Guidelines for Cash Interventions in

Somalia

An initiative of Horn Relief as the Chair of the Cash Working

Group of the Food Security and Economic Development Sectoral
Committee and the IASC Agriculture and Livelihoods Cluster for
Somalia

European Commission

i
 Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1

AN OVERVIEW OF CASH INTERVENTIONS.................................................................................... 3

Interventions for supporting markets............................................................................................... 4

Cash interventions directly to beneficiaries ..................................................................................... 4

Why should cash interventions be considered as an option? .......................................................... 6

When are cash interventions NOT appropriate? ............................................................................. 8

ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................................. 9

Needs assessment......................................................................................................................... 9

Market assessment ...................................................................................................................... 10

PLANNING AND DECISION MAKING ............................................................................................. 12

What type of cash intervention is most appropriate? ..................................................................... 12

Consider the urgency of needs ..................................................................................................... 12

Consider the timing of intervention ............................................................................................... 13

Consideration of gender and vulnerability ..................................................................................... 14

Consideration of power relations and conflict sensitivity ................................................................ 15

Combining interventions ............................................................................................................... 15

Determining the duration of intervention ....................................................................................... 16

Calculating the value of the cash transfer ..................................................................................... 16

SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF CASH INTERVENTIONS ............. 18

1. Unconditional Cash Transfers .............................................................................................. 18

2. Cash for Work (CFW)........................................................................................................... 18

3. Conditional Cash Transfers .................................................................................................. 21

4. Vouchers ............................................................................................................................. 22

5. Social Protection .................................................................................................................. 24

IMPLEMENTATION......................................................................................................................... 26

Risk Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 26

Targeting and Beneficiary Selection ............................................................................................. 28

Developing Selection Criteria ....................................................................................................... 29

Community Representation .......................................................................................................... 30

ii
 Beneficiary Registration ............................................................................................................... 30

Selecting a Cash Distribution Mechanism ..................................................................................... 31

Recruitment and Training of Staff ................................................................................................. 31

Coordination ................................................................................................................................ 32

Accountability............................................................................................................................... 32

MONITORING AND EVALUATION.................................................................................................. 35

Monitoring .................................................................................................................................... 35

Evaluation .................................................................................................................................... 37

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND FURTHER READING ................................................................................... 39

ANNEXES ....................................................................................................................................... 42

List of Annexes

Annex 1 Compilation of minimum standards for cash interventions .................................................. 42

Annex 2 Relevant SPHERE and SEEP Standards ........................................................................... 45

Annex 3 Minimum expenditure basket (food and non-food items) ..................................................... 46

Annex 4 The Principles of Humanitarian Accountability .................................................................... 47

Annex 5 Example beneficiary registration form - 1............................................................................ 48

Annex 6 Example beneficiary registration form - 2............................................................................ 49

Annex 7 Example complaints handling form ..................................................................................... 50

Annex 8 Example market monitoring form ........................................................................................ 51

Annex 9 Example Service Contract with Money Transfer Company ................................................. 53

Guidelines prepared by:

Sophia Dunn

Independent Consultant – Nutrition, Food Security and Livelihoods

[email protected]

iii
 INTRODUCTION
Cash interventions (also known as cash transfers) are a way of providing resources to a population
and/or providing a source of income. Cash interventions are increasingly being used by the
humanitarian and international development community as a means of providing items to populations
in need, and to protect, establish or re-establish livelihoods.

Cash interventions are appropriate if essential goods or services are available but the targeted
populations do not have the income to purchase them or to access services such as healthcare and
education. In-kind support such as food aid and distribution of essential items are suitable when
essential goods are not available in the market and need to be brought in from outside the project
area.

The group of interventions classified as “cash-transfer interventions” are growing in popularity as they
are found to be feasible and appropriate responses to many humanitarian crises, short term
emergencies and longer term livelihood issues. Cash interventions can assist with population needs
across sectors (food security, livelihoods, nutrition, water, shelter, education....) and can be used in
different types of programs - to meet emergency needs, prevent the onset of crisis at critical times of
the year; assist with early recovery and assist populations with development needs when the situation
stabilises. Cash interventions can be run as stand-alone programs or they can complement other
activities.

In response to the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, the humanitarian community used cash
interventions on a scale not seen before, with documented success. Today, many aid agencies
routinely consider cash interventions as an option for meeting the needs of their beneficiaries. The
increase in experience of cash programming has enabled some agencies to have documented
guidelines on the use of cash programming. Guidelines from agencies such as Oxfam GB, ICRC,
Horn Relief and ACF should be considered by agencies working in Somalia as further reading.
Although they have not been written with specific contexts in mind, they provide a more detailed
description of the many aspects of cash programming than is contained within these Guidelines for
Somalia. Further, Horn Relief provides a training program complementing the implementation manual
it has developed based on the Somali context.

In Somalia, non-governmental organisations have been implementing cash interventions since at

least 2003 and there is now considerable documentation of learning from these projects. Evidence
indicates that cash interventions can be implemented successfully in Somalia despite the complex
nature of the situation including the security risks and the threat of corruption. As a result, many
organisations working in Somalia have shown interested in learning and sharing information about
cash interventions.

These new Guidelines for Cash Interventions in Somalia have therefore been designed as a way of
harmonising existing guidelines (including those above) as well as the experiences of agencies
working in Somalia. The guidelines take into account the elements of cash and voucher programming
that are now included in international standards for humanitarian interventions such as the revised
SPHERE Minimum Standards in Disaster Response (draft 2010) and the SEEP Economic Recovery
Standards (2009).

These guidelines are intended to -

Provide a minimum standard for all cash interventions implemented in Somalia
Promote uniformity in implementing cash based responses in Somalia
Guide expectations of cash based responses in the Somali context

1
In Somalia, the lines between emergency, early recovery, development are blurred, as the country
faces regular cycles of drought and floods within a protracted conflict. As a result, these guidelines
outline the key aspects to consider when planning any type of cash intervention regardless of “the
stage of development”.

These guidelines are intended for all agencies operating in Somalia to represent a common approach
to programming for food security and livelihood activities in Somalia. The guidelines outline the
minimum acceptable standard for cash interventions and provide the justification for recommending
certain types of programming depending on the target groups and the season.

No assumptions are made in this guide about restricting the use of cash or vouchers to specific
stages of emergencies. Rather they consider the minimum assessment and planning processes
that agencies should go through when designing cash interventions. Decisions about the
appropriateness of cash interventions must be made on a case by case basis while considering the
basics of cash programming outlined in these guidelines.

These guidelines were commissioned by the Food Security and Economic Development Sectoral
Committee of the Somali Support Secretariat and by the IASC Agriculture and Livelihoods Cluster for
Somalia and funded by the European Commission.

The guidelines were developed by Horn Relief, as both the Chair of the Cash Working Group of the
Food Security and Economic Development Sectoral Committee of the Somali Support Secretariat and
the Chair of the Cash Taskforce for the Agriculture and Livelihoods Cluster.

These guidelines are endorsed by the IASC Agriculture and Livelihoods Cluster and by the Economic
Development Sectoral Committee of the Somali Support Secretariat as the minimum acceptable
standard for cash programming in Somalia.

It should be noted that these guidelines do not include any guidance on micro-finance uses of cash.

2
 AN OVERVIEW OF CASH INTERVENTIONS
Cash interventions are a relatively new option open to the humanitarian and international
development community as a way of providing resources to a population and helping vulnerable
households meet their needs. They are growing in acceptance by both donors and agencies and are
now being used to meet a wide range of objectives and in a number of different contexts - as an
emergency response, during early recovery, to prevent a crisis or to address longer term issues
related to chronic poverty. Some examples of the uses for cash interventions in different context are
highlighted in the table below.

When Why

Pre-disaster In preparation for a predictable shock or as part of a disaster risk reduction

program.

Seasonal cash payments (e.g. during the lean season or hunger gap) can
prevent use of destructive coping strategies and allow retention of assets during
usual selling off period.

Initial stages of To meet immediate, essential food, non-food and income needs and/or protect or
a disaster re-establish livelihoods and provide shelter

Recovery or To help re-establish/support livelihoods and/or provide shelter or short-term

transition period labour opportunities for the benefit of the community.

In permanent/ To contribute to poverty alleviation, shift from humanitarian programming to social

chronic crises assistance, address essential food and non-food needs and support/establish
livelihoods.

During conflict To meet immediate needs and contribute to livelihoods support or establishment.

Long term To provide ongoing support to most vulnerable households (social protection/
issues social assistance)

To provide incentive for households to access basic services such as education

and health care
Source: ICRC /IFRC Guidelines

The appropriateness of cash interventions depends on certain pre-conditions being met, perhaps the
most important of which is a functioning market, close to beneficiaries. Without the presence of a
local market containing the goods that beneficiaries need, cash interventions are not
appropriate. A rapid market assessment (outlined in the next section) provides information about the
state of the market. This information can them be weighed against the pre-conditions for cash
programming to help determine whether cash interventions are an appropriate intervention. In some
cases, support to the market will be needed before cash interventions are appropriate.

The pre-conditions for cash programming are:

A functioning market, close to beneficiaries
Availability of products at a reasonable price
Traders willing to participate (in a voucher program) and with the financial capacity to purchase
goods and the logistical capacity to transport them to the region (or easily supportable).
No excessive taxation on goods

3
 A functioning and reliable system through which payments can be made to traders (vouchers) or
beneficiaries
Security conditions are stable or appropriate mitigation measures can be employed
A reliable recipient identification system

Interventions for supporting markets

For many reasons, it is possible for markets to be disrupted and not function for a period of time. In
Somalia, this may be due to seasonal issues such as flooding or heavy rain, that blocks roads and
prevents goods being transported or it may be due to insecurity.

If the local market has been disrupted or is weak, there are interventions that may help support the
market, and improve the opportunities for cash interventions. This is done by providing support to
traders, suppliers, wholesalers or other market players.

Some examples of possible market support projects include:

Improving or repairing infrastructure, such as damaged roads or bridges, to enable the movement
of goods into the markets close to beneficiaries
Providing support to traders (grants, loans, in-kind assistance or credit) to allow them to rebuild
their stocks so that beneficiaries can access the items they need
Support financial services to allow traders, producers or micro-finance institutions restart their
business
Support transportation of goods through provision of cash for licenses or permits, vouchers for
fuel
Providing regular market information to traders and others involved in the market system so that
they are able to respond appropriately.

Cash interventions directly to beneficiaries

With the increasing use of cash interventions has come an increase in the variation in the names
given to different interventions. However, a number of basic categories of cash interventions still exist
and these are each described in the table below. Each of the categories is a way to provide direct
assistance to beneficiaries. Different cash interventions are more suitable at different stages of
emergencies and agencies should consider the context in which they are working when determining
the most appropriate type/s of cash intervention to be implemented. This decision making process is
outlined ahead.

Name What is it?

Unconditional cash Cash is provided to recipients with no condition attached. Recipients are free
transfers to spend the money as they choose.

Sometimes called When basic needs have been identified through assessments, this is often the
cash relief or most appropriate response, as it allows households to prioritise their own
unconditional cash needs.
grants
This is the most common type of transfer immediately after an emergency
because it is quick to administer.

Examples in Somalia:
Cash given to drought affected households to meet basic needs
Cash given to households who cannot participate in cash for work (CFW)
projects
Cash given to internally displaced (IDP) households to meet needs not

4
 being met by other responses

Conditional cash Cash is provided to recipients with the explicit understanding that the money is
transfers to be used for a specific purpose (e.g. rebuild homes, re-establish livelihoods).

These transfers are often given in instalments and monitored to ensure that it
is being used for the “correct” purpose before receiving additional instalments.
Usually named by
their purpose e.g. Conditional transfers should not be made when basic household‟s needs are
cash for shelter, not being met.
cash for livelihood
recovery, cash for Conditional transfers are sometimes used as a development response to
education..... encourage households to access certain services such as keeping children in
school, getting children vaccinated etc. Conditional transfers should not be
provided unless the intended service is readily available and functioning to
an acceptable standard.

Examples in Somalia:
Cash for livelihood recovery
Cash for shelter
Cash for small business

Cash for work Cash for work is a type of conditional cash transfer, where payments are made
to households or individuals on the completion of specified work.

The work projects usually involve rehabilitation or construction of community

assets.

CFW projects can be implemented when there is a large amount of available

labour and adequate micro-projects can be identified. However, the purpose of
cash for work is to ensure that beneficiaries earn enough income to meet basic
needs and/or other essential long term or short term needs.

Vouchers Vouchers can either specify a cash amount, or specific commodities or

services that the voucher can be exchanged for. Both cash and commodity
vouchers are designed to be exchanged in pre-selected shops, with specified
traders/service providers or at specifically organized fairs. This intentionally
restricts beneficiaries in their selection of traders/services.

Cash vouchers have a specific monetary value, allowing recipients some

control over their spending.

Commodity vouchers define the items or services for which the voucher can be
exchanged.

Combined vouchers (cash and commodity values) also exist.

Examples in Somalia:
Voucher for water
Voucher for animal health care
Voucher for seeds
Some agencies are providing a voucher to denote payment of CFW
activities. The vouchers are then exchanged by the beneficiaries at the
local money transfer company.

5
Cash transfers to Grants or waivers to reduce the cost of basic services.
reduce expenditure
For example, waiving user fees for healthcare for specific population groups,
grants to schools to cover education fees, etc.

These are mainly used in development settings, but a few examples exist for
emergencies.

Social protection Social protection is the sub-set of public actions – carried out by the state or
measures privately – that address risk, vulnerability and chronic poverty. They can be
divided into three categories: social insurance, social assistance and
standards.

Sometimes referred Usually done in conjunction with government bodies

to as social safety
nets, or social Social insurance: This involves individuals pooling resources by paying
transfers contributions to the state or a private provider so that, if they suffer a „shock‟ or
permanent change in their circumstances they are able to receive financial
support.

Social transfers: Non-contributory transfers to those deemed eligible by

society on the basis of their vulnerability or poverty. Examples include cash
transfers and also fee waivers for education and health care.

Examples in Somalia:
Regular cash payments made to most vulnerable households in
Somaliland & Puntland (over multiple years)

Source: Compiled from ICRC, Oxfam, ACF and Horn Relief Guidelines, and Harvey et al (2009)

More information about each type of cash intervention, and their advantages and disadvantages can
be found in the section on planning and decision making.

Why should cash interventions be considered as an option?

Increasingly, aid agencies are moving away from the paternalistic approaches to aid used in the past
where assistance was provided based on assumed needs and available goods rather than specific
needs of the population. There is now increasing understanding of different contexts and beneficiary
needs and allowing beneficiaries increased control over aid flows.

Cash interventions can be relatively quick methods of providing resources to populations in need.
When required items are available in the market, providing cash to beneficiaries allows them to
purchase the goods they need instead of being provided with goods that might be inappropriate and
later sold to earn some cash income.

Empowerment and Choice is put into beneficiary hands. Cash allows beneficiaries to purchase
dignity of their own goods rather than stand in line for handouts.
beneficiaries
Beneficiaries have control over the aid received and can quickly convert it into
the items they need. People in Somalia are used to receiving cash support
through remittances. They are used to handling cash and to making choices
about purchases and cash interventions allow people to continue to act “as
normal”.

Multiplier effects Cash interventions support the local economy often allowing communities to
recover more quickly.

6
 If purchased goods are produced locally, cash interventions not only support
the beneficiaries but also the producers.

Cash interventions can help households repay their debts and rebuild the
credit system within the community.

Flexibility of cash Households do not have exactly the same needs as each other and each
household has different priorities even when affected by the same event.

Unconditional cash interventions allow beneficiaries to make choices and

prioritize spending to meet their specific household needs. It enables a wide
range of needs to be met rather than focusing on specific items usually
provided by in-kind distributions.

Cash interventions allow households to spend on items that are not

traditionally given as in-kind support, such as medical treatments or school
fees or to pay off debt which is critical to pastoralists.

After in-kind distributions it is common for households to sell a portion of the

items to meet other needs. By providing cash, households have faster access
to the items they need and the cash retains its value. When households try
and sell food aid or non-food items that have been provided to them, they may
not receive the „real value‟ of the commodity but may be forced to sell it for a
reduced price because of the situation.

Reduced logistics Cash interventions, in particular unconditional cash grants, have a lower
requirement logistic requirement than in-kind distributions, often making them faster to
deliver, particularly during wet seasons when transportation of items becomes
difficult.

Cost effectiveness Since cash interventions tend to have little or no logistic, transport and
warehousing costs (albeit higher administrative costs), they are often most
cost-effective than in-kind distributions. Also, a higher proportion of the total
project often goes directly to the beneficiaries.

Speed of Cash distributions can often be done relatively quickly once targeting is
implementation complete.

Cash can be quickly converted into needed items by beneficiaries

Administrative requirement needs to be considered in choosing appropriate

interventions as some interventions such as vouchers or cash for work tend to
take longer to organise than unconditional cash transfers.

Gender and intra- Some evaluations of cash interventions found that the additional cash in the
household issues household reduced tensions between men and women.

Cash interventions are often targeted towards women as they are usually
responsible for the management of the household.

Security In conflict prone areas, all assistance – in-kind or cash is at risk of diversion.
Some evaluations have found cash programming to be more secure because
it spends less time in transit than in-kind assistance and it can be hidden more
easily by beneficiaries.

7
 Cash interventions that can organise the cash to be provided locally, with little
travel time (such as through the hawala in Somalia) is often the safest and
most efficient way of providing resources.

Source: Compiled from Cash guidelines by Horn Relief, ICRC, Oxfam & ACF

When are cash interventions NOT appropriate?

Cash interventions are only appropriate if the items needed by the beneficiaries are available in
the local market or if traders can bring in the needed items quickly.

Concerns such as security, misuse, corruption, diversion are not reasons NOT to implement a cash
program. Risk analysis is considered a key aspect of cash interventions and is discussed further in
these guidelines. Consideration of mitigation or avoidance measures must be done in order to ensure
that cash is delivered in an efficient and safe manner to the target beneficiaries.

Some examples of when cash interventions are NOT appropriate...............

Markets If there is damage to infrastructure or disruption to the local market is severe and
emergency relief is needed very quickly

The required goods are not available in the market and cannot be brought in
because of government restrictions, conflict or any other reason

There is high inflation or risk of high inflation in the near future

The required cash injection is so large compared to normal trade, that it is likely to
have an inflationary effect in itself

Too few traders operate, controlling the market and are likely to increase the price
of goods

Security Cash could be used or seized by elites or militia, putting staff and beneficiaries at
and risk and the situation cannot be avoided or mitigated in any way
corruption
Security risks are perceived by the beneficiaries as being too high and they prefer
in-kind assistance

Skills and The capacity within the organisation are insufficient to implement a cash transfer
capacity project within the required timescale and skills/capacity cannot be acquired from
outside

Source: Compiled from ICRC /IFRC, Oxfam and ACF Guidelines

8
 ASSESSMENT
Assessments provide a comprehensive picture of the current situation. Many organisations have their
own guidelines for conducting field assessments so assessment methodology is not detailed here.
However, when implementing a cash program, it is important to remember to not only conduct a basic
needs assessment but to also collect market information in order to understand if cash interventions
are an appropriate response.

Needs assessment
The purpose of a needs assessment is to understand the impact of the situation on the population
and what is needed to address the issue.

A needs assessment should outline the impact of the situation on:

Immediate (basic) needs: Assess the affected households‟ ability to meet their immediate
needs. Immediate needs will include food, water, the means to cook (fuel and cooking utensils),
shelter, soap, clothing, health and education services, and
debt repayment.
Ensure that assessments include the
perspective of the affected
Livelihoods: Assess the affected households‟ capacity to
community (not only the leaders).
support themselves. This will likely include loss of
income, food production (cereal, livestock), access to Ensure that community leaders are
markets, livestock water and drugs, impact on water included.
availability, terms of trade, security issues and the impact
on local structures/ organisations on which households Ensure that information is
depend. triangulated (validating diverse
opinions and not just the opinion of
Coping strategies: Assessment of the coping strategies of leaders, or one or two people).
the affected households‟ will give you an indication of the
urgency of the need and the level of crisis the household is facing. Common coping strategies
include reducing daily food intake; consuming cheaper food; reducing household expenditures on
items such as clothing, medical care, and education; and reducing the number of dependents in
the household (through migration, for example, or having household members live with other
relatives).

Distress coping strategies may include sale of productive assets, undertaking dangerous or
degrading activities such as trading sex for food or other commodities. Vulnerable groups are
more likely to employ distress coping mechanisms early as they often lack social support and
saleable assets.

At a minimum, a needs assessment should state:

What is the situation?
What is the impact of the shock on people‟s livelihoods and their ability to access sufficient food
and income?
How are people coping with the situation?
Who is most affected? How many people need assistance?
What assistance do they need? (remember that different population groups and different
livelihood groups may need different assistance)
How long will they need this assistance?
What are other agencies doing?

9
Market assessment
The purpose of a market assessment is to find out whether the items that were identified in the needs
assessment are available in the local market, at a reasonable price and of appropriate quality.

Cash interventions are an appropriate response for providing resources to people only when the
market is functioning. As a result, an assessment of the local market is considered a minimum
standard for cash interventions. The market assessment must be sufficient to determine if the pre-
conditions for cash interventions are met.

A market assessment need not be complicated but should be done at or around the same time as
the needs assessment and before designing a project. In an emergency, checking the local market
availability and prices and talking to traders if they have adequate stock to meet demand or whether
seasonal issues are impacting stock levels, is often enough to decide if cash programming is
appropriate and whether the markets will be badly impacted by an in-kind distribution or goods.

Both the revised SPHERE Standards and the SEEP Early Recovery Standards highlight the need for
both humanitarian and recovery actors to implement actions that will support and encourage recovery
of the local market. Market actors (traders, transporters, suppliers etc) are part of the affected
community and they play an important role in the local economy. Inappropriate humanitarian
responses can cause damage to market function and trade networks, making the community as a
whole, worse off. Market function and supporting the local economy should therefore always be
considered when designing projects.

At a minimum, a rapid market assessment should tell you:

Is there is a market close to the beneficiaries? Or will there be any major costs to the beneficiaries
for transporting goods back from the market?
Are the needed items** available in markets close by or can local traders bring them in?
Are there seasonal issues with the supply of the required items?
Are the needed items available in sufficient quantity to meet the demand?
Can items be purchased by beneficiaries at a reasonable price?
If you are planning on doing cash for work you also need to assess the local labour market - what
the local skilled and unskilled labour rates are and what times of year is labour most in demand
(and for what activities). This is discussed in more detail later in these guidelines.

**Depending on the results of the needs assessment, the market assessment will need to include
assessment of different items and/or different markets.
Basic needs – Check the availability and price of food items and non-food items like soap and
kerosene.
Livelihood recovery – Check the availability of goods needed to restart business, availability of
credit, and the market opportunities available for these businesses.
Shelter – Check the availability and price of key shelter materials
Ask traders about the quantity and quality of the items they can provide

When considering livelihood recovery interventions or livelihood diversification activities it is often

necessary to do a more in-depth market assessment. A more detailed assessment can tell you the
economic viability of proposed livelihood activities; provide information about the existing labour
market in the area and what type of training may be needed. Guidance on the more in-depth market
assessment is not provided here and agencies are encouraged to seek assistance on this before
embarking on livelihood diversification activities.

10
 Minimum standards for assessments

Conduct and document a needs assessment.

Conduct and document at least a rapid market assessment or ensure that you have adequate
information from secondary sources to justify the appropriateness (or not) of cash interventions.

Assessments should be shared with other agencies

Further Reading

Oxfam GB, IRC, InterAction and Practical Action Consulting. Emergency Market Mapping and
Analysis (EMMA) Toolkit. 2009.

Emergency market mapping and analysis (EMMA) is a set of tools and guidance notes. It has been
specifically designed for humanitarian staff in sudden-onset emergencies to better understand,
accommodate and make use of market-systems. EMMA provides accessible, relevant guidance to
staff who are NOT already specialists in market analysis (Albu, 2009). The EMMA toolkit is
designed to be used as soon as an emergency situation has begun to stabilise (not at the initial,
rapid assessment phase).

When to use EMMA?

o EMMA aims to encourage speedy rough-and-ready market-system analysis during the first
few weeks of an emergency situation. It is designed for use in rapid-onset emergency
situations.

Typically, EMMA is used:

o once absolute priority needs (survival) are already being addressed
o once displaced people have settled, at least temporarily
o once market actors (e.g. producers, retailers, traders) have had a chance to assess their
own situation and begin devising coping strategies

EMMA may continue to be useful for many weeks (or even months) into a crisis, if humanitarian
agencies‟ understanding of key market-systems that relate to emergency needs remains sketchy, or
to monitor changing market conditions. It may be valuable for early-recovery programming if no
other more rigorous market analysis is feasible.

Further information about EMMA can be found at

http://practicalaction.org/icts/print/emma-toolkit

11
 PLANNING AND DECISION MAKING
Whether planning a humanitarian response, early recovery or a response during stable times, the
process of planning a cash intervention is the same. That is, once the needs of the population have
been identified and a market assessment has been done, it is important to decide on the most
appropriate and feasible way to provide the items to the beneficiaries. The figure below should help
decide if it is better to provide in-kind assistance or if cash interventions might be appropriate – either
as direct support to beneficiaries and/or indirect support to markets, or both.

Source: BRCS HES (2010)

What type of cash intervention is most appropriate?

Once it has been decided that cash interventions are an appropriate response, decisions still have to
be made about which type of cash intervention will be most appropriate for the situation. There are
many types of cash interventions as described in the overview of cash interventions. Each one has
advantages and disadvantages and these should be considered when deciding which type of cash
intervention to use.

To decide on the type of response it is important to consider the following:

The type of needs identified and the results of the market assessment
The urgency of the identified needs
The season and the timing of existing livelihood activities. If the response is based on an
understanding of how people‟s livelihoods function, it is more likely to provide assistance that is
appropriate and that does not undermine people‟s efforts to help themselves
The livelihood group/s in need
The labour capacity of the vulnerable groups
How long people will need assistance in order to recover
Gender issues
The availability of micro-projects (for CFW)
The security context
Staff capacity

Consider the urgency of needs

Some types of cash interventions are easier and quicker to design and implement than others. If
beneficiaries have urgent unmet needs it is not appropriate to take time to organise the more
complicated interventions like vouchers or cash for work.

12
 When needs are urgent  provide unconditional cash transfers. Unconditional cash transfers
can be implemented relatively quickly after targeting, especially in the Somali context, where
money transfer companies (hawala) are often easily accessible to the population.

Unlike unconditional cash transfers, cash for work and voucher programs take time to plan and
organise properly. Provide unconditional cash transfers for a period (suggest one month) so that
the beneficiaries can meet their needs while the project team organises CFW, vouchers or other
cash interventions with the community.

Consider the timing of intervention

Another important consideration for planning cash interventions in Somalia is timing. Timing refers to
seasonality, ongoing livelihood activities, and upcoming events (such as the harvest, livestock
migration, religious festivals, elections etc). Project design must consider the Somali seasonal
calendar to better understand the likely impact of a cash injection.

Timing issues must also be considered to ensure appropriate choice of intervention and to prevent the
disruption of the local labour markets. It is important to remember that timing issues often vary by
livelihood group. The table below outlines some examples of timing considerations in the Somali
context.

Examples of appropriate cash interventions by livelihood group and season

Jan – March April – June July – Sept Oct-Dec

JILAAL GU XAGAA DEYR

Pastoralists This is the main time for Providing

livestock migration in unconditional
search of water and cash transfers
pasture. may prevent
sale of livestock
Consider providing at a time of low
unconditional cash livestock price.
transfers to household
members before
livestock migration

Consider CFW
activities for family
members left in the
villages (including
rehabilitation canals.
culverts, slaughter
slabs.

Vouchers for animal

water

Vouchers for animal health (throughout the year)

Agriculturalists Cash transfer during At the end of the Gu This is the main time for
this time may help season is the time of land preparation and
prevent consumption of the main harvest. planting.
a green (early) harvest.
Post-harvest cash Cash transfers that
transfers are more coincide with the
likely to allow planting season give

13
 agricultural recipients an
households to invest opportunity to
in productive assets purchase seeds and
(Mattinen & Ogden, agricultural services.
2006)
Consider providing
unconditional cash
grants to allow people
to continue with their
existing livelihood
activities

Any CFW activities at

this time should
support agricultural
activities AND not pay
more than the going
labour rate.

Fisher folk Xagaa is the off-

season for fishing
communities‟
therefore poor
households may
need support at
this time.

General If households are struggling to meet their basic needs, it is not appropriate to provide cash for
livelihood recovery unless the value includes a component to meet basic needs.

Unconditional cash transfers are an appropriate response for vulnerable groups at any time of the
year.

In some communities, it may not be appropriate to spend long hours on labour activities (CFW)
during Ramadan when participating households are not eating during the day.

Labour opportunities in Somalia are often seasonal. When these opportunities are not available,
the needs of the population may be greater as they are unable to earn additional income.

The timing of existing seasonal opportunities should be taken into consideration when starting
cash-for-work opportunities so as not to disrupt the existing labour market.

Urban/ IDPs Interventions for urban and IDP populations may not be affected by seasonality. However, if IDPs
are saying with host families, then you must consider the livelihood of the host family. Cash
payments can be provided at any time of the year but should take seasonal price fluctuations of
goods into account.

Consideration of gender and vulnerability

Throughout the project cycle, issues of gender, cultural acceptability and vulnerability should be
considered.

Gender roles, women‟s existing workload and time constraints should be understood and factored into
decision making about the types of cash interventions that might be most appropriate. In some parts
of Somalia it may not be appropriate for women to undertake public works, or it might be more
appropriate for women to work at different hours to the men. Decisions need to be made on a project-
by-project basis about how best to include both men and women into the cash intervention.

14
Some examples of ways to include women or labour-poor households into cash interventions include:
Provide unconditional cash transfer
Allow labour-poor households to nominate someone else (usually a family member) to work on
their behalf
Provide light duties for some workers (e.g. disabled)
Allow time-poor households to work less hours for the same pay
Allow women to work at different times of the day than men

In turn, other vulnerable or marginalised groups in the local community should be also considered.
This may include minority clans or sub-clans as well as those traditionally thought of as vulnerable
e.g. disabled, elderly, child-headed households.

Vulnerability impacts on peoples‟ ability to interact with the community, have access to social support,
participate in work opportunities and may also impact peoples‟ ability to access market players
(including credit). In the event of a crisis such as drought, flood or displacement, vulnerable groups
are often the first to use damaging coping mechanisms as they lack the social support and access to
assets of richer groups. These groups are therefore most at risk and must be considered throughout
the planning process.

Some specific considerations about gender and vulnerability include:

Marginalisation of some groups will impact their ability to participate in decisions about the
project.
Labour capacity of households affect their ability to participate in CFW activities
Time constraints and the existing workload of women affects their ability to participate in CFW
activities
Vulnerable households often lack the social network and access to credit that other groups in the
same community have
Long term or repeated stresses on the community weakens traditional social safety nets and puts
vulnerable households at more risk

Consideration of power relations and conflict sensitivity

As with gender and vulnerability, an issue that should always be considered when planning
interventions, particularly in the context of Somalia, is power relations and conflict sensitivity.

Power structures within families and societies create various opportunities and restrictions on an
individual‟s access and opportunities within the household, the community as a whole and within the
market. Projects must take power relations into play and actively put in place measures to mitigate
conflict.

Some examples of when power dynamics come into play include: between members of the same
household, between members of different clans, between voucher beneficiaries and traders/service
providers, between beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries as well as between leaders of the community
and other members.

Suggestions on ways to reduce conflict in programming can be found in the section on risk analysis.

Combining interventions
It is possible to use both cash and in-kind interventions, and different types of cash interventions
within the same project to meet different needs.

If some items are available and other are not, then consider providing cash for the items in the
local market, and ask local traders if they can bring in the remaining items. If local traders cannot
provide the required needs, then arrange for them to be brought in as in-kind assistance.

15
 Even when items are not immediately available in the market, it may be faster for local traders
(either with or without cash support) to bring in the items, than to go through agency procurement
processes!

Within a cash-for-work program, some households who are unable to work can be provided with
unconditional cash transfers.

Some groups with existing skills may receive cash grants for livelihood recovery while other
people receive cash for participating in a training program

Cash can be used to complement food aid to provide micro-nutrients (through fruit and
vegetables) and help households increase dietary diversity.

Cash can be provided for some items, while in-kind assistance can be provided for the items that
are needed but are not available in the local market.

Cash can be given to traders (through grants) to bring certain items to market, and cash transfers
to beneficiaries to purchase them.

Determining the duration of intervention

There is no set basis for determining the duration of cash-based interventions. However, ideally,
relief interventions should continue until the recovery process is underway. In Somalia, recovery is
often dictated by seasonal factors, such as the time of the next harvest, the time until the next Gu rains
or the how long it will take for livestock body condition to improve.

More often than not, however, the implementation period will be limited by availability of funds
for the project. Regardless, the following should be taken into consideration when estimating the
duration period of cash-based interventions:

How long will people need assistance?

What is the likely outcome for households when the project stops?
Do households have access to additional assistance other than what this project will provide?
When do you expect a recovery of the social coping mechanisms? e.g. credit revitalisation, social
sharing

Even if it is not possible to implement a cash intervention for the length of time that it is needed, it is
important to make relief gaps known. Coordination meetings and discussion with other agencies
provide forums for discussing gaps and increasing the chance of other agencies taking on additional
activities or making donors aware of the situation and requesting further funding.

Calculating the value of the cash transfer

The value of the cash transfer to be provided to beneficiaries depends on the objective of the project.
However, it should be noted that the rate of recovery of the population is directly related to the value
and the regularity of payment.

To calculate the value of the cash transfer you must consider the following:

What do you want the money to cover?

What is the price of these items in the local market?
Is the price of the items likely to increase during the length of the program? If so, it might be
appropriate to factor this into the value of the transfer
Are the same beneficiaries receiving assistance from any other program? Is so, the value of the
items received through other programs should be considered.

16
 Discuss the calculated amount with community representatives to ensure that it is fair and that it
takes into account seasonal and the specific local context.
Specific considerations for cash for work interventions and calculating payment rates can be
found in the section below.

Remember, if household basic needs are not met it is not appropriate to provide cash interventions to
meet other needs. The value of cash interventions to meet household basic needs should be at
least the amount required to purchase the minimum expenditure basket (food and non-food
items) – found in Annex 3.

It is important for agencies to find out the village level prices of food basket items in their project area
as that is the most accurate indicator of costs. Although FSNAU provides information of the cost of
the minimum expenditure basket (food and non-food items) for different areas of the country, the
markets selected for monitoring will not necessarily be representative of the local village market.

The items in the basket that is monitored by FSNAU can be found in the annexes. The items and
quantities represent the minimum needs per household (6-7 members) per month.

Summary: Key questions for determining the most appropriate type of cash transfer project

How has the population been affected? Which groups are most affected and how are they
coping?

Do households still have some form of income remaining?

If yes, consider if they can meet their needs themselves

Do household have urgent unmet immediate needs?

If yes, provide unconditional cash transfers as this is often the quickest way to provide assistance.

What other responses are going on (or planned)? Will all households‟ immediate needs be met by
other responses?

 Remember that households have a number of immediate needs outside of food

Are there community or household assets that need rehabilitation or reconstruction?

If yes, considering implementing a cash-for-work component but remember that there will likely be
some vulnerable households who will not be able to provide labour but will still need assistance

 Unconditional cash transfers will probably be the best option for that group.

How long will it take for poor household to get back to their pre-disaster income levels? Do
households have other income options during this period?

If not, households will likely need support until they are able to return to their livelihood activities or
they will need additional livelihood support once their basic needs are met.

 Consider cash grants for livelihood recovery or providing livelihood assets if they are not
available in the market.

Source: Adapted from Dunn, S (2007/8)

17
 SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF CASH
INTERVENTIONS

1. Unconditional Cash Transfers

Unconditional cash transfers are often the most appropriate intervention to address basic needs as it
allows households to prioritise their spending.

Unconditional cash transfers are also appropriate for households with limited labour or time capacity
who would otherwise be unable to participate in cash-for-work activities – e.g. women headed
households who have many home duties to take care of or elderly headed households without the
labour capacity to participate in work programs.

Advantages Disadvantages

When market is functioning, this is often the Some donors have limits on the amount of
quickest way to provide resources to the funds that can be spent on unconditional
beneficiaries transfers

Beneficiaries have full control over the way

they use the money

Lower administrative cost (than conditional

cash interventions, CFW or vouchers) to
implementing agency

Minimal involvement required from

implementing agency at point of trade

Monitoring of spending is often more

accurate because beneficiaries do not feel
pressured to give a pre-determined answer
as for conditional cash transfers.

2. Cash for Work (CFW)

There are a number of names given to work projects (including cash for work, labour intensive works,
public works, employment generation works). It is therefore important to make the distinction
between Cash for Work projects and casual labour.

Cash for work is a name for labour projects, specifically intended to assist vulnerable households
to receive a cash income. The major differences between casual labour and cash for work are
noted in the table below and should be considered when designing cash for work projects.

What is the difference between casual labour and CFW?

CASH FOR WORK PRINCIPLES CASUAL LABOUR

Primary objective is to provide cash income to Primary objective is to complete a specific work
poor households project

The most food insecure and/or poorest Anyone interested can participate
households are targeted

18
The work project will benefit a large proportion of The work element does not necessarily assist the
the community community as a whole

A gender balance should be ensured where Payment is made at market rate or higher
possible depending on the urgency of completing the work

Continues until households are able to earn at Continues only until the work is complete (may
least the cost of the minimum food (and non-food only be a few days)
items) basket

There is some consideration for physically Only those who can work get paid
vulnerable people who may not be able to
complete the required amount of work

Source: Dunn, S (2007) (adapted from Creti & Jaspars, 2006)

Some key points about cash for work projects

If household‟s basic needs are not being met, consider providing unconditional cash transfers
while planning and organising cash for work activities.

Decide on the micro-projects (work project) to be implemented together with the community.
Cash for work projects should ideally rehabilitate,
construct or maintain community assets
Examples of possible CFW micro-
projects in Somalia
Micro-projects should be long enough to allow
households to earn sufficient income to meet their
Water source construction or
basic needs. It may be necessary to have multiple
rehabilitation
projects within the same area in order for participating
households to work for sufficient duration. Canal clearing/ de-silting

Households should be given the opportunity to earn at Road rehabilitation (particularly

least an amount to meet the minimum expenditure those used for transport routes)
basket (food and non-food items). Be aware that self-
targeting approaches by setting the wage rate at a low Reforestation activities
level (so that only the poorest households will want to
participate) can prevent households from earning Rehabilitation of schools, health
sufficient income to meet their needs. centres or market places

Consider the vulnerability of participating households Construction of community

when deciding how often to make payment. If the latrines
project is going on for more than a couple of weeks it is not appropriate to wait and make
payment only on completion of work.

Coordinate with other agencies doing similar projects in the same area to ensure that there is no
duplication of efforts and that payment rates are harmonised.

Consider seasonal and timing issues with the community to determine if CFW is the most
appropriate cash intervention. Remember that there is a timing opportunity to prevent debts and
increase productivity of next season

Ensure you have the technical capacity available to ensure good quality work on the micro-
project. Otherwise consider a different type of cash intervention. Some local authorities in
Somalia can provide technical guidance on such activities as road reconstruction and berkad
rehabilitation however it is preferential to have technical support within the implementing agency.

19
A minimum age of participation should be set and children should not be allowed to participate.

Provide the necessary tools and safety equipment for the workers. Water and transportation for
workers may also be needed.

All cash for work project must consider how to include labour-poor and time-poor households
who meet the vulnerability criteria. Some examples of ways to include these groups include:
o Provide unconditional cash transfer
o Allow labour poor households to nominate someone else (usually a family member) to
work on their behalf
o Provide light duties
o Allow time-poor households to work less hours for the same pay
o Allow women to work at different times of the day than men

Advantages Disadvantages

Enables construction or rehabilitation of Labour-poor, time-poor groups cannot

community assets that will contribute to the participate unless provided with lighter duties,
recovery of the community as a whole. shorter working hours, or unconditional cash
transfers
Provide a sense of community ownership of
project when people work together to achieve In some areas women are not allowed to
a common goal participate in public works.

Payment lower than local labour market Many community projects require technical
makes targeting easy advice that may not be available locally or
within the organisation

Can disrupt the local labour market if not

planned carefully

Can interfere with local livelihood activities if

implemented at the wrong time

How to work out CFW payment rates

Work out fair amount of work per person per day (e.g. 1m of road work, 5m 2 of bush clearing....)

Skilled labour rates should be paid to supervisors. Supervisors need to ensure that participating
households do the set amount of work, keep a register of participating households each day to
enable correct payment.

Cash for work projects can then be paid according to the number of days worked per household
or payment on completion of an amount of work per day.

Decide how to include women in the project (e.g. allow them to work shorter daily hours for the
2
same rate of pay, allow them to do lighter duties – 0.5m of road work, 2m of bush clearing....)

Decide how to include other vulnerable groups (e.g. some people are in urgent need of cash
income but unable to do manual work) – consider paying unconditional cash transfers at the same
payment rate, or allowing very light duties such as making tea, minding the children, etc

Labourers should earn at least enough money to meet their basic needs or basic daily living
expenses. Ideally, project beneficiaries should be able to make enough money also to protect or
recover their livelihoods.

20
Please note that the following is an example only and is designed to show the process that agencies
might go through when determining CFW payment rates.

Steps Example

1. Find out the local skilled and unskilled labour e.g. Skilled labour rate = US$4 per day
rate for the local area (from local authorities,
and from the community) e.g. Unskilled labour rate = US $3 per day

2. Find out what other agencies working in the Another agency, Agency X is implementing CFW in
same area are paying for CFW projects the same project area and paying $2.75 per day for
unskilled labour and $3.50 for supervisors
3. Find out if there are existing livelihood activities
that must be undertaken at the time that you are No other casual labour opportunities are available
planning CFW in the area at this time.

4. Set CFW payment rate just under or equal to After discussion with Agency X and the community
unskilled labour rate (especially when other it is decided that all CFW projects should pay the
local labour activities are needed) as per same rate, just below the local labour rate. i.e.
discussion with household $2.75 per day for unskilled labour and $3.50 for
supervisors.
5. Minimum rate of payment should enable
households to earn an amount to cover the cost However, in the project area, the cost of the
of the minimum food and non-food basket each minimum food and non-food basket is US$80 per
month (Annex 3). month.

This means that unskilled labourers need to work

31 days per month (not possible!) to meet even
their most basic needs.

After further discussion with Agency X it is decided

that both agencies will increase the payment rate to
the local labour rate. i.e. $3 per day for unskilled
labour and $4 for supervisors.

This means that by working 26 days per month

(more realistic!), households will meet their needs.

NB. The minimum amount paid per day for CFW projects should enable households to cover the cost
of the basic food and non-food basket each month.

The maximum amount paid per day for CFW project should be the local labour rate so as not to
distort the local labour market.

3. Conditional Cash Transfers

When deciding to implement conditional cash transfers be aware that if basic needs are not met,
households are likely to spend at least a portion of the grant to meet basic needs. Either factor this
into the value of the cash transfer, or consider providing unconditional cash transfers to meet basic
needs before providing conditional transfers.

Conditional cash transfers (with the exception of cash for work) are usually provided as an early
recovery response once basic needs are met, or as a development response to encourage use of
basic services. Providing conditional cash transfers to ensure access to basic services should only be
done if the services are available in the local area and are of sufficient quality.

21
 Advantages Disadvantages

Can help to directly ensure that objective of Monitoring of beneficiary spending may not be
the organisation is met accurate

Must ensure that the services are available to

the target population and are of appropriate
quality.

4. Vouchers
Vouchers can be used as a humanitarian response, for early recovery, rehabilitation or to address
longer term issues depending on the objective of the project.

Vouchers are designed to be exchanged to purchase commodities from certified traders, either during
fairs, at specific distribution outlets, in markets, or in special relief shops. The traders then reclaim the
vouchers for cash at a bank, a money transfer service or directly from the implementing agency.

Voucher programmes can be used to encourage traders to enter the affected area, by providing them
with a guaranteed market. They can also be given to ensure access to essential services including
health services, education or milling/grinding of food aid, or access to productive assets such as
animal health care or seeds. When using a voucher approach, consider using as many traders or
service providers as possible. This will allow beneficiaries to retain some choice in the exchange of
their voucher. This will also help prevent monopolies and help minimise market distortion.

Vouchers can have a cash value or stipulate specific commodities or services to be purchased. It is
also possible to combine cash and commodities onto the same voucher.

Vouchers and fairs

Fairs are usually organised when people are not easily able to obtain a specific commodity (seed,
livestock, fishing tools, etc.), which is nevertheless available in sufficient quantities and quality within a
reasonable distance of the affected area (Oxfam, 2006). Local traders are asked to bring their goods
to a specific place at a designated time and beneficiaries attend and purchase the goods using the
vouchers.

Fairs have many advantages, including:

• The recipients can select from the commodities on display, and choose what best suits their needs.
• The system ensures a wide range of commodities available for „sale‟ by local traders/service
providers, allowing choice to the beneficiaries.
• The project is usually not responsible for managing the transport of the commodities (although in
some cases, if travel costs are high, it may be necessary to subsidise the expenses of vulnerable
households and producers).
• They provide opportunities to exchange knowledge among buyers, producers, and traders.
• They mirror the „normal‟ market trading system, ensuring a degree of dignity for beneficiaries while
strengthening trading opportunities and links.
• Traders and local producers have access to cash (after exchange of the voucher with organising
agency), which boosts their businesses and their household economy.

It should be noted however, that despite the above advantages, voucher fairs take considering time,
human resources and administrative work that cash grants (ACF, 2007) and they restrict the choice of
beneficiaries. This should be considered before deciding to implement a voucher approach.

The value of the vouchers depends on the objectives of the project, as well as the amounts and unit
prices of the commodities that will be exchanged. Voucher-fair interventions usually aim to restore

22
production and trade, or to re-establish productive assets. The value of the voucher often depends on
the level of production and assets that prevailed before the disaster, and the extent to which
productive assets have been affected or lost (Oxfam, 2006). Fairs are commonly used when
beneficiaries have prioritised similar livelihood needs such as seeds, agricultural inputs, and
veterinary drugs/equipment.

Vouchers and shops/services

A voucher intervention can be implemented through local shops or with local service providers. The
shop/service provider system may utilise either cash vouchers or commodities vouchers. The
beneficiaries come to the shop or service provider and collect goods upon presentation of their
vouchers. The vouchers can allow beneficiaries to decide what to buy from a range of specific goods,
or any goods up to a certain value, or they may be tied to specific commodities.

The main reasons for adopting a vouchers and shop/service provider system are:
• To enable local shops/service providers to be involved in the recovery of the community.
• To provide a cash boost to small shops and local service providers rather than going through a
bank.
• To minimise the necessary logistical support or providing the required goods in-kind

Voucher value = price of the commodity unit x amount of commodity needed

E.g. 1 Price of maize seed = $20/kilo

Average HH needs 5 kg of seed  Value of seed voucher = $20 x 5kg = $100

E.g.2 Price of livestock vaccination = $1/animal

Pastoralists have an average of 30 animals  Value of voucher = $1 x 30 animals = $30

Advantages Disadvantages

Commodity vouchers ensure beneficiaries Removes some level of control from

spend on specific items beneficiaries (either the commodities they
can buy or the traders or services they can
Involves local market players such as traders access)
and helps the wider community recover as
well as providing beneficiaries with needed Higher administrative requirements than
items. unconditional cash transfers.

Voucher exchange is easy to monitor Relatively long organisation time compared

to other cash interventions.
Commodity vouchers are less vulnerable to
inflation (or deflation) in market prices Requires relationships with traders/service
providers to be established

Risks of forgery (non-beneficiaries copying

vouchers to access the services or goods)

The agency must obtain the technical

knowledge to ensure quality of the products
received by beneficiaries (i.e. vouchers for
seeds, restocking, animal drugs, etc.)

23
5. Social Protection
Social protection programs can include a number of components, including social insurance and
social assistance. Social assistance can involve providing regular unconditional transfers to the most
vulnerable groups in the community gives time for traditional social transfer systems to rebuild.

Cash based safety nets are present in many developed countries today, providing support to
vulnerable groups. Cash based safety nets are currently being implemented in other countries in the
region including Kenya, Ethiopia and Zambia.

Social protection is a long term intervention used during recovery and development in stable contexts.

Advantages Disadvantages

Provides longer term assistance to most Requires long term commitment from political
vulnerable households in the community groups and donors and an appropriate
implementation capacity (skills and
Allows traditional support systems to recover infrastructures)
from repeated crises

Predictable payment allows households to

plan and spend appropriately

Minimum standards for planning cash interventions

Ensure that you have considered how urgent the beneficiary needs are – if needs are very urgent,
it is not appropriate to implement a complicated intervention that needs time to design.

Ensure that you have considered seasonal issues and the appropriateness of the timing of the
intervention.

Ensure that you have considered how to include the most vulnerable groups in the project.

Ensure that you have made adequate provision for the inclusion of women into the project.

Ensure that the value of the transfer is appropriate, based on the identified needs of the
beneficiaries and the prices of items in the local market (or the local labour rate for a CFW
project). If you are targeting basic needs make sure you consider the cost of the minimum
basket.

Ensure that you have appropriate project duration and have decided on the frequency of payment
in consultation with the beneficiaries.

Ensure that technical capacity is provided if doing cash for work to guarantee the quality of micro-
projects.

24
 Further reading

Guidelines on cash interventions by the following agencies provide more guidance on planning and
decision making for appropriate interventions.

ACF (2007) Implementing cash-based interventions: A guide for aid workers. ACF – International
Network, New York.

Creti, P & Jaspars, S (Eds) (2006) Cash-transfer programming in emergencies. Oxfam GB.
Oxfam Publishing. Oxford

Gentilini, U. (2007). Cash and food transfers: a primer. Social Protection and Livelihoods Service,
World Food Programme, Rome.

Horn Relief (2010) A practical guide for cash-based responses in emergencies. Horn Relief,
Nairobi.

ICRC/ IFRC (2007) Guidelines for cash transfer programming. International Committee of the Red
Cross (ICRC) and the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
(IFRC), Geneva.

Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (2007) Cash Workbook: A practice user‟s guide
for the preparation and implementation of cash projects. SDC, Geneva

25
 IMPLEMENTATION
The breadth and variation of cash interventions currently being implemented in Somalia make the
writing of minimum guidelines of implementation difficult. Many agencies have their own guidelines
and operating procedures that influence their method of work. However, there are some key aspects
of project implementation in Somalia that are common to all types of cash interventions and these are
highlighted in the following section. These include risk analysis, targeting, registration, selection of the
cash distribution mechanism, recruiting and training staff, coordination and accountability.

Risk Analysis
An integral part of project design, especially in the complex environment of Somalia, is risk analysis.
Good programming, particularly in South/Central is about reducing risks to both beneficiaries and
staff. As a result, risk analysis and mitigation should be considered throughout the project cycle.

Appropriate planning and decision making should consider the risks associated with each decision
and plans should be put in place either to mitigate or avoid each identified risk. The table below
provides a general overview of how transparencies, planning, clear targeting, ongoing participation of
the community and appropriate decision making can reduce risks to programming.

PROBLEM SUGGESTIONS

How to reduce the Choose an appropriate cash transfer mechanism (eg. using hawala instead of
security risk to direct distribution by project staff).
staff
Ensure that targeting is done in a transparent and participatory way.

Recruit skilled staff and/or provide training to staff about project implementation.

Have a written agreement with money transfer companies specifying the

responsibilities of both the organisation and the transfer company. Money
transfer companies usually assume full liability for loss or stolen monies and
take responsibility for the transport of the cash to the beneficiaries.

Cooperate with local authorities and keep them informed of project activities

Develop a good working relationship with other agencies working in the same
area.

All agencies should develop and strictly follow a set of security guidelines for
working in the field.

A clearly explained method of complaint should be in place to allow complaint

without violence and protect staff.

How to reduce the Select an appropriate type of cash intervention for the security of the area. Do
security risk to not put beneficiaries in more danger than the existing context. Talk with the
beneficiaries community when deciding on the type of intervention.

A transparency and clear targeting method will reduce the risks to beneficiaries
as the community will be clear about why specific groups are being targeting
while others are not.

Where possible, give beneficiaries some flexibility of when to collect their cash
(not everyone collecting money at a specific time or day).

26
 Consider specific security risks to women and seek community opinion on how
best to mitigate or avoid the risks.

Seek appropriate technical advice for the construction and rehabilitation of

community assets to avoid injury during CFW activities.

Ways to reduce Be open with the community about the project.

corruption
Work together with community leaders.

Use clearly verifiable targeting criteria and verify beneficiary lists.

Ensure that the beneficiaries are clear about their entitlements.

Conduct post-distribution monitoring and ask beneficiaries if they received the

correct amount of money.

Ensure that beneficiaries are correctly identified during the payment process.

Ensure that there is a clear mechanism for community feedback. This will help
the project team identify problems during the project.

Clear financial procedures and documentation ensuring that money can be

traced throughout the project

How to reduce Community mobilisation and awareness raising on the purpose of the project
risk of conflict and groups to be targeted. Participation of the community and community
leaders throughout the project cycle.

Community based targeting – involvement of the community using a

transparent process will help reduce tensions between beneficiaries and non-
beneficiaries.

Ensure that payments are made on time. Delays in payment can increase
vulnerability of targeted households and cause tension within the community.
Payment schedules must be shared with both the community and with the
money transfer companies.

Clear withdrawal or transition strategy will inform the community about the
project and help limit expectations.

How to monitor If using a voucher approach, ensure that as many traders as possible are
for signs of participating. This helps ensure a competitive market.
inflation and
reduce the risk of Monitor prices of food and non-food items in neighbouring markets to check that
inflation your project area is not unfairly increasing prices.

Check exchange rates on a regular basis to ensure that cash retains its value.

27
Targeting and Beneficiary Selection
The purpose of targeting is to ensure that programs benefit the intended population or groups within
the population.

Targeting design is concerned with who is to be reached and

The Horn Relief Guide outlines in
why. Targeting for cash interventions, like in-kind and other
detail their method of targeting –
interventions is often a difficult and time consuming process
Inclusive Community Based
that must be undertaken with transparency and participation
Targeting (ICBT). It explains how to
from communities. Cash interventions are often seen as more
ensure community representation,
difficult to target because “everyone wants cash”. However,
working with village relief
evidence shows that possibly because of the fear among
committees and determining
agencies related to cash, in general, cash programs have been
selection criteria.
well targeted and carefully considered, and targeting has been
no more difficult than for in-kind assistance. It is recommended that agencies
new to working in Somalia read
Remember that like other types of assistance there are some
these guidelines and provide training
instances where a whole community, or whole population
to all project staff on cash
group are in need of assistance. This may include sudden
interventions before starting
onset emergencies where all households in a given community
implementation of programs.
have suffered similar losses. Universal (blanket) provision of
cash grants may well be an appropriate response. A universal It is possible to request Horn Relief
cash grant is as valid as a general food distribution to to conduct the training (contact
populations who cannot meet their needs (ACF, 2009). details in Bibliography and Further
Reading).
When resources are limited or when only certain groups within
the population need assistance, community based targeting is
seen by many agencies as the most appropriate way to identify beneficiaries in Somalia. There are
many documents written on the methodology of community based targeting so this process is not
outlined here. However, the minimum acceptable standard for targeting processes is outlined below.

At a minimum, targeting procedures should include the following:

The community should be aware of the project objectives
The targeting approach should be clear to community and to agency staff
Community participation: including open public meetings, meetings with trusted community
members, as well as community leaders
Participation from local authorities/elders must be actively sought
Agencies should actively seek participation from minority and vulnerable groups
Agencies should work together with a representative community committee or group of trusted
individuals for beneficiary targeting, information sharing, feedback and complaints
The role of the agency, community and beneficiary representative committees should be clearly
defined and clarified
Meetings and information sharing should be transparent and open
Public meetings should be held with whole community to explain the project
Selection criteria for targeting should be developed with the community
Community representatives should prepare beneficiary lists based on selection criteria.
Verification of beneficiary lists should be done by project staff – including checking of inclusion of
vulnerable groups and ensuring beneficiaries meet selection criteria
Accountability mechanisms should be in place to collect feedback information from the community
(described ahead)

Source: Compiled from Horn Relief & ICRC/IFRC Guidelines

28
Developing Selection Criteria
Targeting criteria (selection criteria) should be developed together with the beneficiary community and
will vary depending on the local context and the objective of the project.

Selection criteria are usually based on indicators of economic, social, political, physiological and
physical vulnerability or on a combination of these vulnerabilities. Both exclusion and inclusion criteria
can be used e.g. excluding households who own more than a certain number of goats or water tanks
or including households who earn less than a certain amount per month.

Some examples of selection criteria are listed below.

Context-specific criteria
o Households that have lost more than 50% of their crop or livestock
o Households who have lost their home
o Households with debts of more than a defined amount (or as a proportion of their household
income)
o Households with no family support/ access to remittances
o Households with no access to credit

Social welfare criteria

o Households with members who are chronically ill
o Households with disabled members
o Elderly-headed households
o Child-headed households
o Female-headed households
o Households with more than 8 members and only one member with income capacity
o Households with a monthly income of less than a defined amount

Specific vulnerable groups

o IDPs
o Refugees
o Host families
o Pastoralist communities

Specific examples of selection criteria by livelihood group

Pastoralists Agriculturalists Urban

Households with no livestock Households with no Households with no

land permanent home
Households with no camels
and no cattle and/or small Land size Households hosting IDPs
number of shoats
Access to irrigation Households that are displaced

At a minimum, agencies should consider the following when developing selection criteria:
Selection criteria should be developed together with the community
Clear criteria that can be easily verified. They must be easily understood, measureable and easily
verified (e.g. widowhood, number of children, number of livestock)

29
Community Representation
Community participation and mobilisation during the course of project implementation is a key aspect
to ensuring success.

The community as a whole should be informed about the objective of the project and the processes
that will be followed. In addition, there are certain aspects of programming, including targeting,
registration and feedback procedures where the community play a key role. As a result, it is critical to
ensure that the community members, whose opinions are sought at any stage, are representative of
the community.

Agencies often have their own procedures in place about working with communities, including setting
up committees specifically for the project, working with existing committees or having discussions with
community leaders.

Regardless of the methods used agencies should consider the following:

Be aware of the possible biases of informants
Triangulate information received from community members
Actively seek the opinions of both men and women
Actively seek the opinions of minority groups (e.g. minority clans, IDPs)
Actively seek the opinions of vulnerable groups (e.g. widows, disabled, elderly)

Beneficiary Registration
Registration is a key element of any distribution. A well carried out registration determines a trouble
free and smooth distribution. Registration is a systematic method of collecting and recording
information about people. It helps you understand the way a community is organised and in
distribution, it is used to identify those people who are eligible to be included as recipient beneficiaries
in a project as per agreed selection criteria.

The beneficiaries of a distribution must understand why the registration is necessary. If they do, then
they will feel more committed to its success and will be able to play an active role in making that
happen.

Accurate registration information is important because it can be used to:

Make detailed plans for the distribution
Identify those people who are particularly vulnerable
As a basis for resolving problems and claims during distribution
Proof of record for recipients of relief

The registration system must be able to give you all the information to plan and carry out an accurate,
smooth and trouble free distribution. For example, you may want to know the total population, the total
numbers of households, the numbers of boys and girls under five years of age, the number of people
with disability, the number of female headed households and so on. A simple counter book, with
columns ruled in it, is sufficient to record the details of each household. An example of a registration
format can be found in the annexes.

When registration is completed, there is still need to verify those on the list to confirm compliance with
agreed selection criteria. Ideally, this should be done in public meetings where names on the register
are called out and confirmed in public by the community. In this meeting, complaints can also be
voiced and addressed. After the meeting/s registration lists should be updated and validated as final
list of eligible recipients. Recipients can then sign or leave their thumb print on the registration lists as
proof of receipt of the cash payments.

Two examples of beneficiary registration forms used by agencies in Somalia can be found in the
annexes.

30
Selecting a Cash Distribution Mechanism
Globally, agencies implementing cash programming have a number of cash distribution mechanisms
open to them including direct distribution (hand–to-hand distribution), bank accounts, smart cards,
post office transfers and even payment through the mobile phone network. In most parts of Somalia
however, these mechanisms are unavailable. The main distribution methods used by agencies in
Somalia are direct distribution and using money transfer companies (hawala).

Experience has found that the money transfer companies are a secure and reliable way to deliver
money to the field. This is especially important for agencies working in Somalia through remote
implementation. By working with a money transfer company, the risks of carrying cash into the field is
passed to the money handlers as they are used to working in the Somalia context. Hawala companies
can be found throughout South/Central Somalia as well
as in the northern areas of Puntland and Somaliland. When choosing a money transfer
company you should consider:
The money handlers will need to be paid a commission
for their work. However in many cases the commission Network coverage
enables companies to travel directly to the target Professionalism
villages and camps to reduce the travel times for the Community opinion/trust
beneficiaries. Administrative capacity
Financial capacity
An example of a Memorandum of Understanding Management capacity
between an agency and a money transfer company can
Source: Horn Relief, Implementation Manual (2010)
be found in the annexes.
net
At a minimum, agencies should:

Assess the possibility of working with a local hawala company (or using another third party such
as a local trader or local businessman with financial capacity) rather than making direct payments.
Have a written agreement or Memorandum of Understanding with the money transfer company
that specifies the responsibilities of both the agency and the money transfer company for the
implementation of the project.

Recruitment and Training of Staff

Cash programming is a skill and like other sectors, it is important that staff either has experience, or
receive comprehensive training on cash interventions.

Each agency has their own guidelines on human resources. However, a number of key staff are
needed in cash interventions and these positions should be considered.

At least one team member with cash intervention experience is an advantage

When implementing CFW projects, ensure there is expertise in place to ensure that the
rehabilitation or construction work is technically sound and adequately implemented.
Staff should receive training on cash interventions, the project itself and the methods for
implementation
Field staff should have community mobilisation skills as it is important that there is good
participation from the community, good targeting and accountability to beneficiaries at all stages
of the project.
A number of field monitors will be needed to ensure that post-distribution monitoring is carried out.
Cash interventions have a high administrative burden, so adequate support staff should be in
place.

31
Coordination
As with other types of intervention it is important to coordinate activities both at the field level and at
regional levels to avoid duplication and increase the impact for the beneficiaries.

In Nairobi, a number of coordination bodies exist including:

o Cash Working Group of the Food Security and Economic Development Sectoral Committee
(chaired by Horn Relief and for which in the sectoral committee there are a number of other
working groups: food aid, livestock & agriculture)
o IASC Clusters (including Agriculture and Livelihoods Cluster (chaired by UNFAO)

Any agency working in Somalia is welcome to attend these meetings.

At regional and district levels within Somalia it is recommended that agencies organise or attend
coordination meetings for agencies and local authorities.

Coordination meetings provide a forum for sharing of information such as assessments,

methodologies or evaluation reports and for making relief and recovery gaps known. This allows for a
greater voice to the donor community.

Accountability
Accountability is the means by which power is used responsibly. Humanitarian accountability involves
taking account of, and accounting to, disaster survivors (HAP-I, 2007).

Aid agencies exercise significant power in humanitarian crisis through their control over essential
goods and services, such as food, medical aid and shelter. However, until recently, the "helping
power" of emergency relief agencies has been fairly unregulated as few organizations formalized
procedures to allow disaster survivors to participate in decisions about services or complain about
poor practices (HAP-I, 2007).

To address the issue of the lack of accountability in aid, a consortium of UN and NGO agencies
formed the Humanitarian Accountability Partnership – International (HAP-I) in 2003. The Principles of
Accountability developed by HAP-I are the core elements of good practice in accountability in
humanitarian situations. Further, HAP-I produced a set of benchmarks and indicators for
accountability and quality management in humanitarian work (The HAP Standard 2007) and these
should be considered by all agencies working in humanitarian responses.

At the heart of the accountability standards are the Principles of Humanitarian Action and the premise
that beneficiary communities should be included throughout the project cycle – in decision making,
discussions, feedback processes and information sharing. This is expected even in an emergency
context.

Principles for Humanitarian Action

Primary principles
• Humanity: upholding the right of all persons to receive and give assistance.
• Impartiality: providing humanitarian assistance in proportion to need and with respect to urgency,
without discrimination based upon gender, age, race, impairment, ethnicity and nationality or by
political, religious, cultural or organisational affiliation.

Secondary principles
• Informed Consent: ensuring that the intended beneficiaries, or their representatives, understand
and agree with the proposed humanitarian action and its implications.

32
• Duty of care: ensuring that humanitarian assistance meets or exceeds recognised minimum
standards pertaining to the wellbeing of the intended beneficiaries.
• Witness: reporting on policies or practices that affect the wellbeing of disaster survivors.

Tertiary principles
• Transparency: ensuring that all relevant information is communicated to intended beneficiaries or
their representatives, and other specified parties.
• Independence: acting under the authority of the governing body of the agency and in pursuit of the
agency‟s mandate.
• Neutrality: refraining from giving material or political support to parties to an armed conflict.
• Complementarity: operating as a responsible member of the humanitarian assistance community.

The standards then go on to provide agencies with performance benchmarks, indicators and means
of verification on the areas listed below. Some of the benchmarks highlight areas already mentioned
in these guidelines. Examples of benchmarks are highlighted below but it is recommended that
agencies read the full list of benchmarks to ensure quality programming.

The HAP Standard 2007 Benchmarks

Transparency The agency shall make the following information publicly available to
intended beneficiaries, disaster-affected communities, agency staff and
other specified stakeholders: (a) organisational background; (b)
humanitarian accountability framework; (c) humanitarian plan; (d)
progress reports; and (e) complaints handling procedures

Beneficiary participation The agency shall enable beneficiaries and their representatives to
participate in programme decisions and seek their informed consent

Staff competencies The agency shall determine the competencies, attitudes and
development needs of staff required to implement its humanitarian
quality management system

Complaints handling The agency shall establish and implement complaints-handling

procedures that are effective, accessible and safe for intended
beneficiaries, disaster-affected communities, agency staff, humanitarian
partners and other specified bodies

An example of a form for complaints handling can be found in the annexes.

Financial accountability is another key aspect that should be considered in all interventions. Financial
accountability means that you can account for how the money for the program has been spent. For all
interventions (cash or otherwise) it is important to keep sufficient documentation to enable a clear
understanding of how monies have been spent (e.g. how much went directly to beneficiaries). This
provides valuable information to the agency about cost-effectiveness and efficiency.

At a minimum, agencies are expected to include the following accountability procedures:

Participation of beneficiary communities throughout project cycle
Provide clear information to communities about their entitlements and the duration of intervention
A procedure must be in place for discussion with the community if implementation problems arise
A clear feedback mechanism must be in place to receive complaints and suggestions from the
community (beneficiaries, non-beneficiaries or other interested parties)
Clear record keeping of the finances for the project

33
 Minimum standards for implementing cash interventions

Ensure that you have designed the program fully considering risk analysis. Good programming
can assist with mitigating and avoiding risks to both beneficiaries and staff.

Ensure that the project community is involved in all stages of the project cycle.

Provide training to staff on cash programming and specific project implementation processes.

Hold a public meeting to discuss the objectives of the project, beneficiary selection criteria,
entitlements and any other aspect of the project.

Use clear, easily verifiable selection criteria.

Work through a community structure (such as a committee or existing structure) to produce a

beneficiary list.

Agency staff or local partners should verify a random selection of the beneficiary list to ensure
good targeting.

Consider using a local money transfer company rather than directly distributing cash.

Accountability mechanisms – feedback mechanisms and other aspects of accountability should

be considered throughout project cycle.

Put measures in place for financial accountability.

Coordinate activities with other agencies working in the same location.

Further Reading

Slater, R & Farringdon, J (2009) Cash transfers: targeting. Project Briefing No. 27, November
2009. Overseas Development Institute

Horn Relief (2010) A Practical Guide for Implementing Cash Based Responses. Horn Relief,
Nairobi

Horn Relief is an NGO that has been working in Somalia since 1991. They have recently updated a
previously published manual - a Practical Guide to Cash-Based Responses in Emergencies. The
Horn Relief guide outlines in detail Somalia specific implementation guidelines including some that
are referenced here. It is recommended that agencies working on cash programs in Somalia read the
Horn Relief Guide in order to better understand the specific working environment and how to
implement an appropriate cash program in Somalia. Their manual also contains detailed information
on their method of targeting (Inclusive Community Based Targeting) that might be useful to other
agencies. Further, Horn Relief manual is supplemented by a short training course based on the
implementation manual and a training guide that the organization has used for its own staff and other
international and local NGOs. The training course is suited for Project Managers and field staff of a
cash program and agencies can request the training by contacting Horn Relief directly at
[email protected]

HAP-I (2007) HAP 2007 Standard in humanitarian accountability and quality management.
Humanitarian Accountability Partnership –International. http://www.hapinternational.org

34
 MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Monitoring
The purpose of monitoring is to check the process of implementation (including the resource inputs
and activities being implemented) and the resulting products, and determine whether any changes are
needed to the project design.

Monitoring is a continuous process and should be done throughout project implementation.

To know if the project has met the objective, ideally all projects should aim to include:
A baseline survey to understand the situation before implementation of the project
Regular monitoring of the context so that changes to the project can be made if necessary
Regular post-distribution monitoring to ensure that beneficiaries received the correct amount of
money and how the beneficiaries utilized the cash
Regular, documented market price monitoring to check that prices have not increased
Evidence provided in a final report of the impact of the project (measured as a change from the
baseline)
A final evaluation (either internal or external)

In practice however, especially in an emergency context, very few baseline studies are carried out.
Recovery and development programs that tend to be implemented for a longer period should aim to
include each of the above.

Ongoing monitoring of the context is important so adjustments can be made to the project as
necessary. Regularly talking to traders about the availability of goods, monitoring the price of key
goods in the local markets and monitoring exchange rates in the project area will give you a good idea
about whether the cash being provided is retaining its intended value.

Mechanisms for feedback from the community might also provide useful monitoring information such
as the success (or not) of targeting, issues with the money transfer company, security issues or the
appropriateness of the specific cash intervention.

At a minimum, all agencies should be able to provide information to other agencies on the following:

Number of people receiving cash

How much money (or vouchers) is being distributed to each household
What is the situation in the local area and why is cash being provided

Post-distribution monitoring (PDM) should be done after each distribution of cash to beneficiaries.
The purpose of PDM is real-time evaluation and guidance for the project. PDM data should be
comparable from month to month so that changes in the project can easily been found. The PDM
data can also be used to understand when beneficiaries are ready to change to recovery interventions
or development interventions depending on how they are spending the money.

e.g. if beneficiaries are regularly spending a large portion of the cash transfer on food and very
little on livelihood activities, they are still struggling to meet basic needs. This can tell you that
you need to increase the value of the cash transfer or continue for a longer period.

Market price monitoring: It is often difficult to predict what will happen to market prices, particularly
after a major disaster where large-scale recovery is unpredictable and complex. This means that
prices need to be continually monitored even if the risks of price changes (particularly price increases)
are initially thought to be small. Somalia is dependent on imported items and the country is therefore
subject to price changes depending on the world market. Market price changes affect the ability of

35
the beneficiaries to purchase the desired goods therefore regular market price monitoring is a
minimum requirement for cash interventions. An example of a market monitoring form can be
found in Annex 8.

If prices in the local market are changing considerably, try and find out why. The Food Security and
Nutrition Analysis Unit (FSNAU) regularly monitor a number of markets throughout Somalia and their
staff will be able to help you better understand the market situation.

Monitoring indicators depend on the project objective however there are a number of areas that all
cash intervention should be monitoring.

At a minimum, all cash interventions should monitor the following:

What are people spending the cash/voucher on?

How accessible are the markets?
Where are people buying key goods?
What is happening to prices?
Did people receive the right amount of cash?
Were beneficiaries able to spend the money/voucher safely?
Source: Adams & Harvey (2006) Issue Paper 6

If implementing CFW activities, monitoring should also include the quality of the micro-project

When measuring the impact of the cash intervention it is important to consider that cash interventions
often have a number of unintended impacts. Talk to traders, beneficiaries, non-beneficiaries and any
other key stakeholders to get an idea of what the unintended impacts might be. Ensure informants are
asked to express both positive and negative impacts.

Some examples of impacts of receiving cash are noted in the table below. Agencies should consider
whether any of the following are appropriate, or whether other unintended impacts (both positive and
negative) could have arisen as a consequence of their intervention.

Examples of impacts from cash interventions

Beneficiary Households are able to regularly meet their basic needs

spending
Households are able to purchase the items set by a conditional transfer

If households did not buy the intended items, find out why. Perhaps the value of the
transfer was too low, or basic needs were not met or the priorities of the
beneficiaries were not correctly identified.......

CFW projects Impact of the micro-project on the community e.g. better access to water throughout
the year, reduced time to reach market

Clean up activities may have health impacts

The local employment opportunity may have reduced the need for migration of
household members

Social and Empowerment of women and men – creating a sense of dignity

psychological
benefits Reduced tension in the household between men and women

Inclusion into community activities for minority and vulnerable groups who would

36
 otherwise often be excluded

Household Debt repayment

economy
Improved access to credit

Retention of productive assets at a time when they might have had to be sold

Market Stimulation of petty trading within the project area  reduced dependency on other
types of aid

Revival of the credit system

Local traders may have increased their volume of sales

Nutrition Households retain usual number of meals each day when they might have had to
reduce the number or size of meals.

Meals contain a wider diversity of ingredients  better intake of micronutrients

Negative Has the project finished too quickly?  How will beneficiaries cope when it is
impacts finished?

Has the project gone on too long?  Are participants receiving cash payments
when there are local labour opportunities available?

Has the right cash intervention been chosen?  Would a different intervention
produce the same impact?

Has the project created security risks to beneficiaries or had negative impact on
women and other vulnerable groups?

Evaluation
The purpose of evaluation is to learn and reflect on what went well and what could have been
improved. An evaluation will determine if the project has met the intended objective/s in the most
appropriate way. Evaluation usually occurs at the end of the project.

Evaluation of a project can be done either internally (by project staff) or externally (by an outside
party, usually a consultant).

Different donors have different criteria about minimum evaluation requirements. These may be
determined by specific knowledge gaps or research interests of each donor but often the Organisation
for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) – Development Cooperative Directorate (DCD-
DAC) Evaluation Criteria are used as a basis for evaluations of development programs. The OECD-
DAC criteria (below) are the key aspects of programs and should be considered when designing the
project as well as during evaluation!

The seven OECD-DAC criteria for evaluations

Relevance/ Is the project in line with local needs and priorities (as well as donor policy)?
Appropriateness
Appropriateness is the tailoring of humanitarian activities to local needs,
increasing ownership, accountability and cost-effectiveness accordingly.

Connectedness The need to ensure that activities of a short-term emergency nature are carried

37
 out in a context that takes longer term and interconnected problems into account.

Coherence The need to assess security, developmental, trade and military policies as well as
humanitarian policies, to ensure that there is consistency and, in particular, that
all policies take into account humanitarian and human-rights considerations.

Coverage The need to reach major population groups facing life-threatening suffering
wherever they are.

Efficiency Efficiency measures the outputs (qualitative and quantitative) achieved as a

result of inputs. This generally requires comparing alternative approaches to
achieving an output to see whether the most efficient approach has been used.

Effectiveness Effectiveness measures the extent to which an activity achieves its purpose, or
whether this can be expected to happen on the basis of the outputs. Implicit
within the criterion of effectiveness is timeliness.

Impact Impact looks at the wider effects of the project – social, economic, technical, and
environmental – on individuals, gender and age-groups, communities and
institutions. Impacts can be intended and unintended, positive and negative,
macro (sector) and micro (household).

Minimum standards for monitoring and evaluation of cash interventions

At a minimum, all agencies implementing cash interventions should monitor the following:
Number of people receiving cash
How much money is being distributed to each household
What are people spending the cash on?
How accessible are the markets?
Where are people buying key goods?
What is happening to prices to the local market?
Did people receive the right amount of cash?
Were beneficiaries able to spend the money safely?

Further reading

Adams, L. and P. Harvey (2006) Series on learning from cash responses to the tsunami: Issue
Papers. Issue Paper 6 – Monitoring and Evaluation. Humanitarian Policy Group, Overseas
Development Institute, London.

38
 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND FURTHER READING
Guiding principles & standards

1. Humanitarian Accountability Partnership – International (2007). Standards in humanitarian

accountability and quality management. http://www.hapinternational.org

2. SEEP (2009) Minimum standards for economic recovery after crisis. The SEEP Network. First
Edition. Washington DC

3. SPHERE (2004) Humanitarian charter and minimum standards in disaster response.

4. SPHERE (2010) Humanitarian charter and minimum standards in disaster response. Revised
Edition (draft).

5. OECD – DAC evaluation criteria. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) – DAC http://www.oecd.org

Agency guidelines on cash interventions

1. ACF (2007) Implementing cash-based interventions: A guide for aid workers. ACF, New York.

2. Creti, P & Jaspars, S (Eds) (2006) Cash-transfer programming in emergencies. Oxfam GB.
Oxfam Publishing. Oxford

3. Gentilini, U. (2007). Cash and food transfers: a primer. Social Protection and Livelihoods Service,
World Food Programme, Rome.

4. Horn Relief (2010) A practical guide for cash-based responses in emergencies. Horn Relief,
Nairobi.

5. Horn Relief (2008) A trainers guide to conducting cash-based response trainings. Horn Relief,
Nairobi.

[Contact Horn Relief, Nairobi Office if you would like further information about training on cash
interventions [email protected] ]

6. ICRC/ IFRC (2007) Guidelines for cash transfer programming. International Committee of the Red
Cross (ICRC) and the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
(IFRC), Geneva.

7. Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (2007) Cash Workbook: A practice user‟s guide
for the preparation and implementation of cash projects. SDC, Geneva

8. Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (2005) The use of cash projects in humanitarian
situations: an innovative form of direct support. SDC, Geneva

General cash intervention documents

1. Adams, L. and P. Harvey. (2006). Series on learning from cash responses to the tsunami: Issue
Papers. Humanitarian Policy Group, Overseas Development Institute, London.
o Issue Paper 1 – Analysing markets
o Issue Paper 2 – Cash distribution mechanism
o Issue Paper 3 – Setting the value
o Issue Paper 4 – Cash and shelter
o Issue Paper 5 – Livelihoods recovery

39
 o Issue Paper 6 – Monitoring and evaluation

2. Farrington, J., Harvey, P & Slater, R (2005) Cash transfers: Just giving them the money?
Opinions 55. Overseas Development Institute, UK

3. Farrington, J., P. Harvey, R. Slater. (2005). Cash transfers in the context of pro-poor growth.
Overseas Development Institute, London.

4. Harvey, P., Lamade, N. & ӧ rgel, H (2009) Cash for Work: A Contribution to the International
Debate based on Lessons Learnt in Northern Afghanistan. GTZ

5. Harvey, P (2005) Cash and vouchers in emergencies. Discussion paper- February. Humanitarian
Policy Group. Overseas Development Institute, UK

6. Harvey, P (2007) Cash based responses in emergencies. Briefing paper 25. Humanitarian Policy
Group. Overseas Development Institute, UK

7. Jaspars, S (2006) From food crisis to fair trade: livelihoods analysis, protection and support in
emergencies. Special Supplement Series No. 3 March. Emergency Nutrition Network (ENN)

8. Jaspars, S et al (2007) A review of UNICEF‟s role in cash transfers to emergency affected

populations. EMOP Working Paper. UNICEF.

9. Khogali, H & Takhar, P (2001) Empowering women through cash relief in humanitarian contexts.
Gender and Development, Vol 9, No 3.

10. Khogali, H (2003) Cash: an alternative to food aid

11. Levine, S. & Chastre, C. (July 2004). Missing the point: An analysis of food security interventions
in the Great Lakes. HPN.

12. Lor-Mehdiabadi, W & Adams, L (2008) Evaluation and review of the use of cash and vouchers in
humanitarian crisies: Part 1 – Evaluation report. ECHO

13. Lor-Mehdiabadi, W & Adams, L (2008) Evaluation and review of the use of cash and vouchers in
humanitarian crisies: Part 2 – Review report. ECHO

14. Slater, R & Farringdon, J (2009) Cash transfers: targeting. Project Briefing No. 27, November
2009. Overseas Development Institute

15. Soares, S & Zepeda, E (2007) Can all cash transfers reduce inequality? One pager Number 36,
International Poverty Centre.

Market assessment documents

1. Adams, L. and P. Harvey. (2006). Analysing Markets. Learning from cash responses to the
tsunami: Issue Paper 1. Humanitarian Policy Group, Overseas Development Institute, London.

2. Albu, M. & Murphy, E. (2007). Rapid market analysis toolkit for sudden onset emergencies: Phase
2. The toolkit framework, key issues and deliverables (Draft).

3. Oxfam Great Britain, International Rescue Committee, InterAction and Practical Action
Consulting, with support from U.S Office for Foreign Disaster Assistance. Emergency Market
Mapping and Analysis (EMMA) Toolkit. 2009.

40
Evaluations/Reviews of cash interventions

1. Austin, L (2006) Document Review Synthesis- Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement Cash
Programming Guidelines

2. Dunn, S (2007). External Evaluation - Cash component of the Community Based Drought
Preparedness and Mitigation Project, Kampong Speu Province, Cambodia.

3. Dunn, S (2007/8) A review of Oxfam‟s emergency cash transfer interventions. Oxfam GB.

Somalia specific documents

1. Acacia Consultants Ltd (2005) Case study: Somaliland – drought and chronic food insecurity

2. Acacia Consultants Ltd (2005) External evaluation: DFID/OXFAM/NOVIB funded NGO

consortium response to drought in Togdheer, Sool, Bari/Nugaal regions, Somaliland

3. Ali, D., Toure, F & Kiewied, T (2005) Cash relief in a contested area: Lessons from Somalia.
Network Paper No. 50. Humanitarian Practice Network. Overseas Development Institute

4. Majid, N., Hussein, I & Shuria, H (2007) Evaluation of the Cash Consortium in Southern Somalia:
Oxfam GB and Horn Relief with AFREC, Development Concern and WASDA

5. Mattinen, H & Ogden, K (2006) Cash-based interventions: Lessons from Southern Somalia.
Disasters, 2006, 30(3): 297-315.

6. Oxfam Netherlands (2004) Workshop report: Cash relief: an option for Somalia?

7. Reynaud, Y (2005) CFW Monitoring Report – Analysis and Findings: Emergency Relief and
Livelihood Support, Togdheer Region, Somaliland

8. Reynaud, Y (2005) Emergency Relief and Livelihood Support - Togdheer Region, Somaliland.
Baseline Survey: Analysis and Findings

Donor guidance on cash interventions

1. DFID (2004) CFW Key sheet 1- vulnerability and targeting

2. DFID (2004) CFW Key sheet 2 - cash transfers

3. DFID (2004) CFW Key sheet 3 - project selection

4. EC (2009) The use of cash and vouchers in humanitarian crisis. DG-ECHO Funding Guidelines.
European Commission Directorate General for Humanitarian Aid - ECHO.

5. USAID (2006) Guidelines for unsolicited proposals and reporting. USAID Office of U.S. Foreign
Disaster Assistance (OFDA)

Useful websites

1. Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWSNET) website – http://www.fews.net

2. Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit - Somalia (FSNAU) website – http://www.fsausomali.org

3. Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) website – http://www.ipcinfo.org

4. Overseas Development Institute (ODI) website – http://www.odi.org.uk

41
 ANNEXES
ANNEX 1: Compilation of minimum standards for cash interventions

Project cycle Minimum standards

Assessment Conduct and document a needs assessment.

Conduct and document at least a rapid market assessment or ensure that
you have adequate information from secondary sources to justify the
appropriateness (or not) of cash interventions.
Assessments should be shared with other agencies

Needs assessments should include:

What is the situation?

What is the impact of the shock on people‟s livelihoods and their ability to
access sufficient food and income?
How are people coping with the situation?
Who is most affected? How many people need assistance?
What assistance do they need? (remember that different population groups
and different livelihood groups may need different assistance)
How long will they need this assistance?
What are other agencies doing?

Rapid market assessments should include:

Is there is a market close to the beneficiaries? Or will there be any major

costs to the beneficiaries for transporting goods back from the market?
Are the needed items available in markets close by or can local traders
bring them in?
Are there seasonal issues with the supply of the required items?
Are the needed items available in sufficient quantity to meet the demand?
Can items be purchased by beneficiaries at a reasonable price?
Do beneficiaries have access to credit, in particular pastoralists and
agricultural communities?
If you are planning on doing cash for work you also need to assess the
local labour market - what the local skilled and unskilled labour rates are
and what times of year is labour most in demand (and for what activities)

Planning and Ensure that you have considered how urgent the beneficiary needs are – if
decision making needs are very urgent, it is not appropriate to implement a complicated
intervention that needs time to design.
Ensure that you have considered seasonal issues and the appropriateness
of the timing of the intervention.
Ensure that you have considered how to include the most vulnerable
groups in the project.
Ensure that you have made adequate provision for the inclusion of women
into the project.
Ensure that the value of the transfer is appropriate, based on the identified
needs of the beneficiaries and the prices of items in the local market (or the
local labour rate for a CFW project). If you are targeting basic needs make

42
 sure you consider the cost of the minimum basket.
Ensure that you have appropriate project duration and have decided on the
frequency of payment in consultation with the beneficiaries.
Ensure that technical capacity is provided if doing cash for work to
guarantee the quality of micro-projects

Implementation Ensure that you have designed the program with risk analysis in mind.
Good programming can assist with mitigating and avoiding risks to both
beneficiaries and staff.
Ensure that the community is involved in all stages of the project cycle.
Provide training to staff on cash programming and specific project
implementation processes.
Hold a public meeting to discuss the objectives of the project, beneficiary
selection criteria, entitlements and any other aspect of the project.
Use clear, easily verifiable selection criteria.
Work through a community structure (such as a committee or existing
structure) to produce a beneficiary list.
Agency staff or local partners should verify a random selection of the
beneficiary list to ensure good targeting.
Strongly consider using a local money transfer company rather than directly
distributing cash.
Accountability mechanisms – feedback mechanisms and other aspects of
accountability should be considered throughout project cycle.
Put measures in place for financial accountability.
Coordinate activities with other agencies working in the same location.

Targeting procedures should include:

Targeting approach should be clear to community and to agency staff

Community participation  including open public meetings, meetings with
trusted community members, as well as community leaders
Participation from local authorities/elders must be actively sought
Agencies should work together with a representative community committee
or group of trusted individuals for beneficiary targeting, information sharing,
feedback and complaints
Agencies should actively include minority and vulnerable groups
Meetings and information sharing should be transparent and open
Public meetings should be held with whole community to explain the project
Selection criteria for targeting should be developed with the community
Community representatives should prepare beneficiary lists based on
selection criteria.
Verification of beneficiary lists should be done by project staff – including
checking of inclusion of vulnerable groups and ensuring beneficiaries meet
selection criteria
Accountability mechanisms should be in place to collect feedback
information from the community (described ahead)

Developing selection criteria:

Selection criteria should be developed together with the community

Clear criteria that can be easily verified. They must be easily understood,

43
 measureable and easily verified (e.g. widowhood, number of children,
number of livestock)

The cash distribution method:

Assess the possibility of working with a local hawala company (or using
another third party such as a local trader or local businessman with financial
capacity) rather than making direct payments.
Have a written agreement or Memorandum of Understanding with the
money transfer company that specifies the responsibilities of both the
agency and the money transfer company for the implementation of the
project.

Accountability:

Participation of beneficiary communities throughout project cycle

Provide clear information to communities about their entitlements and the
duration of intervention
A procedure must be in place for discussion with the community if
implementation problems arise
A clear feedback mechanism must be in place to receive complaints and
suggestions from the community (beneficiaries, non-beneficiaries or other
interested parties)
Clear record keeping of the finances for the project

Monitoring and At a minimum, all agencies implementing cash interventions should monitor the
evaluation following:
Number of people receiving cash
How much money is being distributed to each household
What are people spending the cash on?
How accessible are the markets?
Where are people buying key goods?
What is happening to prices to the local market?
Did people receive the right amount of cash?
Were beneficiaries able to spend the money safely?
CFW projects should monitor the quality of the micro-project/s

Information sharing with other agencies:

Number of people receiving cash

How much money is being distributed to each household?
What is the situation in the local area and why is cash being provided?

44
ANNEX 2: Relevant SPHERE and SEEP Standards

SPHERE Minimum Standards for Disaster Response

Source: SPHERE Standards, Revised draft (2010)

Food assistance Standard 2: Cash and voucher transfers

Where appropriate, cash and vouchers are considered a response to address basic needs, and to protect and re-
establish livelihoods, where goods and services are available in the local area but lack of income limits people‟s
access to them.

Food security & livelihoods standard 1: Programming food security and livelihoods
People have access to adequate and appropriate responses in a manner that ensures their survival, prevents
erosion of assets, builds resilience and upholds their dignity.

SEEP Minimum Standards for Economic Recovery

Source: SEEP (2009) Minimum Standards for Economic Recovery. SEEP Network

Common Standard 3: Support long term recovery - Immediate post-crisis programming can, and should,
facilitate longer term recovery of markets and institutions

Common Standard 4: Inclusive and transparent program design and implementation

Common Standard 5: Use both direct and indirect mechanism to achieve impact on target populations

Common Standard 6: Coordinate efforts for greater impact

Common Standard 7: Build technically competent teams

Common Standard 8: Collect and apply learning

Assessment and Analysis Standard 1: Food security and livelihoods: Where people are at risk of food
insecurity, programme decisions are based on a demonstrated understanding of how they normally access the
food, how the markets are functioning, the impact of the disaster on current and future food security, and hence
the most appropriate response.

Assessments and Analysis Standard 2: Assessments synthesize relevant information about affected house-
holds‟ livelihoods, market systems, and socio-political factors.

Assessments and Analysis Standard 4: Analysis of assessment data is timely, transparent, and relevant to
monitoring and program decision needs.

Assessments and Analysis Standard 5: Results are disseminated to provide comprehensible guidance to
appropriate decision makers.

Access to Assets Standard 1: Asset programming is conducted in a manner that facilitates long-term economic
recovery, while taking into account issues of targeting, equity, transparency, and security.

Key Indicator: Activities that provide assets assess the viability of the recipients‟ previous economic activity,
the recipients‟ skills, technical capacity and priorities and the potential profitability of the economic activity to
be supported as well as its environmental impact.

Key Indicator: Programs assess potential risks to the physical security of beneficiaries, their assets, and
resulting income, and take steps to address these risks before transferring assets.

Guidance Note: Programs assess the potential impact on local markets when procuring and distributing
assets

45
ANNEX 3: Minimum expenditure basket (food and non-food items)

Source: Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit for Somalia

** Please note that the basket is subject to revision as FSNAU conduct additional baseline surveys.

MINIMUM BASKET SOUTH CENTRAL/NORTH

Minimum Food (per household per month)

Urban
Town Rural Town Urban Town Rural Town

SORGHUM 95kg 95kg 95kg 95kg

W. FLOUR 3.75kg 3.75kg 3.75kg 3.75kg

SUGAR 5kg 5kg 5kg 5kg

V. OIL 4Lt 3Lt 4Lt 3Lt

MILK 15Lt x 20Lt x

MEAT 4kg 2kg 10kg 5kg

TEA LEAVES 0.5kg 0.5kg 0.5kg 0.5kg

SALT 1.5kg 1.5kg 1.5kg 1.5kg

COWPEAS 6kg x 4.0kg x

Minimum Non-Food

Kerosene 1.5Lt 1.5Lt 1.5Lt 1.5Lt

Soap (Laundry Bar) 4pcs 4pcs 4pcs 4pcs

Firewood (bundle) 30 x 10 x

Water (Jerican 20Lt) 5 5 5 5

Human Drugs (SoSh) 20,000 10,000 20,000 10,000

Grinding Cost 30kg 30kg 9kg 13kg

Clothes (SoSh) 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000

School Fees (SoSh) 90,000 52,000 90,000 52,000

Social Tax (SoSh) 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500

Other (SoSh) 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000

46
ANNEX 4: The Principles of Humanitarian Accountability

The Principles of Humanitarian Accountability

Source: HAP-I (2007) Humanitarian Accountability Standard

Commitment to
Members state their commitment to respect and foster humanitarian
humanitarian
standards and the rights of beneficiaries
standards and rights

Setting standards and 1

Members set a framework of accountability to their stakeholders.
building capacity
Members set and periodically review their standards and performance
indicators, and revise them if necessary.
Members provide appropriate training in the use and implementation of
standards

Communication
Members inform, and consult with, stakeholders, particularly beneficiaries
and staff, about the standards adopted, programmes to be undertaken and
mechanisms available for addressing concerns.
Participation in
Members involve beneficiaries in the planning, implementation, monitoring
program
and evaluation of programmes and report to them on progress, subject
only to serious operational constraints.
Monitoring and
Members involve beneficiaries and staff when they monitor and revise
reporting on
standards.
compliance
Members regularly monitor and evaluate compliance with standards, using
robust processes.
Members report at least annually to stakeholders, including beneficiaries,
on compliance with standards. Reporting may take a variety of forms.
Addressing
Members enable beneficiaries and staff to report complaints and seek
complaints
redress safely.
Implementing partners
Members are committed to the implementation of these principles if and
when working through implementation partners.

47
ANNEX 5: Example beneficiary registration form - 1

Source: Oxfam GB

Column Number

(1). (2). (3). (4). (5). (6). (7). (8)

The beneficiary registration form can provide different pieces of information such as:

The total registered population by adding column (7)

The total number of households by counting downwards the final serial number in column (1)

Children under five years of age can be found by selecting from columns (5) and (6)

Those eligible for NFI distribution that targets people above the age of 15 year by adding column
(2 & 3) and selecting from columns (5) and (6)

The final column (8) gives space for recording any additional information such as people with
special needs, people with disability, the elderly, orphans, people with chronic illness or simply
indicating the nature of vulnerabilities as per the agreed targeting criteria.

The second of the two examples in this format reverses the column for men and women, so that the
woman is seen more easily as a household head. Since items are normally distributed to women, and
it is their names, which are called out at the distribution, it makes sense for the woman‟s name to be
listed first.

In this example, the women in households 2 and 3 are co-wives with their husband listed in both
households, but counted only in the first household.

48
ANNEX 6: Example beneficiary registration form - 2

49
ANNEX 7: Example complaints handling form

Source: Save the Children

Date/Time Person calling Contact No. Location Complaint Receiver Action required Date
of completed
complaint

50
ANNEX 8: Example market monitoring form

SOCIAL SAFETY NET PROJECT

Sanaag & Karkaar Regions, Somalia

Date

Name of data collector

Region

District

Name of market

Currently available
in the market?
Item Quantity Price (SoSh)
(tick if available)

50kg
Maize
1kg

50kg
Rice
1kg

50kg
Sorghum
1kg

50kg
Wheat flour
1kg

50kg
Sugar
1kg

Vegetable oil 1 Litre

Milk 1 Litre

Meat (goat) 1 kg

Milk powder 1 kg

Cowpeas 1 kg

Tea leaves 1 kg

51
 Salt 1 kg

Currently
available in the
Item Quantity market? Price (SoSh)

(tick if available)

Kerosene 1 Litre

Soap (Laundry Bar) 1 piece

Firewood 1 bundle

1 sack
Charcoal (50kg)

Jerri-can
Water 20Lt

Grinding Cost (of Per kg

cereals)

Livestock prices

Currently available
in the market?
Price (SoSh)
(tick if available)

Camel Local

Export quality

Cattle Local

Export quality

Goat Local

Export quality

Sheep Local

Export quality

Dry fish 1 kg

Fresh fish 1 kg

Daily labour rate

(unskilled labour)

Exchange rate

USD/ SoSh

52
ANNEX 9: Example Service Contract with Money Transfer Company

Source: Horn Relief

SERVICE CONTRACT

BETWEEN

AND HORN RELIEF

FOR

XXX PROJECT

PREAMBLE

This service contract is entered into between XXX represented by XXX, situated at XXX District of XXX region hereinafter
referred to as the Contractor; and

Horn Relief represented by the Executive Director, situated at Mijikenda Road, off Olenguruone Road, Lavington, Nairobi,
Kenya and P.O. Box 70331-00400, Nairobi, Kenya hereinafter referred to as Horn Relief.

WHEREAS, the Contractor and Horn Relief stand for and actively uphold the Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Relief;

WHEREAS, the Contractor and Horn Relief have realized that the above-mentioned values can be effectively upheld
throughout the project entitled XXX Project hereinafter referred to as the Project;

WHEREAS, each party has agreed to collaborate for the realization of the Project; and

Therefore, this contract is entered into on the terms and conditions stated hereunder.

1. OBJECTIVE OF SERVICE CONTRACT

1.1 The Contractor and Horn Relief to endorse the contract as the instrument, which will establish and clarify the
partnership of the two parties to achieve the goal and objectives of the project.

1.2 To ensure the full coordination of a humanitarian response in the form of cash relief and cash for work to the
vulnerable communities in XXX region; the Contractor has agreed to undertake specific activities for the implementation of th e
project.

2. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE CONTRACTOR

The Contractor agrees to execute the project under the following Terms and Conditions.

2.1 Deposit an amount of USD XXX in a bank account to be given by Horn Relief as a cash security guarantee.

2.2 Make all payments to intended recipients as, when and where required in the agreed currency and notes.

2.3 To serve the most destitute and vulnerable people as determined by Horn Relief and the Local Authorities despite
clan affiliation.

2.4 Provide a full account of payments made at the end of each month; with the necessary supporting documents
(Monthly statement, Copies of Signed payroll and Signed payment receipts).

53
2.5 Provide the required personnel and ensure that the necessary security, logistics (vehicle, driver and fuel) and
communication (thuraya or mobile) arrangements are taken care to ensure that the beneficiaries are paid on time and in a
secure environment.

2.6 To print receipt books for the payments in triplicate (3 copies) in which one copy is provided to the beneficiary, one
copy to Horn Relief and a copy is kept by the contractor for their records. A sample of the receipt books to be printed will be
provided by Horn Relief to the contractor and the contractor must ensure to comply with this sample.

2.7 To indemnify Horn Relief against any cash loss that may arise during the transfer, transport and/or distribution of the
cash, and to make good of any such losses. In such instance, the Contractor is fully responsible for returning all lost or s tolen
funds to Horn Relief within a period of 30 days from the time in which the incident has occurred.

2.8 To carry out the project cash distributions with due diligence and efficiency.

2.9 To be responsible for the security of the funds and provide security, at own expense, during all payment periods on
site of payment and provide for reasonable security in the movement of all funds between locations.

3.0 Not to engage in payment of any beneficiaries without the presence of the designated Horn Relief staff person on
location, or without the permission of a Horn Relief staff person.

3.11 To ensure payment lists of beneficiaries and payment instructions from Horn Relief are diligently adhered to.

3.12 If the Contractor, for any reason or due to any act of God, is compelled to discontinue the activities covered under
this contract, the Contractor shall return any unspent amount from the Project to Horn Relief along with a full financial rep ort of
all funds spent.

3.13 The Contractor shall dedicate a suitable number of employees to the management of the Project. Employees
engaged by the Contractor for the implementation of the Project will be under the sole employment of the Contractor without
any legal relationship whatsoever with Horn Relief. Horn Relief will be exempt of any claims, damages, expenses or costs
incurred by the Contractor employees.

3.14 Horn Relief will be exempt of any claims, damages, expenses or costs incurred by third parties or sub-contractors
used by the Contractor during the implementation of the Project.

3.15 Where any billboards are constructed or signs erected or displayed, the Contractor shall give due credit to Horn
Relief and donor.

3.16 To comply fully with the terms and conditions of the contract.

3. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF HORN RELIEF

3.1 Horn Relief through authorized representatives has the right to visit the project area in order to hold discussions with
the Contractor on project related concerns. Horn Relief will stay fully informed on the progress of the activities.

3.2 Horn Relief shall cooperate with the Contractor according to the signed contract.

3.3 Horn Relief shall transfer periodic installments not to exceed the cash guarantee amount of USD 216,000 at any one
time to the Contractor in advance of agreed upon distribution dates. The final payment will not be made to the contractor until
Horn Relief has fully verified all the payment documentation provided by the Contractor.

3.4 Horn Relief shall provide to the Contractor a list of the recipients including details pertaining to their identity, location
and amounts payable.

3.5 Horn Relief shall pay a commission of 6% on all transfers for the services provided by the Contractor in regards to
the distribution of cash to the beneficiaries of the Project.

3.6 The Contractor will be paid in USD from Horn Relief Bossaso office. Funds will be transferred to the Contractor‟s
account. The Contractor will acknowledge the receipt of payment by issuing an official receipt to that effect as required by Horn
Relief.

3.7 The Contractor shall make payments to the beneficiaries in accordance to the instruction and the monthly payroll
provided by Horn Relief and in accordance with the terms and conditions of this contract.

3.8 Horn Relief will not reimburse any additional expenses in excess of approved amounts released to the Contractor.

54
3.9 The Contractor is fully responsible for the use of funds once funds are received from Horn Relief.

3.10 The contract duration will be for XXX months beginning on XXX and ending on XXX.

4.0. TERMINAITION

4.1 This Contract will automatically terminate with immediate effect on the Termination Date.

4.2 Notwithstanding clause 5.1 above, this Contract may be terminated by Horn Relief or by the Contractor giving to the
other not less than 14 days notice in writing.

4.3 Horn Relief shall also be entitled to terminate this Contract at any time if it reasonably believes that there has been a
fundamental or serious breach of this Contract by the Contractor.

4.4 Horn Relief shall also be able to terminate this Contract at any time if in its reasonable opinion any activity by the
Contractor is likely to bring Horn Relief into disrepute.

4.5 Horn Relief shall also be able to terminate this Contract at any time up to the Termination date if an event occurs
which makes the start or continuation of the Services impossible. This may include (but is not limited to) conflict, floods,
hurricanes, any action of man or an act of God (a “termination event”). Such a termination event will be determined at the
absolute discretion of the Commissioning Managers.

4.6 The Contractor will not at any time after the Termination Date represent her or himself as being in any way still
connected with Horn Relief.

5.0 GOVERNMENT LAW AND LANGUAGE

5.1 This Contract shall be governed by and in accordance with the laws of Kenya, and shall be subject to the non-
exclusive jurisdiction of the Kenyan courts.

5.2 For the purpose of this Contract, English shall be considered the applicable language.

6.0 VARIATIONS

6.1 No variations to this Contract shall be valid unless in writing and signed by or on behalf of both parties.

7.0 NOTICE

7.1 All notices under this contract will be given in writing and will be deemed to have been properly submitted when
delivered by one of the following means: personal delivery to the designated representative; by e-mail with notification of
receipt; and by registered mail at the specific designation of the parties as set forth below:

8 .0 SIGNATURE

9.1 The following signatures are a representation of all parties understanding and commitment to the aforementioned
roles and responsibilities. This contract comes into effect upon signature by all parties below.

Representative from Horn Relief: Representative from XXX:

Signature: Signature:

Name: Name:

Date: Date:

55