Cash transfers to emergency affected households The assessment phase

1. Cash transfers to emergency affected households The assessment phase

2. Preconditions • A monetary economy and local markets • Implementation capacity exists • Beneficiaries prefer cash transfers programme • Beneficiaries can be registered in a safe and secure manner and can be paid safely and securely • Cash is available • Payment of the cash benefits can be monitored • Where relevant, authorities should approve of the cash transfers programme

3. ASSESSMENTS • Market Assessment (including trade routes and quality of goods) • Vulnerability Assessment of the target group, of the community, of the project implementation including a gender analysis (links to SITAN) • Inventory of Existing Cash Transfers Programmes • Capacity Analysis of the possible partners (including their administrative and financial ability to deal with frequent and large cash disbursements) – size- reputation-integrity-experience • Availability of mechanisms for beneficiary assessment, identification and registration, etc. • Assessment of benefit level • Enterprise Risk Assessment • Consultation within UNICEF, with Humanitarian Country Team, with government and with other development partners

4. Structured Enterprise Risk Assessment • Main risks: • Cash delivery creates insecurity for partners and beneficiaries • Cash transfers create market failure and localized inflation • Targeting is inadequate • Cash payments create tensions in communities • Monitoring is inadequate • Diversion and misuse • ERM Principles • Accepting risk when benefits out-weight costs • Anticipating and managing risk • Making decisions promptly, recognizing that affirmative management of risks is critical to success. • Taking calculated risks and pursuing innovations that are contradicted by control measures

5. Categories of Risk to be considered as part of any risk assessmentin HIGH THREAT ENVIRONMENTS(a) Security risks to staff(b) Risks to ‘do no harm’ policy(c) Risk to ongoing or future country programmes(d) Risk to other actors(e) Reputational risk(f) Global precedents(g) Legal/political risks(h) Risks of financial loss, misuse, or misappropriation

6. What is the Risk? Likelihood x Impact

7. Examples of risk mitigation strategies • A. Structured-Risk-Informed Decision Making • B. High-Frequency Multi-Sourced Monitoring • Web-based remote project monitoring • Quality Assurance Teams (QAT) for remote management accountability • Third party monitoring • Beneficiary/ local community group monitoring/ local government officials • Triangulated monitoring • C. Reducing the Risk of Misappropriation and Diversion • Reduced inventory • De-branding • Sharing of information about contractors with HCT • D. Other Risk Management Mechanisms • Staff training • Risk management committee in CO • E. Particular issues regarding counter-terrorism, proscribed individuals and entities • Support from EMOPS 24/7 • F. Additional measures to be explored • Can do more with low tech monitoring by affected populations

8. The risks associated with cash transfers, including the one of corruption, are not inherently greater than for commodity distribution. In some situations, cash transfers can be delivered more safely than supplies, in particular where local banks, money transfers companies, mobile phone can be used.

9. GENDER: Analyse and address the gender dimensions • Women might be vulnerable within the household • Women have less control over cash than over food or other commodities. • Distributing cash to women may cause family disputes or domestic violence. • + Cash transfers can contribute empower women by enhancing their decision-making position in the household and strengthening their bargaining position.

10. Capacity of partners • Prior to entering into a partnership, conduct an Institutional Assessment and a Financial Assessment of partners • In many cases, capacity will be low. This is not necessarily a show stopper, but: • Additional risks must be mapped and managed • A capacity development strategy to be devised • What we know about capacity development in humanitarian action: • Must be results based • Must be a systemic approach, targeting all levels • Must be modest in its ambition