Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 1

HUMANITARIAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (HIP)

SOUTHERN AFRICA AND INDIAN OCEAN1

The full implementation of this version of the HIP is conditional upon the necessary

appropriations being made available from the 2020 general budget of

the European Union

AMOUNT: EUR 18 000 000

The present Humanitarian Implementation Plan (HIP) was prepared on the basis of financing

decision ECHO/WWD/BUD/2020/01000 (Worldwide Decision) and the related General Guidelines

for Operational Priorities on Humanitarian Aid (Operational Priorities). The purpose of the HIP and

its annexes2 is to serve as a communication tool for DG ECHO

3’s partners and to assist in the

preparation of their proposals. The provisions of the Worldwide Decision and the General Conditions

of the Agreement with the European Commission shall take precedence over the provisions in this

document.

This HIP focuses primarily on Disaster Preparedness and Education in Emergencies interventions

in both contexts of preparedness and response. It furthermore foresees the possibility to respond to a

new crisis in countries with limited capacity to cope, and/or where national or local capacity may be

overwhelmed should funds be made available.

0. MAJOR CHANGES SINCE PREVIOUS VERSION OF THE HIP

First modification as of June 2020

The humanitarian situation in Cabo Delgado, Mozambique’s northernmost province, has

dramatically deteriorated in 2020, with a significant increase in the number and scope of attacks and

subsequent humanitarian impact. From January to 25 April, there were 101 incidents and 285 deaths

(of whom more than 200 were civilians) according to ACLED (Armed Conflict Location & Event

Data Project). The total death toll of this armed violence, from 2017 to 25 April 2020, is 1,100, of

whom more than 700 civilians.

Nearly 500,000 people are directly affected by the armed violence. The escalation of attacks and

violence has led to a significant increase in displacement reaching 211,000 internally displaced

persons (IDPs) in early May (+ 251% as compared to last December)4. The majority are children,

followed by women. A total of 42 health centres are now not functioning due to damage and

insecurity. Displacements are multiple and pendular, with people fleeing mostly to the southern

districts of the province, others to islands, overstretching the already limited resources and services,

affecting also the provision of primary health care. IDPs are moving with little to nothing, and with

some trauma, often to areas where existing vulnerabilities are further exacerbated. An estimated

300,000 individuals are hosting IDPs; most of these host families are food insecure in a region

classified as IPC 3. Many areas affected by violence are still recovering from the devastation caused

1 This HIP covers the following countries in the Southern Africa and Indian Ocean region (SAIO): Botswana, Comoros

Islands, Eswatini, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, and

Zimbabwe. 2 Technical annex and thematic policies annex

3 Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO)

4 According to IOM DTM, there were 60,000 IDPs in December 2019 and 100,000 beginning of February 2020)

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 2

by cyclone Kenneth in April 2019. In May, some families started to concentrate in schools in Metugi

in very difficult conditions while others began more recently to flee to the neighbouring provinces of

Nampula (5,000 IDP) and even Niassa (800 to 1000). Those who stay in their communities – often

the most vulnerable and marginalized – are exposed to significant security and protection risks. To

add to the complexity, Cabo Delgado and Nampula are the provinces most affected by the Covid19

pandemic, with respectively 154 and 268 reported active cases as of 30 June. They have been

declared as provinces with Covid19 community transmission, with a risk that the virus will lead to

further deterioration of the humanitarian situation.

Humanitarian access is a huge challenge with security and logistical constraints to reach the most

vulnerable. The humanitarian capacity needs to be able to engage with the stakeholders in such a

volatile situation. It also needs to be reinforced to adopt conflict sensitive and protection approaches

and be able to respond in due time.

In order to address the most urgent needs of people affected by the armed violence, the European

Commission has made available an additional amount of EUR 5 000 000. This will aim to support

multi-sectoral assistance with protection as an overarching sector of intervention: shelter, non-food

items, water, sanitation and hygiene; humanitarian food assistance; health; coordination; information

management and monitoring of the humanitarian situations.

1. CONTEXT

The Southern Africa and Indian Ocean (SAIO) region is highly vulnerable to various hazards ranging

from floods, cyclones, droughts and epidemics resulting in loss of lives and livelihood assets,

economic losses and population displacement. Disasters represent a major source of risk for the most

vulnerable populations and can potentially undermine development gains.

During the last couple of years, hydro-meteorological hazards have worsened and local disaster

management capacities have been stretched thin.

The region has just about recovered from the strong El Niño in 2015/2016, which led to the worst

drought in 35 years and affected over 16 million people across the region, creating severe food and

water shortages, which compounded existing vulnerabilities in all humanitarian sectors. Again,

during the rainfall season 2018/2019, a strong drought affected central and western parts of the

region, leading to a deteriorating food security situation in the region. The number of severely food

insecure people is rising in some countries and expected to reach a peak between October 2019 and

March 2020. Large parts of Botswana, northern Namibia, north-western South Africa and north-

western Zimbabwe received their lowest seasonal rainfall totals since at least 19815. According to

the July 2019 SADC Regional Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis, an estimated 41.2 million

people in 13 SADC Member States are food insecure in 2019. Of this number, 23.9 million people

are from countries covered by this HIP and at least 7.5 million require food assistance during the

2019/2020 lean season. Food insecurity and malnutrition is on the rise in the region, in part due to

the hydro-meteorological disasters mentioned above. Significant increases in the number of food

insecure people from 2018 have been recorded in Zimbabwe (128%), Eswatini (90%), and

Mozambique (85%). Crop estimates in Lesotho declined over two consecutive years, with production

of maize declining by 70% and sorghum by nearly 98% from 2018. Poor agriculture techniques,

depleted soil fertility, crop pests, land access disputes, lack of access to food, and volatile food prices

5 SADC, Synthesis Report on the State of Food and Nutrition Security and Vulnerability in Southern Africa, 2019

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 3

are all factors that worsen the overall food security situation6, compounded by governance, social

and economic issues. While the rates of acute undernutrition are generally below emergency levels in

Southern African countries, shocks such as rising food insecurity or epidemics can trigger crisis at

local level and call for need of support for the scale up of national programme capacities.

Concurrent with drought are also cyclones and floods. In the first half of 2019, several countries

experienced flooding caused by extreme weather events: heavy rains, hailstorms, strong winds and

tropical cyclones. By February 2019, Madagascar recorded landslides and floods – worsened by

Tropical Storm Eketsang – that affected 9 400 people; Malawi reported 135 000 people flood-

affected; and Tropical Storm Desmond in Mozambique resulted in the displacement of 7 155

people7.

The situation worsened dramatically when two tropical cyclones – Idai and Kenneth – hit Comoros,

Malawi, Mozambique and Zimbabwe in March and April 2019. The two cyclones caused the death

of more than 1 000 people and directly affected over 3.8 million people, destroying infrastructure,

houses and crops. More than 750 000 individuals were estimated to be in need of urgent assistance.

This was the first time in recorded history that two cyclones struck the coast of Mozambique in such

close succession, and the furthest north that a cyclone had ever made landfall in the country. 8 The

frequency and intensity of cyclones appear to be increasing because of climate change, posing

further risk to the region.

The Education sector is heavily disrupted by all the above-mentioned natural disasters, overall

limiting access either due to destruction of the facilities or schools having been used as safe shelters.

As stated in the SADC Regional Humanitarian Floods Appeal in Response to Tropical Cyclone

IDAI, ‘The floods destroyed 3,344 classrooms in the affected areas disrupting 150,854 students from

accessing education as both the learning facilities and materials were destroyed. Other services

promoted in schools such as school feeding, sanitation facilities and training on WASH were also

disrupted.’9 Increasing Food insecurity has also affected education with indications in Zimbabwe

where in the areas affected by drought school dropout has reached more 60% in 2019. Emergencies

are likely to have a disproportionate effect on the education of women and girls.

The region remains the global epicentre of the HIV epidemic with six countries having a prevalence

rate above 10%, while Botswana, Eswatini and Lesotho above 20%10

. Cholera is endemic in several

southern African countries, with drought and flooding often exacerbating poor water and sanitation

conditions. Climate-related impacts on water resources poses an increased risk for access to drinking

water. Plague is endemic in Madagascar.

In SAIO, people are mainly displaced due to rapid onset natural disasters. In 2019, more people were

displaced after the cyclone events; more than 130 000 in Mozambique, 51 000 in Zimbabwe and 87

000 in Malawi. Increasing violence caused by insurgency in Cabo Delgado in Mozambique forced

more than 60 000 people to seek refuge in urban areas and remote islands since 2017. Displacement

and disasters disproportionately exposes women and girls to risks of Sexual and Gender Based

Violence (SGBV) and, consequently, exposure to HIV/AIDS.

In terms of security and politics, the region is relatively stable, experiencing pockets of unrest during

elections. However, in the Cabo Delgado Province in northern Mozambique, violent insurgent

6 SADC, Synthesis Report on the State of Food and Nutrition Security and Vulnerability in Southern Africa, 2019

7 SADC, Synthesis Report on the State of Food and Nutrition Security and Vulnerability in Southern Africa, 2019

8 OCHA - Cyclones Idai and Kenneth Snapshot - July 2019

9 SADC Regional Humanitarian Floods Appeal in Response to Tropical Cyclone IDAI (April 2019), p. 13

10 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.DYN.AIDS.ZS numbers from 2017

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 4

attacks are increasing. Since 2017, non-state armed actors have waged attacks on villages in this

Province and, more recently, engaged in clashes with armed forces.

The macro-economic situation in Zimbabwe is also deteriorating. High inflation is affecting

vulnerable households, and the difficult access to cash constrains humanitarian operations.

The Human Development Index (HDI) 2018 ranks Mozambique 180, Malawi 171, Madagascar 161,

Lesotho 159, Zimbabwe 156, out of 189 countries. All five countries are categorised as having Low

Human Development. Comoros is ranked 165, Namibia 129 and Eswatini 144.

DG ECHO's Integrated Analysis Framework for 2019-2020 identified high humanitarian needs in the

SAIO region, but with significant variations across countries. The vulnerability of the crisis-affected

population is assessed to be high/very high. Looking at the figures in the below table, it is important

to highlight that they do not take into account the violent attacks in the north of Mozambique.

Moreover, the numbers are based on the situation before the two major cyclones (Idai and Kenneth)

that caused major flooding and destruction in three of the five countries listed. Later updates of the

figures are therefore likely to show higher values for hazards and vulnerability.

Index For Risk Management (INFORM)11

and Food Insecurity12

in the targeted SA IO

countries

The experience of 2019 amply demonstrates the exposure of the SAIO region to natural disasters.

The region was impacted not only by two powerful high impact cyclones in quick succession, but

2019 was also the driest season in over three decades in parts of the region which has led to a food

security crisis across the region. Natural disasters are likely to remain key drivers of humanitarian

crises in the region, and accelerating warming trends likely to bring many more bouts of severe

drought as well as increased flooding to the region. Building resilience and investing in disaster

preparedness is imperative in this context. The food security crisis will continue to impact vulnerable

11 INFORM – March 2019 – available on June 2019 at http://www.inform-index.org/

12 SADC Regional Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis (RVAA) Synthesis Report 2019

INFORM

risk value

Hazard &

Exposure

Vulnerabi

lity Index

Lack of

Coping

Capacity

Food Insecure

Population

January -

March 2020)

No. of people

Requiring

assistance

Eswatini 3.9 2.3 5.0 5.3 232,000 200,000

Botwana 3.2 2.0 3.4 4.6 38,000 3,600

Lesotho 4.4 2.1 6.0 6.8 433,000 348,000

Mauritius 2.1 2.1 1.6 2.9

Madagascar 5.2 3.8 4.8 7.6 916,000 731,000

Malawi 4.5 2.4 6.0 6.3 1,126,000 697,000

Mozambique 6.1 5.3 6.5 6.6 1,649,000 1,649,000

Namibia 4.0 2.6 4.7 5.1 290,000 290,000

Seychelles 2.1 1.6 1.6 3.4

South Africa 4.8 5.7 4.2 4.5 13,670,000

Zimbabwe 5.0 4.2 5.2 5.8 5,529,000 3,551,000

SA IO region 5.3 4.0 5.7 6.7 23,883,000 7,469,600

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 5

households well into 2020, and, in the absence of sufficient response, numbers may increase. In

Zimbabwe, with the ongoing macro-economic crisis, there is a high likelihood that the humanitarian

situation will continue to deteriorate.

2. HUMANITARIAN NEEDS

1) People in need of humanitarian assistance

This HIP specifically targets:

Populations living in risk-prone areas: Populations exposed to recurrent cyclones, floods and

mudslides mainly live in lowland areas of Madagascar, Mozambique, Malawi, and Zimbabwe. Urban

populations are also often hit by natural hazards like floods and cyclones. In urban areas these rapid

onset disasters exacerbate the risk of communicable diseases, injuries due to buildings collapsing,

and drowning. These areas can be mapped using new technologies and a watershed approach, and

beneficiaries should be identified on that basis.

Children at risk of education disruption: During and after disaster events, children are often at

risk of missing school days due to various factors including use of schools as evacuation centres,

damage to school infrastructure and learning equipment, inaccessibility to schools due to destruction

of roads and bridges, displacement. Even when schools in disaster-affected areas are not officially

closed, significant numbers of children stop coming to school based on multiple disaster-related

factors; children may stop attending school as parents have no money to pay school fees due to loss

of livelihoods or because they need help to earn money. Conversely, children may be sent to school

when there are school feeding programmes. Food insecurity may also lead to displacement, exposing

children to various forms of exploitation and abuse and increasing dropouts. Psychological trauma

can result in poor concentration and focus in the classroom and have a long-term impact on child

development. In northern Mozambique, recent attacks on villages, including threats targeting local

leaders and teachers have led to forced displacement and disruption of education services.

Local, national and regional authorities: Other potential beneficiaries of funding are local disaster

management authorities, SADC (Southern African Development Community), education authorities

and school personnel as well as relevant ministries and departments.

For response, when relevant, vulnerable people affected by disasters where there are unmet

humanitarian needs/food insecure populations: Because of sudden-onset natural disasters as well

as drought and socio-economic crises, many households have lost their livelihoods. Several countries

in the region have experienced low agricultural yields and populations in crisis Integrated Phase

Classification (IPC 3) and above need humanitarian assistance during the lean seasons.

2) Description of the most acute humanitarian needs

1. Disaster Preparedness (DP)

The recent disasters caused by Cyclone Idai and Kenneth not only confirmed the need to strengthen

Disaster Preparedness (DP) and response capacity in the region, but also showed the positive impact

of Disaster Preparedness projects financed under previous HIPs (i.e. adoption and use of Early

Warning Systems - EWS at district and community level). It is important to integrate and capitalise

on gaps identified and lessons learned from the cyclone response in future actions.

Support is needed for vulnerable communities as well as local and national institutions to increase

their resilience and enhance their preparedness, and to translate national and regional strategies into

actions on the ground. Even though policies and guidelines have been put in place in most countries,

there are still significant gaps in preparedness and in rolling out on the ground. At all levels, actions

should support by way of equipment with DP materials, training and capacity building, (both human

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 6

resources and assets), deliver assistance in the development of contingency and evacuation plans, set

up/strengthen civil protection committees, strengthen early warning systems and coordination

systems among national and local actors, and conduct risk assessments and simulation exercises.

The potential of local committees is significant, but they need the right equipment and capacity to be

able to prepare for, mitigate and respond to disasters.

At regional level, support is needed to assist the operationalisation of SADC's regional disaster

response mechanism and surge teams with established thresholds for response, developed in

coordination with the member states remains crucial for a coherent and effective response. Support

is needed to strengthen coordination structures to facilitate coherent and coordinated regional

response and to plan for prepositioning of disaster preparedness stocks strategically across the region

DG ECHO encourages the use of new and innovative technologies in DP Actions. For example,

integrated web and mobile based platform such as DataWinners in Mozambique and Whatsapp in

Malawi have proven to be useful tools enhancing preparedness for response. The experience as well

as use of drones for rapid risk assessment, mapping and rescue operations are positive innovations

that require scale up due to their efficiency. There is need to further embed and scale up the availed

good practices of use of these technologies at national level.

An important lesson learned from cyclone Idai and Kenneth response is the necessity for

prepositioned emergency stocks. Despite rapid funds allocation from donors, procurement and

logistical constraints substantially slowed down the response. Existing stocks, though pertinent, were

insufficient and quickly depleted. There is need to reinforce national capacity to prepare, manage and

replenish emergency stocks and set up data systems for their management and accountability.

Prepositioning and logistics preparedness is therefore crucial to enhance disaster rapid response both

in terms of more rapid delivery time to the affected people as well as reduced costs. Stock

prepositioning should be guided by the already developed/up to date contingency plans and wherever

possible based on a risk assessment.

Flood events in 2019 demonstrated that urban disaster preparedness needs to be reinforced, for

instance with a more capacitated, trained and equipped DMA and the national red cross society.

Early Warning and Early Action

Efforts to support functional Early Warning Systems (EWS) have produced good results, but

continued efforts to expand and strengthen the system is needed. Even though Early Warning

Systems exist at national levels, support is still necessary to: i) integrate hydrological and

meteorological services to produce efficient and usable EW; ii) interlink EWS at national, district

and community level in a more efficient and usable way; iii) enhance risk knowledge; and iv)

expand the coverage of EWS since some remote areas are not yet served by effective EWS (as

evidenced by the 2019 cyclone impact). Coordination/interactivity of the various components is

weak, undermining the effectiveness of the whole system. The ability to translate climate forecasts

into locally usable early warning information and early action by affected communities,

humanitarian responders and political decision-makers varies across the countries, but is generally

limited. It is a concern that Early Warning is not always systematically translated into Early Action.

Flexible funding modalities, such as Crisis Modifiers are integrated in the majority of DG ECHO

funded actions funded in the SAIO region. This to ensure that humanitarian actors on the ground

have flexible funding available to act promptly to a sudden-onset crisis before the arrival of large-

scale response mechanisms. Crisis Modifiers are therefore an important component of building

capacity for Early Action that needs to be further advocated for and integrated both by humanitarian

and development programmes. Activation of flexible funding mechanisms should be wherever

possible be guided by a developed contingency plan.

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 7

Shock Responsive Social Protection Systems (SRSPS)/ Preparedness on Cash Transfers

National social protection systems are not shock responsive or adequately equipped to expand

vertically or horizontally to rapidly respond to the needs of affected people13

. There is a need to

promote, advocate for and develop SRSPS. It is essential to further ensure that basic needs of

affected beneficiaries are addressed using Multi-Purpose Cash Transfers.

Links between Disaster Management Agencies (DMA) and social protection sectors need to be

reinforced to endorse and implement SRSPS.

Shock responsive components need to be aligned with national DP strategies, including a single

registry to facilitate rapid and effective horizontal and vertical expansion. Enhanced coordination

among government institutions, civil society, NGOs, UN and International Organisations and private

sector is key.

Multi-Purpose Cash Transfer (MPCT) preparedness needs to become an intrinsic part of DP

activities and, whenever possible, linked to Shock Responsive Social Protection Systems (SRSPS) to

ensure faster and more efficient use of cash.

Cash preparedness needs to be enhanced, such as pre-arranged and pre-tested agreements with

service providers, to ensure rapid activation and scale-up. Advocacy for cash preparedness and

technical support to national authorities and local partner organisations is crucial.

Cash transfers should be multi-sectoral, i.e. covering such sectors as shelter, NFIs and should be

nutrition-sensitive, whenever the markets are ready to absorb and provide the necessary products.

There is also a need to ensure that transfers to beneficiaries are made using safe, modern, innovative

and efficient solutions like mobile technologies, whenever possible.

Advocacy for Disaster Preparedness

There is still a clear need to further advocate for the operationalization of Disaster Preparedness. This

could include activities that support operationalisation of policies especially concerning allocation of

national resources at the district level (ensuring funds for EWS, DP in schools, flexible funding in

programmes, i.e. crisis modifier, and training of staff in disaster preparedness and response at district

level). Advocacy activities could include workshops and best practice exchanges, promotion of joint

assessments between humanitarian and development actors and of a humanitarian-development

nexus approach (with the use of Joint Humanitarian/Development Frameworks), and participation in

regional RIASCO working groups.

Logistics (Humanitarian Supply Chain- HSC)

When a disaster hits, time is of outmost importance. Logistical and coordination issues can seriously

delay a timely humanitarian response. HSC is one of the priorities of the Sendai framework that

needs to be reinforced to reduce time, cost and complexity in humanitarian responses.

2. Education in Emergencies

There is a need to strengthen education systems to prepare for and respond to disasters, such as

through the Comprehensive School Safety Framework14

.

13 See Regional Inter-agency Standing Committee (RIASCO) lessons learned report of July 2017

14 United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction and Global Alliance for Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience in

the Education Sector (2017) Comprehensive School Safety Framework.

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 8

In areas prone to natural hazards, education systems must be equipped and prepared for and take

steps to actively reduce risks to learners, education staff and physical infrastructure of schools. It is

equally important to minimise education disruption and enhance children’s safe access to schools

during and after natural disasters.

This can be done through both hardware and soft components, e.g. among others, through awareness

raising, training of teachers and pupils on DP, development of evacuation plans, prepositioning of

education materials, linking Disaster Management Authorities and EWS to schools, small-scale

improvements of school infrastructure, and training of teachers on psychosocial support to children

following disasters. Light classroom refurbishment and (re)habilitation of gender-sensitive WASH

facilities might also be necessary in the wake of a disaster.

Schools are often used as emergency shelters after disasters, which can cause education disruption

and does not represent an ideal solution for IDPs, as schools rarely have adequate infrastructure to

accommodate them. To avoid disruption of educational activities, EiE Actions can also cover

establishment of temporary learning spaces and/or provide adequate temporary facilities to IDPs

whenever the school area is the only solution in term of evacuation points during emergencies. There

is therefore need for adequate preparation including emergency stock piling. Especially when access

is a challenge, innovative technological solutions such as tablet or radio learning may be an

appropriate option to ensure continuous learning as much as possible.

Advocacy is generally needed to ensure that DP is integrated into national Education Sector Plans

and education policy in order to mitigate the impact of disasters.

In cases of humanitarian crisis, it may be necessary to restore and maintain access to safe and quality

education, and to support out of school children to quickly enter or return to quality learning

opportunities. DG ECHO works towards four EiE objectives focused on access, quality, protection

and capacity development

EiE is also highly relevant for displaced populations in Cabo Delgado, as well other areas where

potential unrest may cause displacement. Among other things, and taking into consideration Conflict

Sensitive Education (CSE) principles, it is important to provide both safe learning spaces and

psychosocial support to teachers and pupils, as well as ensure teacher recruitment, retention and

compensation (in case teachers are leaving the area due to general insecurity).

3. Emergency Response

No funds are initially allocated in this HIP for emergency response (with the exception of the

EiE sector- see above). However, in case of a natural or man-made disaster in the region, where

national capacities are overwhelmed or where there are unmet needs, this HIP allows to allocate

funds for emergency response. Humanitarian needs are likely to be high in the sectors of food

assistance, health, water, sanitation, shelter, non-food items, nutrition, education in emergencies,

short-term livelihood support, emergency rehabilitation of basic infrastructures, protection, support

to emergency communication, and logistics and coordination. In view of the current food insecurity

crisis in the region, humanitarian food assistance and, when undernutrition levels are critical, support

to nutrition programming are expected to be priority sectors in emergency response.

3. HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE

1) National / local response and involvement

Regional level: At regional level the SADC DRR Unit has the mandate to play a key role in disaster

response and preparedness, but lacks capacity and resources. Their long-term strategy paper, SADC

Disaster Preparedness and Response Strategy and Fund 2016-2030, contains the key priorities to be

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 9

reached at SADC level and highlights some of the key gaps to be addressed, e.g. the necessity for a

regional DRM data system, the need for a regional disaster response mechanism and a Regional

Emergency Response Team. There is weak coordination between disaster preparedness and response

structures at regional and national level, in part due to the lack of guidelines and Standard Operation

Procedures (SOPs).

National level – Overall, the capacity of governments to implement disaster preparedness activities

and respond to natural disasters has made some important improvements in the last years. However,

the capacity to face disasters of the magnitude seen in the last few years, including the cyclones in

2019, remains low. Disaster Risk Management policies and frameworks already exist, although their

effectiveness is often limited due to lack of resources and technical capacity of the Disaster

Management Authorities (DMA). The DMA in Mozambique, Malawi and Zimbabwe have been

active and present during the Idai and Kenneth cyclone response providing personnel, equipment and

some financial resources. Collaboration with international organisations is generally conducive and

collaborative. Nevertheless, the response demonstrated the need to improve rapid response capacity

and coordination in all the countries affected. The capacity to respond was, in part, hindered by lack

of effective coordination in the response, and lack of emergency contingency financial resources and

stocks in the affected countries. This resulted in uncoordinated/delayed response. Despite prompt

international response and fast emergency funds allocation, it took weeks to materialise at field level.

Strengthening coordination capacity and prepositioning of emergency stocks should therefore be

scaled up.

Various DMAs are reinforcing EWS at central and district/province level although often the EWS

remains disconnected from the hydrological and meteorological services. In the past years, a strong

focus has been put on strengthening DMAs and important progress has been achieved.

At community and district level, civil protection committees exist, and, have proved to be crucial

during disaster response when they have been properly trained and equipped. However, in several

areas which not supported by international aid, these have no formal structure yet, thus lacking

adequate capacity in DP/DRR. Local civil protection committees and district actors need to be

reinforced.

There is openness toward use of innovative technologies such as mobile technologies and drones in

Mozambique, Madagascar and in Malawi where these technologies have demonstrated their

pertinence and effectiveness.

In Mozambique, the Early Warning System (EWS) has been significantly improved in some of the

most hazard prone areas. EWS still needs to be rolled out to cover all of the most at risk areas, and to

better integrate meteorological and hydrological data at all levels.

The modality of cash transfer interventions in humanitarian response is generally accepted in the

region and promoted by the governments15

. As a result of concerted efforts by humanitarian

partners, the government of Mozambique is now open to pilot cash transfer in the country.

In Zimbabwe and Malawi the government directly implemented food assistance operations using

their own grain reserves, in collaboration with WFP and NGOs. However, the magnitude of the food

insecurity, compounded with the macro economic crisis made international support necessary to

implement Humanitarian Food Assistance operations.

Links between the Disaster Risk Management and social protection sectors are generally not

consolidated.

15 With the exception of Mozambique where accepted on pilot basis.

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 10

2) International Humanitarian Response

Disaster Preparedness

Main donors involved in disaster preparedness/mitigation in the SAIO Region are the EU and its

member states, (DFID, IRISHAID, Belgium, France, Italy), NORAID, USAID/OFDA, the World

Bank/GFDRR, several agencies of the UN System, framed within long-term development strategies

with some integrating wider climate change adaptation programmes.

Humanitarian Response

According to Humanitarian Response Plans and Flash Appeals launched in the first half of 2019, the

total estimated number of people in need of assistance in Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi,

Mozambique and Zimbabwe is 9 435 980. In early 2019 and following the cyclone events a series of

Appeals and Humanitarian Response Plans were issued and updated in Madagascar, Malawi,

Mozambique with Comoros and Zimbabwe16

. For the cyclones-related flood response alone the

requirements are as follows: Comoros: 19.7 USD million (16% covered); Malawi: 45.2 USD million

(89%); Mozambique: 386 USD million (36%); Zimbabwe: 60 USD million (38%).17

Cyclone Idai and Kenneth response

The international community responded promptly to Cyclone Idai and Kenneth. DG ECHO

mobilised a total of EUR 16.250 million for the emergency response for various sectors such as

Humanitarian Food Assistance, Logistic, Health, Protection, Education and WASH. Upon request

from the Mozambican government, the European Civil Protection Mechanism (EU CPM) was

activated. The EU deployed humanitarian experts and Member States provided in-kind assistance to

Mozambique: Some 60 000 relief items were delivered and 9 operational teams operated on site. In

total, 9 EU Member States (AT, DE, DK, ES, FR, IT, LU, PT and UK) contributed through the EU

CPM.

Post Disaster Needs Assessments (PDNA) were conducted in Mozambique and Malawi. According

to the PDNA for Mozambique, the government was in need of USD 3.2 billion for post-cyclone

recovery. Following the publication of the PDNA at the International Donors Pledging Conference in

Beira on 31 May and 1 June, donors committed USD 1.2 billion. The PDNA for Malawi estimates

that needs amount to USD 370.5 million for resilience, recovery and reconstruction needs.

Several institutional actors have been involved in the cyclone response: the EU and its member

states, (DFID, IRISHAID, Belgium, France, Sweden, Italy, Portugal, Spain), NORAID,

USAID/OFDA, the World Bank GFDRR plus several private donors.

3) Operational constraints:

Access/humanitarian space: Access is rarely an issue in the SAIO Region from a security point of

view. Nevertheless, some areas frequently affected by natural disasters are not reachable due to

logistical constraints or to security risks (i.e. Southern Madagascar and North Mozambique). The

preparedness component of such areas needs further resources to ensure a more efficient response

capacity in the future. The security situation in Northern Mozambique, specifically in Cabo Delgado

16 Humanitarian Response Plans for Mozambique, Flash Appeal for Zimbabwe and Madagascar (Grand Sud), Lesotho

Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis, Malawi Flood Response Plan and Appeal. Some available at

https://reliefweb.int/disaster/tc-2019-000021-moz

17 OCHA Southern Africa Cyclones Idai and Kenneth Snapshot – July 2019

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 11

appears to be worsening. In 2019, there was no need to operate in remote management and it is

likely to remain the same in 2020, although enhanced logistic support to deliver humanitarian

assistance is likely to be necessary.

Partners (presence, capacity): Major humanitarian partners are present in the region. Presence of

development programmes and expertise presents opportunities to mainstream/link DP/EiE funded

actions in development programmes with appropriate advocacy and sustainable outcomes in the long

term.

Absorption capacity on the ground and efficiency of operations; Overall, there are no major

problems in terms of absorption capacity among the DG ECHO partners, which often collaborate in a

very constructive way both with local NGOs and private sector. This was further demonstrated

during the cyclones and flood response in 2019 where DG ECHO partners ensure presence at

community level before, during and after the cyclones events.

4) Envisaged DG ECHO response and expected results of humanitarian aid

interventions.

- General considerations for all interventions:

All humanitarian interventions funded by DG ECHO must demonstrate the integration of gender and

age sensitivity in a coherent manner. Also, all humanitarian interventions funded by DG ECHO must

take into consideration any risk of sexual- and gender-based violence (SGBV) and should develop

and implement appropriate strategies to actively prevent such risks. DG ECHO equally urges the

establishment of quality, comprehensive and safe SGBV response services.

Specific attention will also be paid to the measures ensuring inclusion of people with disabilities in

proposed actions.

DG ECHO will give particular attention to climate-proofing humanitarian response.

For more information see the Thematic Policies Annex.

The strategy of this HIP is structured around three pillars:

PILLAR 1) Disaster Preparedness (DP) for response and early action

PILLAR 2) Education in Emergencies

PILLAR 3) Humanitarian Emergency Response.

Eligible countries are:

Pillars 1 and 2: Mozambique, Malawi, Zimbabwe, Lesotho and Madagascar.

Pillar 3: Botswana, Comoros Islands, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique,

Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Eswatini and Zimbabwe.

Protection should be mainstreamed and integrated in all actions, prioritising safety and dignity,

meaningful access to services, participation of affected children / communities and accountability.

Risk-analysis will include specific protection threats and include GBV, child protection.

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 12

Pillar 1: Disaster Preparedness for response and early action

Support is envisaged for enhanced DP for response and early action in contexts of recurrent and

predictable crises, building upon ongoing actions and lessons learned from recent crises, and linking

to national systems and longer-term strategies. This will include supporting and strengthening

national disaster management systems, reinforcing early warning and linking early warning to early

action.

The 2020 strategy will build on and integrate lessons learned and gaps identified in the cyclone

response (Idai and Kenneth) in 2019. Lessons learned, innovative approaches and best practices from

previous and ongoing actions should be built upon and scaled up.

Logistics preparedness may be integrated where necessary and appropriate especially to promote

emergency stock piling.

While man-made disasters cannot be ruled out, major hazards threatening the region are natural

(floods, cyclones, droughts); DP actions supported by this HIP will predominantly address rapid

onset natural hazards. As drought is a considerable phenomenon in the region, pertinent interventions

may be considered, and interventions such as cash/social protection and education in emergencies

could serve the purpose to prepare for drought events.

As regards flooding, watershed management approaches are recommended.

Partners are encouraged to work with local implementing partners, and to promote active

involvement of targeted communities and their representatives, as well as authorities at all levels.

The following are the priorities related to Pillar I

Priority 1 – Strengthening Linking Early Warning (EW) to Early Action (EA) and adoption and use

of Crisis Modifiers

Early Warning Systems (EWS)

Reinforce the nexus between early warning and early action

Emergency Stock piling/prepositioning

Support national and local competences on Rapid/Emergency Response Mechanisms (ERMs)

Build capacity at national/local level – including for contingency planning and coordination

Enhance capacity to respond to a crisis within a crisis

Advocate for further development funding for DRM/EWS

Priority 2 - Shock Responsive Social Protection System (SRSPS)

Support governments, development and humanitarian actors to include SRSPS linked to

functional EWS in their long term plans

Capacity strengthening on cash transfers linked with the development of Shock Responsive

Social Protection Systems.

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 13

Priority 3 – Support to operationalise regional response mechanisms

Provide technical support to SADC DRR unit capacity to operationalise SADC Disaster

Preparedness and Response Strategy and Fund 2016-2030, including creation of regional response

team and contingency funds

Advocacy, support and dissemination of policies, guidelines and SOP in relation to SRSPS,

MPCT and crisis modifiers.

Promote Regional Coordination and exchanges / lesson learning exercise in relation to

DP/DRR

Promote/facilitate effective, principled and rapid humanitarian action; enhance

operational readiness/preparedness to respond, coordinated humanitarian response; support for

mobilizing humanitarian financing and comprehensive information management.

Explore relevant synergies with the EU Civil Protection.

Cash/Multi Purpose Cash Transfers (MCPT) preparedness should be embedded in all the above-

mentioned priorities of the Pillar I.

Pillar 2 – Education in Emergencies

In the SAIO region, interventions in Education in Emergencies (EiE) is closely linked to disaster

preparedness (DP). Under 2020 HIP DG ECHO will also support activities related to EiE beyond

DP. This will include response to emerging needs to ensure education continuation in the context of

natural and man-made disasters.

The following are the priorities related to EiE pillar:

Priority 1 – Increase disaster preparedness capacities of schools, teachers and pupils.

Priority 2 – Ensure minimal education disruption due to natural disasters.

Priority 3 – Ensure safe learning spaces and provision of adequate education programmes for

children in areas affected by violence and/or emergency. 18

For both Pillars I and II, actions funded under this HIP should focus on contributing to a larger,

longer term resilience vision of vulnerable communities in crisis/disaster prone areas to withstand,

adapt and quickly recover from stresses and shocks. This means that priority will be given to actions

that demonstrate that they are part of a longer-term strategy and part of a programme that goes

beyond the action to be funded under this HIP with tangible continuation of concurrent and

subsequent activities using development funds.

DG ECHO supported actions should be risk informed and able to relate to the INFORM Risk Index

to enable them to define preparedness measures, for readiness to respond to potential disasters whilst

aligning to the country-specific action plans/strategies and to the priorities of the Sendai Framework

for DRR (2015-2030). DG ECHO's focus will be on Sendai Priority No.4, “Enhancing disaster

preparedness for effective response and to build back better in recovery, rehabilitation and

reconstruction”.

18 Taking into consideration the length of education disruption and the availability of official/qualified teachers, need

for provision of catch-up classes or remedial classes should be assessed. CSE principles and PSS component

including Social Emotional Learning (SEL) should also be factored in

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 14

Pillar 3 – Humanitarian Response

The main priority of this pillar is to provide rapid and lifesaving humanitarian aid to populations

affected by natural or man-made disasters.

This pillar concerns emerging or sudden-onset humanitarian needs related to natural and/or man-

made disasters during the duration of the HIP. No initial funding is initially allocated but could be

considered in case of disaster event.

Any eventual emergency response should consider a multi-sectoral approach including food

assistance, nutrition, WASH, shelter, health, protection, Education in Emergencies and any other

relevant sectors based on the needs of the affected population, and should reflect vulnerabilities

related to gender and age, food and nutrition insecurity (i.e. IPC 3+), HIV/AIDS status, and be

coherent with DG ECHO policies. A single multipurpose assistance modality using a unified

delivery mechanism would be preferred when possible.

Crosscutting priorities for all the Pillars:

Adherence to humanitarian principles.

Protection mainstreaming

Use of innovative technologies aimed at enhancing efficiency

Prepositioning of emergency stock when possible (especially for Pillar I and II) and Logistics

(Humanitarian Supply Chain- HSC) guided by risk informed contingency plans.

Integration of crisis modifiers in actions.

Humanitarian – Development Nexus

Coordination and alignment with national policies and guidelines.

Please refer to the annexes for further details on each sector.

4. HUMANITARIAN COORDINATION

1) Other DG ECHO interventions

The Emergency Toolbox HIP may be drawn upon the prevention of, and response to, outbreaks of

Epidemics. Also, under this HIP the Small-Scale Response, Acute Large Emergency Response Tool

(ALERT) and Disaster Relief Emergency Fund (DREF) instruments may provide funding options.

2) Other donors’ engagement

Main development actors involved in disaster preparedness/mitigation policies in the SAIO Region

include DFID, Belgium, Italy, France, NORAID, IRISHAID, USAID/OFDA, the World Bank

GFDRR (Global Facility for DRR) and the EU and its Member States.

5. HUMANITARIAN – DEVELOPMENT NEXUS

1) Other concomitant EU interventions

In the countries of the region, the European Development Fund (EDF) is the main EU instrument to

provide development assistance. The 11th EDF covers the period 2014-2020. In addition, there are

several complementary programmes funded by the EU's Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI)

such as Pro-Resilience Action (Pro-ACT) and Global Public Goods and Challenges (GPGC) and

Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace (IcSP). Interventions of particular relevance for the

activities of this HIP include: Lesotho - Building an Integrated Social Protection System; Malawi -

Year 2020

Version 2 – 30/06/2020

ECHO/-SF/BUD/2020/91000 15

Resilience and Social Protection Programme, Education and Pro-Act; Madagascar: Pro-Act;

Zimbabwe: Zimbabwe Resilience Building Fund.

DG ECHO and the EU Delegations have made significant progress towards humanitarian-

development nexus approaches. Several actions initiated by DG ECHO have been taken over by the

EU Delegations and other development actors. The EU response to the cyclones IDAI and Kenneth

has been an excellent example of an effective EU nexus approach where humanitarian assistance,

and development programmes designed following the PDNA are complementing each other. EU

Delegation staff often take part in DG ECHO field missions and consultations with key stakeholders,

leading to common analysis and coherent and comprehensive joint response plans. Assessment of

proposals and final selection of projects will take into account nexus opportunities, supporting

synergies and complementarities with programmes funded by development donors.

2) Exit scenarios

The disasters caused by the cyclones in March and April 2019 clearly showed that there is continued

need for DG ECHO to fund Disaster Preparedness in the region. DP has the potential to save lives,

and lessen the impact of disasters on vulnerable communities, as well as lowering response and post-

disaster reconstruction needs. Additionally, natural hazards can undermine development gains and

exacerbate poverty and vulnerability.

Before DG ECHO can exit the region, it is necessary to ensure further engagement from

development actors in DP, and ensure that capacity of national and regional actors is sufficiently

robust. It is essential to reinforce the synergies between international organizations, UN, NGOs and

local and national authorities as key partners to work in a coordinated way in DP.

The exit strategy includes a progressively increasing role of the EU Delegations, national authorities

and other development actors to: 1) incorporate crisis modifiers, and to further mainstream integrated

DP in all its programmes;, 2) provide a concrete incentive to governments and other actors to further

invest in DP at national and district level; and 3) support the development of shock-responsive social

protection systems where possible. DG ECHO funding as well as knowledge and experience

supports "stepping stones" within longer-term strategies and programmes.

Electronically signed on 08/07/2020 16:04 (UTC+02) in accordance with article 4.2 (Validity of electronic documents) of Commission Decision 2004/563