter_en
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 9
Criteria for DG ECHO assessment: access problems are serious and cannot be resolved
by partners; no other humanitarian organization is willing and able to deliver assistance
through direct management.
2. Acceptance-building: The best way to mitigate security risks and to gain access to vulnerable populations is to build acceptance of impartial and independent action
among local or displaced communities, with local authorities or non-state actors.
Partners should explain how their organization is currently building such acceptance in
Libya in sections 4.3, 4.7 and 7 of the Single Form.
Criteria for DG ECHO assessment: proposals must identify actors at local, regional or
national level who could have an impact on humanitarian access; the proposed action
includes concrete steps to gain, regain, or maintain acceptance. Mitigation measures to
avoid aid diversion or discrimination must be explained
3. Life-saving character: Operations undertaken through remote management should only be implemented if justified by a life-saving imperative. Partners should explain if
the proposed action is life-saving by preserving key livelihoods in section 4 of the
Single Form.
Criteria for DG ECHO assessment: the proposed action is designed to implement direct
life-saving operations, or operations aiming at preserving key livelihoods.
4. Security risks: risk “displacement” is not acceptable. Partners should explain if access constraints are related to a specific threat to expatriate humanitarian workers. In other
words, partners should be able to demonstrate in section 6.6. of the Single Form that
risks for their local staff are substantially lower than the risks identified as the reason
for withdrawing expatriate staff.
Criteria for DG ECHO assessment: clear evidence that all possible measures have been
put in place to reduce and manage risks for humanitarian workers implementing the
action; clear evidence that programs are designed and delivered in a manner that does
not affect negatively on the security of beneficiaries/disaster affected communities.
5. Needs assessment: Partners should explain how they guarantee the impartiality of their needs assessment. Crosschecking information through trusted third parties is necessary.
Partners should provide details under section 3 of the Single Form.
Criteria for DG ECHO assessment: the proposed action specifies which sources of
information were used to estimate needs; data collected remotely (e.g. through
national/local staff, external partners or aerial surveillance) have been confirmed
through cross verification from direct sources.
6. Qualification of staff: under section 6.1 of the Single Form partners should confirm whether the skills and experience of local staff who will implement the action are
adequate.
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 10
Criteria for DG ECHO assessment are: 1) partners ensure that staff managing the action
are updated at all times with all relevant information concerning the implementation of
the action on the ground; 2) the action identifies potential qualification gaps and
explains how and to what extent the necessary technical, analytical and managerial
skills will be sourced (including possible training measures).
7. Monitoring arrangements: face-to-face discussions between senior staff and local stakeholders from the area of intervention such as community representatives and
authorities must be foreseen as a minimum requirement. Indirect monitoring (mobile &
web-based technology, photo evidence, telephone feedback mechanisms, biometrics,
vouchers reconciliation, triangulation of information) are also highly encouraged. As a
last resort, third-party monitoring will be considered. Partners should decide which
combination of methods is most suitable to the particular context in Libya and detail the
use of such methods in section 8 of the Single Form.
Criteria for DG ECHO assessment are: 1) the proposed action includes arrangements to
facilitate direct contact between those who manage the action and beneficiaries or other
local stakeholders; 2) the action does not rely on a third party monitoring provided by
private firms or individual consultants that offer or have offered their services to
military organizations or any other party to the conflict.
ALGERIA
Food Assistance:
The focus should be on the provision of food assistance. Food assistance should be
nutrition-sensitive. Specific attention is to be paid to food-related health problems like
anaemia and diabetes. The food assistance provided should be in line with local dietary
preferences, acceptable to beneficiaries, and balanced according to the specific health and
nutrition profile of population10
. Oil and flour of the dry food ration should be fortified to
address micronutrients deficiencies. DG ECHO could consider supporting the access to
fresh food for the most vulnerable food insecure refugees only if socio-economic targeting
will be possible and nutritional benefits will be demonstrated. Awareness raising on
nutritional good practices can be included as a complementary activity.
Vulnerability criteria should be included and progressively implemented in all project
proposals. Partners should take into consideration the economic capacity of refugee
households and target the most vulnerable rather than offer refugee status-based blanket
coverage. Strict monitoring of distributions will be required.
The introduction of cash transfers, based on a market and feasibility analysis, is
encouraged. Partners should carefully appraise the risks associated with such a modality.
Where assistance is to be delivered in the form of cash transfers, particular attention
should be paid to the principles laid down in DG ECHO's cash guidance note. The latter
will form the basis for the assessment and selection of partners, in particular in the case of
10
https://docs.wfp.org/api/documents/WFP-0000103413/download/.
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 11
large-scale transfers. Partners are expected to show a good knowledge of the operational
context and efficiency. In assessing the proposals, DG ECHO will also take into
consideration: 1) the ability of the partner organisation to work with common targeting
criteria, 2) single or interoperable beneficiary registries, 3) a single payment mechanism,
4) a common feedback mechanism and 5) a common results framework.
In line with the cash guidance note, DG ECHO expects that partners will demonstrate the
segregation of duties and full transparency of the implementation costs. For the delivery of
smaller-scale cash transfers, DG ECHO will assess proposals paying particular attention to
the Guidance note's principles of coordination, harmonisation and multi-partner approach.
A good efficiency ratio will also be expected for small-scale projects.
Nutrition:
The latest nutrition survey11
shows a deterioration of the nutrition status of children and
women. Particularly worrying are the increase of acute malnutrition, stunting and
anaemia. Proposed nutrition assistance should contribute to stabilizing or reducing the
prevalence of acute malnutrition, anaemia, and stunting among children under 5 years of
age and women. This should be done by improving the coverage and the management of
acute malnutrition through the existing food assistance system, and providing adequate
supplementary feeding for children under 5 years age. Active MUAC screening at
community level and improved nutritional follow-up of infants and children in health
facilities is encouraged. Education on nutrition good practices targeting specifically
mothers and families can be included as a complementary activity.
Water, Sanitation and Hygiene:
Any project proposal supporting operations and maintenance of existing systems should
be clearly integrated into a multi-annual WASH strategy. In particular, the delivery of
services such as water trucking, water supply systems or access to latrines need to result
from feasibility studies and include multi-annual cost effectiveness analyses. Multi-
annual WASH strategies should clearly address in a given timeframe the issues related to
rationalization and efficiency gains from the gradual shift from a system of water trucking
to an extended water supply network.
Projects guaranteeing households access to safe water through improvement of storage
tanks will be considered. Partners are, however, expected to target the most vulnerable
refugees using evidence-based socio-economic criteria. Projects can include ideas to
improve local markets supply of water storage tanks. Monitoring of the services supplied
must guarantee the respect of minimum standards in terms of water quantity and quality.
All partners submitting WASH proposals are required to take duly into account risks
linked to natural hazards such as floods, storms and dune movements. Risk mapping of
construction sites of any new WASH infrastructure is mandatory.
Health:
11
https://www.wfp.org/publications/algeria-prro-200301-evaluation-nutrition-components
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 12
Health needs analysis of new proposals should be based on Health Information System
data. Proposals should also reflect lessons learned from previous health support in the
camps.
DG ECHO will consider project proposals guaranteeing the provision and management of
drugs, including those for non-communicable diseases and small equipment.
Local purchases of drugs and medical equipment need to respond to the quality criteria as
described in the Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA)12
. Cost effective local
purchases are encouraged whenever appropriate.
In their health sector project proposals, partners should systematically include the
promotion of a healthy life style and adequate nutritional practices.
Education in Emergencies (EiE):
Through the Education in Emergencies (EiE) policy, DG ECHO promotes continuous
access to safe, inclusive, quality formal and informal education for girls and boys affected
by protracted humanitarian crises.
DG ECHO will give priority to project proposals which:
1) target children that are out of school or at risk of dropping out;
2) increase retention and transition to secondary education through tackling relevant
causes for absenteeism and drop out;
3) provide continuous capacity development of underqualified and unqualified teachers
and other education staff;
4) provide ad hoc support and materials to improve teaching and learning outcomes;
5) promote a contextualized and holistic approach (i.e. mainstreaming WASH, DRR).
In addition to child academic needs, EiE project proposals should include an analysis of
protection risks (forced marriage, gender based discrimination, exclusion of people living
with disabilities, SGBV), integrate appropriate prevention and mitigation measures and
respond adequately to child protection needs to allow children learning lifesaving and life-
sustaining skills, protect them and have increased personal resilience. EiE project
proposals should ensure a safe and gender sensitive learning environment. Specific needs
of people living with disabilities should be addressed as to promote inclusiveness. The
effectiveness of Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse mechanisms should be
described.
Some kind of financial support to voluntary teachers is clearly a key issue at stake.
However, any increase in incentives requires a coordinated approach across sectors
(education, health, wash…), between humanitarian organisations and an agreement with
the Sahrawi camps authorities’ leadership. Additionally, the engagement of development
actors is required to ensure sustainability of the system.
12
FPA, point 9.4.2
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 13
Project proposals should follow the regular school year and cover at least one full
academic year to avoid disruption.
Shelter and non-food items (NFIs):
Project proposals providing shelter and NFIs will be considered only in case of response to
a natural disaster. They need to be in line with DG ECHO Shelter and Settlement thematic
policy.
Security:
DG ECHO acknowledges the security risks for humanitarian workers in the Saharan
context. Security-related costs will therefore continue to be eligible.
VAT:
In line with section 9.3. of the FPA guidelines13
, partners are expected to coordinate with
the relevant authorities for the VAT exemption as granted by the Ministry of Finance since
2016. Only if this exemption is not granted and partners demonstrate that they have taken
all the necessary steps, VAT could be considered eligible.
DRR mainstreaming:
All project proposals submitted to DG ECHO should be risk informed (cf. the resilience
marker). In line with the Grand Bargain commitments, and where relevant, partners are
encouraged to include a multi-year strategy in their proposals, where relevant.
EGYPT
Programming priorities:
DG ECHO’s focus in 2020 will be on further consolidating and slightly expanding the
small-scale niche response. The objective is to keep abreast with the upward trend of new
arrivals and increased vulnerabilities of the urban protracted refugee caseload. Whilst the
Syrian refugees remain the entry point, assistance to the most vulnerable among other
refugee groups and their hosting communities will be considered in line with the one
refugee approach promoted by DG ECHO.
Project proposals should adhere to the overall DG ECHO response strategy. The strategy
aims to strengthen protection for the most vulnerable while concurrently addressing the
basic needs of the most vulnerable through Multi-Purpose Cash Transfers (MPCT) and
enhancing access to emergency health and education services, including through
Education in Emergencies (EiE).
13
http://dgecho-partners-helpdesk.eu/reference_documents/start
http://dgecho-partners-helpdesk.eu/reference_documents/start
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 14
DG ECHO partners should submit proposals that clearly demonstrate robust
complementarities and synergies with other EU instruments. The latter include the
Regional Development and Protection Programme/Asylum, Migration and Integration
Fund (RDPP/AMIF) for protection and mix-migration, the European Neighbourhood
Instrument (ENI); the MADAD Trust Fund, the EU Trust Fund for Africa (North-Africa
window), as well as with any other action under the 3RP-Egypt and the Egypt-specific
Humanitarian Appeal.
Thematic priorities
Protection:
Given the upward trend of new arrivals, and amongst them the sharp increase of
Unaccompanied and Separated Children (UASC), strengthening core protection activities
for new arrivals and for the most vulnerable among the protracted caseload will remain the
paramount objective of DG ECHO. Project proposals aiming at enhancing access to basic
services as main objective should give due consideration to protection mainstreaming,
including the inclusion of a protection mainstreaming indicator.
DG ECHO will specifically consider funding protection interventions among the
following:
Information management and advocacy aimed at extending residence visas and facilitating free and safe access to basic services.
Child protection, including special assistance for UASC and other specific groups. Priority will be given to partners that are able to deliver services to UASC and
other disadvantaged groups including a Best Interest Assessment (BIA), alternative
care arrangements, and case management. Coordination and advocacy on child
protection issues could be supported if relevant.
Assistance to victims of all kinds of violence, including Gender Based Violence (GBV).
Community-based protection interventions focusing on enhancing the self-protective capacities of refugees, including through information and counselling
services, referrals to services and Psychosocial Support Services (PSS) services
targeting individual and group enhanced well-being.
Particular gaps in documentation, status determination, and legal protection of individuals, especially those not covered by other donors.
Multi-Purpose Assistance:
DG ECHO considers multi-purpose assistance, preferably through Multi-Purpose Cash
Assistance (MPCA), among the most effective modalities of addressing the basic needs of
an urban protracted refugee situation emerging from increased socio-economic
vulnerabilities. In the absence of a full-fledged social protection scheme for refugees,
project proposals for basic-needs assistance preferably through MPCA will be assessed
against well-defined and properly monitored vulnerability criteria, and solid and
transparent targeting mechanisms aimed at reducing discrimination among the different
refugee groups. DG ECHO believes that there should be one nationwide approach to
refugees in Egypt, based on one targeting system, one card, and one single, unrestricted,
monthly cash transfer to cover the basic needs of severely vulnerable refugees. The
-
Year 2020
Version 02 bis – 07/08/2020
ECHO/-NF/BUD/2020/91000 15
response should include robust referral/appeal systems and linkages with complementary
actions to guarantee accountability to the affected population, equity, and transparency.
Furthermore, independent monitoring and evaluation systems, as well as a governance
structure, are required to guarantee transparency, accountability, and overall efficiency and
cost effectiveness of the response. Streamlined processes, segregation of duties, and
budget transparency must be reflected in any proposal in a detailed manner.
Education in Emergencies:
DG ECHO will support education activities that help vulnerable refugees in entering, re-
entering or being retained in formal education. This may involve non-formal education
(NFE) support to provide pathways for children to transition into formal education, or
support to children to directly enter and be retained in formal education. All education
actions should be complemented with child protection responses and strong child safe-
guarding mechanisms. Proposals should demonstrate a focus on out-of-school children and
those at risk of dropping out of school, with a clear understanding of education pathways
into accredited formal education reflected upon. DG ECHO may also consider funding
retention activities where a clear needs assessment demonstrates a high drop-out risk.
Proposals targeting areas with the highest concentration of refugees will be prioritized.
Coordination with development partners, other EU instruments, the Egyptian Ministry of
Education, and other relevant line ministries, must be specifically addressed in proposals.
In addition, proposals should align with the National Council for Childhood and
Motherhood (NCCM) principles and to globally recognise minimum standards for
Education in Emergencies (INEE) and Child Protection. DG ECHO support to education
activities in Egypt will focus on primary levels of education, with possible exceptions for
secondary school levels based on a clear needs assessment. Non-formal education
responses (such as Community Learning Centres at primary level) will be considered
solely if coordination with the Egyptian Ministry of Education and clear entry pathways
for children to pursue public education options is detailed. Actions to prepare children for,
to support, and to complement government initiatives for refugee education, such as
experimental language schools, may be considered.
Health:
Whilst refugees in Egypt are legally entitled to access public health services, several
structural causes (e.g. poor quality of services) calling for developmental investments,
limit their capacity to benefit from them. DG ECHO will consider proposals that facilitate
access to emergency health services, particularly maternal and reproductive health, for
refugees without the financial means to afford health fees, as well as for those victims of
discrimination and marginalization. Host communities may also benefit from these
interventions, as long as the most vulnerable groups or individuals are targeted. Proposals
under this sector should specifically envisage a gradual phase out and transition to longer
term instruments. Although local capacity building is paramount, DG ECHO funding
should not be used to promote stand-alone capacity building schemes. All proposed
healthcare activities should be in line with DG ECHO health policy.
WASH, Food Assistance, and Shelter are not identified as priority sectors for DG ECHO
funding in Egypt in 2020, although special consideration could be given if immediate
lifesaving needs manifest in specific locations as duly justified by partners.
Electronically signed on 11/08/2020 12:43 (UTC+02) in accordance with article 4.2 (Validity of electronic documents) of Commission Decision 2004/563
TECHNICAL ANNEXfinancial, administrative and operational information1. Contacts2. Financial infoBreakdown per Actions as per Worldwide Decision (in euros):3. Proposal Assessment3.1. Administrative info3.2. Operational requirements:3.2.1. Assessment criteria:3.2.2. Specific operational guidelines and operational assessment criteria:
2020-08-11T10:51:53+0000