REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL OPERATIONS PLAN · Director of Civil Protection (DPC) Ministry of the Interior...

1

REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL One People - One Goal - One Faith

African Risk Capacity (ARC)

REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL

OPERATIONS PLAN EDITION 2015/2016

November 2015

2

Table of contents

1. General Information ....................................................................................................... 5

2. Senegalese Drought Profile ........................................................................................... 6

2.1. General geographic distribution of droughts ............................................................ 6

2.2. General rainfall features of the country ................................................................... 9

2.3. Seasonal agricultural calendar .............................................................................. 10

2.4. Historical drought description ................................................................................ 10

2.5. Historical drought impact....................................................................................... 11

2.6. Historical drought interventions ............................................................................. 12

2.7. Discussion of points 2.4 to 2.6 .............................................................................. 13

3. Institutional Arrangements ........................................................................................... 13

3.1. Existing national policies or legislation .................................................................. 13

3.2. Existing assessment processes ............................................................................ 14

3.3. Contingency planning procedures for drought ....................................................... 14

3.5. Proposed financial arrangements and coordination of ARC payout ....................... 16

4. Risk Transfer Parameters ............................................................................................ 17

5. Scenario Definition ....................................................................................................... 17

5.1. Drought model scenarios ...................................................................................... 18

6. Intervention Details ...................................................................................................... 19

6.1. First intervention: Food distribution ....................................................................... 19

6.2. Second intervention: Cash transfer ....................................................................... 24

6.3. Third intervention: Cattle feed distribution ............................................................. 28

6.4 Fourth intervention: Screening and management of acute malnutrition ................. 31

7. Monitoring & Evaluation Framework and Plan .............................................................. 34

8. Programme Risks and Assumptions ............................................................................ 35

9. Definition of Standard Operating Procedures ............................................................... 37

10. Bibliography ............................................................................................................. 43

11. Annexes ................................................................................................................... 44

3

List of acronyms

ACRONYM MEANING

ANACIM National Civil Aviation and Meteorological Agency

ANSD National Agency of Statistics and Demography

ARC African Risk Capacity

ARV Africa RiskView

CLM Unit to Combat Malnutrition

CSA Food Security

DPC Directorate of Civil Protection

EWS Early Warning System (or SAP)

ERASAN Rural Survey on Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition

FEWSNET Famine Early Warning Systems Network

MEFP Ministry of the Economy, Finances and Planning

MEPA Ministry of Livestock and Animal Productions

MSAS Ministry of Health and Social Welfare

PSE Emerging Senegal Plan

SE/CNSA Executive Secretariat of the National Food Security Council

ZAR Zones (areas) at Risk

4

List of Figures

Figure 1: Rainfall trends (in mm) in Senegal covering the period 1980-2013 ......................... 9 Figure 2: Rainfall trends in Senegal between 2004 and 2013 .............................................. 10 Figure 3: Seasonal Calendar in Senegal ............................................................................. 10

5

1. General Information

Name of Country: SENEGAL

Legal representative for the plan:

Mr. Abdoulaye NABO Director of Civil Protection (DPC) Ministry of the Interior and Public Security Courriel : [email protected] Téléphone : +221 33 889 39 00

Focal point for the plan: Mr. Massamba DIOP ARC National Administrator Food Security Commission (CSA) Email: [email protected] Telephone: +221 775291562 / +221 338210811

1.1. Status of Senegal in Terms of Risk 1.1.1. Most serious risks

Senegal is prone to various risks which are mainly linked to climate change. Because of its geographical location, the country is exposed to the risk of coastal erosion which threatens habitat and infrastructure all along the coastline. Furthermore, the country regularly faces problems relating to rainfall distribution over time and area. On average, the rainfall varies from more than 1000 mm in the south to less than 300 mm in the north. The poor distribution of rainfall over time means that there are long periods of drought, such as those in 1980, 1983, 1996 and 2002. The erratic nature of the rainfall can also lead to flooding, as in 2005. In addition to unpredictable rainfall, locusts and grain-feeding birds are major risks for crops and pasturage. In 1983, 1992 and 2002, the country experienced infestations of desert locusts, which had a negative impact on agricultural production. On top of these various risks, volatile food prices for subsistence crops, cash crops and cattle add risk for food insecurity. This variability can be partly ascribed to fluctuations on world markets. The land ownership system, access to land, cattle diseases (e.g. Rift Valley fever, bird flu, Newcastle disease) and cattle theft are all risks to livestock.

1.1.2. Vulnerability

Climatic and other natural disasters (e.g. repeated droughts, floods, locust infestations) further undermine food security and the livelihoods of vulnerable households. Drought-related risks have a greater effect on rural populations who practice agriculture in the broad meaning of the term (e.g. farming, fishing, livestock farming, etc.). Out of 1 607 769 ordinary households living in Senegal, 755 532 practice agriculture, i.e. 47% (ANSD: National Agency of Statistics and Demography, 2013). It should be noted that more than 73% of farming households live in a rural environment characterised by a high rate of poverty (57%) and a low level of access to basic social services, in spite of all the efforts made by the State. Rural farming households are most at risk from climate change, the threat of locust infestations, dysfunctional food product and livestock markets, etc. These categories of households have to deal with the continual depletion and deterioration of natural resources, soil fertility, and fishery resources. Irregular rains and droughts lead to a shortage of grazing for livestock. This phenomenon is more accentuated in the sylvo-pastoral zone. In these categories of households, the most vulnerable groups are children under five years old, pregnant and breast-feeding women, female heads of households (FCM), the elderly, the handicapped, and those suffering from chronic diseases.

mailto:[email protected]

6

1.1.3. National risk and disaster management capacity

In Senegal, the prevention and management of disaster risks faces many obstacles. The country does not have a major natural disaster risk research unit, experiences are not shared, and disaster risk prevention techniques are not disseminated. Moreover, Senegal has to deal with a shortage of dedicated sea and air intervention resources, as well as a lack of specialised equipment to deal with maritime search and rescue events, maritime safety, and sea pollution. Furthermore, there is no functional insurance system to compensate victims of natural disasters and local authorities lack local emergency plans. The State has nevertheless established a legal and institutional framework to manage disaster risks. This framework consists of consultative bodies including the Higher Civil Protection Commission, the National Platform for the Prevention and Reduction of Major Disaster Risks, and Regional and Departmental Civil Protection Committees. Apart from these consultative bodies, there is also a Civil Protection Directorate and the National Fire Brigade, which are the main executive bodies for disaster risk management. For livestock grazing, the State has developed an innovative mechanism which makes it possible to ensure the survival of herds threatened by drought: the livestock rescue operation (OSB). This operation was initiated in 2012 and aims to save the herds should there be a shortage of grazing. However, it should be noted that herding communities have a traditional adaptation mechanism for drought which consists of moving livestock to areas that are less affected. With regard to nutritional monitoring and the management of acute malnutrition cases, mechanisms instituted by the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare as well as the Nutritional Reinforcement Programme implemented by the Unit to Combat Malnutrition (CLM), allow continuous monitoring of the nutritional status of vulnerable populations and put in place appropriate interventions to deal with disasters.

1.2. Goal of this Operational Plan

The goal of this operations plan is to improve the food security of households and livestock affected by a rainfall deficit. In particular, the operational plan seeks to:

provide food assistance to households that are the most affected by drought in order to safeguard their livelihoods;

safeguard herds from a shortage of grazing; conduct nutritional monitoring and offer appropriate care to inhabitants affected by acute

malnutrition in disaster areas.

2. Senegalese Drought Profile

2.1. General geographic distribution of droughts Senegal has 14 regions and 45 departments. Except for the regions of Dakar, Kaffrine and Tambacounda which each have four departments, all other regions consist of three departments.

Region Department Drought prone

(Yes /No)

Top 3 crops vulnerable to droughts

Any other important livelihoods

DAKAR DAKAR No - -

DAKAR GUEDIAWAYE No - -

DAKAR PIKINE No - -

DAKAR RUFISQUE No - -

DIOURBEL BAMBEY Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Trade, livestock farming

7


(Yes /No)



DIOURBEL DIOURBEL Yes


DIOURBEL MBACKE Yes


FATICK FATICK Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize

Fisheries, tourism, salt production

FATICK FOUNDIOUGNE Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Tourism, fisheries

FATICK GOSSAS Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Livestock farming

KAFFRINE BIRKELANE Yes


KAFFRINE KAFFRINE Yes


KAFFRINE KOUNGHEUL Yes


KAFFRINE MALEM HODDAR Yes


KAOLACK GUINGUINEO Yes


KAOLACK KAOLACK Yes


Trade, livestock farming, fisheries

KAOLACK NIORO Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Livestock farming, trade

KEDOUGOU KEDOUGOU Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Gold exploration, forestry

KEDOUGOU SALEMATA Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Forestry

KEDOUGOU SARAYA Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Forestry

KOLDA KOLDA Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Forestry, fisheries

8


(Yes /No)



KOLDA MEDINA YORO FOULAH Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Forestry, fisheries

KOLDA VELINGARA Yes


Forestry, livestock farming

LOUGA KEBEMER Yes

Cowpeas, Groundnuts, and millet Livestock farming

LOUGA LINGUERE Yes


LOUGA LOUGA Yes

Cowpeas, Groundnuts, and millet

Livestock farming, emigration

MATAM KANEL Yes


MATAM MATAM Yes


MATAM RANEROU Yes


SAINT LOUIS DAGANA Yes Rice, millet and maize

Market gardening, fisheries

SAINT LOUIS PODOR Yes Rice, millet and maize

Fisheries, market gardening, Livestock farming

SAINT LOUIS SAINT LOUIS Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Tourism, fisheries

SEDHIOU BOUNKILING Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Fisheries, forestry

SEDHIOU GOUDOMP Yes


SEDHIOU SEDHIOU Yes


TAMBACOUNDA BAKEL Yes

Groundnuts, cotton and maize Fisheries, emigration

TAMBACOUNDA GOUDIRY Yes

Groundnuts, millet and maize Emigration

9


(Yes /No)



TAMBACOUNDA KOUMPENTOUM Yes


TAMBACOUNDA TAMBACOUNDA Yes


THIES MBOUR Yes

Groundnut, millet and cassava Fisheries, trade

THIES THIES Yes

Groundnut, millet and cassava

Fisheries, market gardening, industry

THIES TIVAOUANE Yes

Groundnut, millet and cassava

trade, industry, market gardening

ZIGUINCHOR BIGNONA Yes Rice, millet and maize Fisheries, forestry

ZIGUINCHOR OUSSOUYE Yes Rice, millet and maize

Fisheries, forestry, tourism

ZIGUINCHOR ZIGUINCHOR Yes Rice, millet and maize

Fisheries, tourism, forestry

2.2. General rainfall features of the country

Like all countries of the Sahel, Senegal is characterised by highly variable rainfall in both time and space. The northern regions generally receive an annual rainfall of less than 500 mm. This is true for the regions of Saint Louis, Louga and Matam, while southern regions such as Ziguinchor, Kédougou and Sédhiou record more than 1000 mm as an annual average (Figure 1). Figure 1: Rainfall trends (in mm) in Senegal covering the period 1980-2013

Source: (WB, 2014) Figure 1 also shows how irregular rainfall can be over time. During the period 2008-2010, the average rainfall recorded in the twenty weather stations of the country exceeded the bar of 800 mm per year (Figure 1). Precipitation was particularly poor (in quantity and duration) in 2007 and 2011.

251 352 380 390 487 493 569 617 668 672919

10421163 1223

sain

t Lo

uis

lou

ga

mat

am

dak

ar

thiè

s

dio

urb

el

fati

ck

tam

bac

ou

nd

a

kaff

rin

e

kao

lack

kold

a

séd

hio

u

kéd

ou

gou

zigu

inch

or

10

Figure 2: Rainfall trends in Senegal between 2004 and 2013

Source: ANACIM data gathered by the ANSD

2.3. Seasonal agricultural calendar

Senegal's agricultural sector enjoys some important advantages and favourable conditions, notably its potential 35 billion cubic metres of surface and underground water and more than 3,8 million hectares of arable land. However, farming in Senegal depends largely on the rainy season which generally starts in May and ends in October (Figure 2). The harvest period of crops such as millet, sorghum, maize and groundnuts is October and November. Figure 3: Seasonal calendar in Senegal

Source: FEWSNET (Newsletter no.1, December 2012)

2.4. Historical drought description

The key aspect of a meteorological risk is that of moisture content stress caused either by irregular rainfall, early stoppage of rainfall, late start of rainfall or extended drought. Even in the absence of these specific conditions, studies have shown that more than 40 % of the variation in national crop production may be attributed simply to annual variation in rainfall (World Bank, 2014).

Year Affected regions Source Official statement

Impact on food security and livelihoods

2004-2006

None

2007 All regions except for Dakar

ANACIM (National Civil Aviation and Meteorology Agency)

No Drop in agricultural production;

Shortage of grazing for livestock

Rural exodus;

0

20

40

60

0

200

400

600

800

1000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

quantité moy en mm nb moy en jours

October November December January February March April May June July August September

Transhumance (Livestock migration)

Marketing of groundnut Seasonal migration

Rainy season Rainy season Dry season

Harvest

Harvest

Harvest

Harvest

Harv

est

Planting/Repl

ant

Planting

Planti

ng

Planti

ng

L/P

L/P

Land preparation

Weeding/Hoeing

Weeding/Hoeing

Weeding/Hoeing W/h

Millet

Maize, Gnut, sorghum

Rice

Seasonal calendar in Senegal

11

Year Affected regions Source Official statement

Impact on food security and livelihoods

Sell-off of livestock; Sell-off of production

equipment; Food and nutritional

insecurity

2008-2010

None


ANACIM No Drop in agricultural production;


Rural exodus; Sell-off of livestock; Sell-off of production


insecurity

2012 None






insecurity






insecurity

2.5. Historical drought impact

This section describes the impact of drought in Senegal during the past ten years in terms of the number of persons and households needing assistance.

Persons affected by food insecurity

Persons affected by malnutrition

Livestock affected

Year Number Source Number Source Number Source

2007 Not available

2011 806 000 persons

WFP (action plan for 2012)

*120 000 children aged 6-59 months *10 900 pregnant


645 721 Tropical Livestock Units (sensitive)


12

and breast-feeding women

2013 675 000 persons

SECNSA (Executive Secretariat of the National Food Security Council) (response plan for 2014)

SECNSA (response plan for 2014)

628 163 Tropical Livestock Units (sensitive)


2014 927 416 SECNSA (response plan for 2015)



784 000 ARC (ARV newsletter for November 2014)

2.6. Historical drought interventions

There have been three interventions during the past ten years following difficulties during the 2007, 2011, 2013 and 2014 rainy seasons.

Number of beneficiaries of food assistance (foodstuffs, cash, food vouchers)

Number of beneficiaries of nutritional initiatives

Number of stock farmers who have benefitted from the sale of subsidised animal feed

Number Source Number Source Number Source

2008 24 941 tons of rice were distributed to inhabitants

CSA (Food Security Commission)

2012 1 080 902 persons

Review of the 2011/2012 food and nutritional crisis (Ministry of Family Affairs)

250 000 children


116 980 Tropical Livestock Units


2014 618 395 2014 Response Plan Report (SECNSA)

25 571 children

2014 Response Plan Report (SECNSA)

41 Tropical Livestock Units

2014 Response Plan Report (SECNSA)

2015 On-going

13

2.7. Discussion of points 2.4 to 2.6

In total, 24 941 tons of foodstuffs were distributed throughout rural areas in 2008. It is difficult to determine the number of beneficiaries because of the fact that no targeting was done. The 2012 response plan was coordinated by the Ministry of Family Affairs and implemented by the World Food Programme (WFP). In 2014, the response plan was coordinated by the Executive Secretariat of the National Food Security Council (SECNSA). For the food assistance component, 618 395 persons were effectively assisted out of a target of 675 000 persons. With regard to the livestock rescue operation, the objective was 628 163 livestock units for needs assessed at 56 535 tons. Overall, 6,6% of the goal was achieved.

3. Institutional Arrangements

This section is based on institutional provisions in effect to manage interventions in the case of drought.

3.1. Existing national policies or legislation

ARC initiative In 2012, the State of Senegal joined the African Risk Capacity Insurance Company (ARC) to strengthen its capacity to manage risks related to natural disasters, to adapt to climate change and to assist inhabitants who are vulnerable to the threat of food insecurity. In 2014 Senegal received a total of 16,5 million US dollars from ARC to provide assistance to 927 416 food insecure people and to purchase 14 839 tons of cattle feed which was sold at subsidised prices to livestock farmers.

AGIR initiative In order to make the most vulnerable inhabitants more resilient, that is to strengthen their capacity to cope with the risk of various shocks, to respond effectively to shocks and to adapt in a sustainable manner, the State of Senegal joined the Global Alliance for Resilience - Sahel and West Africa (AGIR). The overall objective of AGIR is to reduce household food and nutritional vulnerability in a structural and sustainable manner.

Emerging Senegal Plan Moreover, in the Emerging Senegal Plan (PSE), the State clearly declared its determination to develop national and regional contingency plans, promote the culture of disaster risk management and prevention, cope with major industrial accidents, establish an early warning system for natural disasters and improve safety during the transport of dangerous materials. The State is also considering improving natural disaster management with the establishment of an assistance and insurance mechanism, the creation of an emergency intervention fund and capacity building of role-players in civil protection. In total, the State is making provision for 40 billion CFA francs to finance a storm water management project as well as a project relating to climate resilience and risk and disaster management. A project of 36.4 billion CFA francs together with the Integrating Climate Change Adaptation project for the sustainable development of the country; the integrated eco-system management project in Senegal and the project to consolidate and extend protected marine areas (PSE, 2014).

Coordination de l’urgence In order to face a drought situation, the Government of Senegal elaborates end execute a response plan. In 2015, a national coordination commission overseeing the execution of the national response plan was established by the “arrêté primatoral” n°03379 of the 17 march 2015. The executive secretary of the national council for food security (SECNSA) was appointed as the coordinator of such commission. Roles and responsibilities of all parties have clearly been defined.

14

3.2. Existing assessment processes .

Type of evaluation

Description of the process

Evaluation of the population’s nutritional status

This evaluation was coordinated by SECNSA. It is usually carried out in October and November. Data are collected by members of the early warning system technical committee. The main tools used are the harmonised framework or teams sent to zones at risk (ZAR). The evaluation indicates the quantity of rainfall received per region, food insecurity status and agricultural production. These evaluations are always financed together with partners although this is not a sustainable mechanism.

Estimate of the size of the herd affected by a shortage of fodder

This assessment is coordinated by the Ministry of livestock. The vulnerable core is estimated at 25% of the total livestock population. The biomass availability assessment is conducted to determine the areas likely to receive assistance. This assessment is financed by the Senegalese State

SMART (Standardised Monitoring and Assessment of Relief and Transitions) surveys

Type of nutritional survey carried out annually by the MSAS (Ministry of Health and Social Welfare) and/or the Unit to Combat Malnutrition (CLM) which determines the levels of prevalence of malnutrition with representation at departmental or regional level. This assessment is financed by the Senegalese State with sometime the support technical and financial partners

Analysis of PRN monitoring data

Every quarter the Nutrition Enhancement Programme (PRN) undertakes active screening campaigns for acute malnutrition in children aged 6-59 months in 60% of the local communities of Senegal. This completely covers all areas that are most severely affected by acute malnutrition in Senegal. Such analysis is financed by the PRM

3.3. Contingency planning procedures for drought

3.3.1. Emergency plan coordination authority

In Senegal, SECNSA coordinates the drafting and implementation of emergency plans to respond to drought-related shocks and works closely with all national and partner structures involved.

3.3.2. Other stakeholders In this task, SECNSA works in close collaboration with:

The Food Security Commission (CSA) which is in charge of activities related to the purchase and delivery of foodstuffs for inhabitants;

the Ministry of Livestock and Animal Productions which is responsible for the purchase and delivery of cattle feed as part of the livestock rescue operation;

the Unit to Combat Malnutrition (CLM) is responsible for implementing the PRN and acts in aspects related to screening and managing acute malnutrition at community level;

The Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MSAS) undertakes passive screening and manages cases of severe acute malnutrition in health care facilities;

Regional Food Security Committees (CRSA) and Departmental Food Security Committees (CDSA) have respectively been established and are chaired by Governors and Prefects. These authorities provide support for implementing emergency plans at regional level;

15

Technical and financial partners (FAO, WFP, UNICEF, Red Cross of Senegal, OXFAM, CARITAS, ACTED, CECI (Centre for International Studies and Cooperation), ACF (Action Against Hunger, etc.) provide support to the government in implementing emergency plans.

3.3.3. Needs assessment

Drought detection is done by means of an early warning system (EWS) which provides information on the rainfall situation and the status of vegetation and animals. All technical structures involved in food security are members of the EWS technical committee. This analysis is usually supplemented by the results of the agricultural season monitoring missions in zones at risk (ZAR) as well as food security surveys carried out by SECNSA. In 2014 the results of the rural survey on agriculture, food security and nutrition (ERASAN) served as substantiation for a food security analysis carried out during the national workshop on the harmonised framework which was held in November 2014. The needs have been estimated with the help of the results provided by this workshop. Henceforth, the harmonised framework will be the preferred instrument to evaluate needs with regard to assistance with food security. The technical and financial partners (CILSS, FAO, WFP etc.) fully finance ZAR mission surveys and national workshops on the harmonised framework. However, SECNSA and some national structures are pooling their efforts to finance certain surveys as was the case during the ERASAN survey. Almost all the needs assessments are coordinated by SECNSA: the EWS (Early Warning System), food security surveys, national workshops on the harmonised framework, etc. With regard to the nutrition component, a needs assessment is done based on the prevalence of acute malnutrition identified according to the SMART 2014 survey undertaken by the MSAS and the number of children aged 6 to 59 months affected during active screening campaigns for acute malnutrition.

ARC payout (in million USD)

Activities to be carried out Comments

< 1 Food or food voucher distribution

The most vulnerable regions identified by the harmonised framework

5 Food or food voucher distribution

The most vulnerable regions identified by the harmonised framework

30 Food or food voucher distribution? sale of cattle feed at subsidised prices and implementation of acute malnutrition screening and management activities

The most vulnerable regions identified by the harmonised framework. The size of the sensitive core will be estimated. The areas most affected by acute malnutrition will be identified by the 2015 SMART and affected populations will be estimated on the basis of prevalence.

Regardless of the amount received, a portion will be used to fund the operations of targeting of beneficiaries.

16

3.4. Drought response coordination mechanism

SECNSA is the structure responsible for coordinating the response plans which include ARC interventions. The other parties are the CSA, the Unit to Combat Malnutrition (CLM), the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MSAS), the various technical and financial partners, the Ministry of Livestock and Animal Production (MEPA), the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning (MEFP) and Regional and Departmental Food Security Committees (CRSA and CDSA), chaired by Governors, Prefects and Deputy Prefects. The number of households requiring food assistance is determined by analysing food security using the harmonised framework tool. The Food Security Committee targets villages and neighbourhoods on the basis of well-defined criteria of vulnerability in each department which has been targeted. From this point on a targeting mission is organised by the national commission responsible for the response plan to supervise the targeting of households. Households are selected by village and neighbourhood assemblies facilitated and supervised by members of the National Commission, the Regional Food Security Committee (CRSA) and the Departmental Food Security Committee (CDSA). Village and neighbourhood assemblies consist of the village/neighbourhood leader/delegate, the Imam, a youth representative, a women’s representative, etc. A targeting report would be drawn up, signed by all participants and approved by the administrative authority (Prefect or Deputy Prefect). The data are captured on smart phones and sent to SECNSA server where they are analysed. In theory, an audit survey is carried out to correct for any inclusion mistakes. The final results of the targeting are then shared by SECNSA with all the stakeholders. With regard to nutrition, targeting is done by means of two active screening campaigns for acute malnutrition carried out by the PRN as well as continuous passive screening in health care facilities.

3.5. Proposed financial arrangements and coordination of ARC payout

To avoid any difficulties with payouts noted during the 2015 implementation of interventions financed by ARC funds, the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning (MEFP) will open an account with a commercial bank to receive the funds. An account manager will be designated by the MEFP. Payments will be made directly to those entitled to them (service providers, suppliers, personnel, etc.) after completion and on submission of all substantiating documents approved and certified by the authority in charge of the operational structure and the Director of Civil Protection.

Account

A special account opened in a commercial bank

Account manager A manager designated by the MEFP

Type of supervision

The management of the account will be supervised by the Ministry of the Interior as well as by the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning

Will the account only receive funds from the ARC? Yes

Destination of the funds in the account

Financing of activities which are contained in the implementation plan

17

4. Risk Transfer Parameters

Coverage period 2015

Expected payout frequency Once

Maximum payout Thirty million US dollars

Risk transfer level 73%

Estimated premium USD 3.6 million

5. Scenario Definition

In this section, four scenarios are defined on the basis of assumptions made about the rainy season and payouts received from ARC. It should however be mentioned that the ARC payouts depend mainly on rainfall. Thus, good rainfall is not necessarily synonymous with good agricultural production. Studies have clearly established that more than 40% of the variation in annual national crop yields depends exclusively on fluctuations in rainfall (Kandj, Verchot & Mackensen, 2005).

Scenario ARC payout

Steps to be taken by the State

Scenario 1: Normal year

No payout

A food insecurity response plan is drawn up for all regions where there is persistent food insecurity. In particular, these are the regions of Kolda, Kédougou, Sédhiou, Ziguinchor, Matam, Tambacounda and Saint Louis (Podor department). The State will depend primarily on the support of its humanitarian partners to finance this response plan. The PRN and MSAS will roll out their usual nutrition monitoring and acute malnutrition management activities. These activities will relate specifically to the regions of Matam, Tambacounda, Kédougou, Kolda, Sédhiou and Ziguinchor as well as to the Podor department.

Scenario 2 : The severity of the drought is in the frequency range of once every two years to once every five years

Low payout (USD 2 million)

This scenario is undoubtedly the most realistic if one considers the global advance of the rainy season characterised by cumulative rainfall that is higher or equal to normal rainfall, and favourable plant growth. The payout received would be less than two million US dollars. It would be fully used by the State in implementing a national food insecurity response plan. The financing gap would be made up by humanitarian partners. The regions of Louga, Kolda, Kédougou, Sédhiou, Ziguinchor, Matam, Tambacounda and Saint Louis (Podor department) would be involved. The PRN and MSAS will roll out their usual nutritional monitoring and acute malnutrition management activities. These activities will relate specifically to the regions of Matam, Tambacounda, Kédougou, Kolda, Sédhiou and Ziguinchor as well as the Podor department.

Scenario 3 frequency: The severity of the drought is in the frequency

Average payout (USD 5 million)

In this case, the response plan would include the grazing component. In total 20% of the payout would be allocated to purchasing cattle feed for livestock farming areas (Louga, Matam) and reception areas for migrant livestock (Kaffrine, Tambacounda).

18

Scenario ARC payout

Steps to be taken by the State

range of once every six years to once every nine years

The rest would be used to assist inhabitants suffering from food insecurity in vulnerable regions such as Louga, Kolda, Kédougou, Sédhiou, Ziguinchor, Matam, Tambacounda and Saint Louis (Podor department) and to implement screening and management campaigns for acute malnutrition through the PRN and MSAS mechanisms.

Scenario 4: The severity of the drought is in a frequency range of greater than once every ten years

High payout (USD 30 million)

A large-scale national response plan will be implemented. It will consist of three components: food assistance (60% of payout), cattle feed distribution (30% of payout) and nutrition (10% of payout) In-depth geographic targeting will be undertaken to determine which departments and local authorities are the most affected by drought. Screening campaigns for acute malnutrition and activities to manage it will be undertaken every two months.

5.1. Drought model scenarios

The regions listed in Scenario 1 are the most vulnerable. It is believed that certain categories of households will have difficulties in recovering from the drought of the previous year in spite of a good rainfall recorded in the next year. In March 2015, the harmonised framework projected the number of persons affected by food insecurity to be 503 293 (for June 2015). In addition, these districts are the most impoverished of the country: the incidence of poverty is 76,6% at Kolda, 71,3% at Kédougou and 68,3% at Sédhiou. The areas listed have a concentration of impoverished persons totalling some 1 358 885, i.e. 21,3% of the total number of impoverished persons in Senegal. Furthermore, the Matam region and the Podor department are areas which suffer from an almost permanent state of drought. For all these reasons, even if there should be no funding from the ARC, these areas will need support to combat persistent food insecurity

Scenario Regions ‘At risk’ Number of people affected

Comments

Scenario 1 Kédougou, Kolda Matam, Saint-Louis (department of Podor), Sédhiou, Tambacounda, Ziguinchor ,

503 293

A food security survey will be conducted in the month of October. It will be followed by the analysis of food security through the national workshop of the harmonised framework in November 2015. These two evaluations will help to better refine areas at risk and to determine the number of people affected, regardless of the scenario.

Scenario 2 Kédougou, Kolda Louga Madam, Saint-Louis, Sédhiou, Tambacounda,

604 362

Scenario 3 All regions except Dakar 1 015 016

Scenario 4 All regions 1 039 550

19

6. Intervention Details

Four interventions are planned, according to the scenario: food distribution, food voucher distribution, sale of subsidised cattle feed and screening and management of acute malnutrition.

Intervention Name

Nature Programme

Description Comment

Food distribution

C Ad hoc activity Food distribution to the most vulnerable households living in areas at risk of food insecurity

This intervention will be performed, regardless of the scenario

Cash transfer A Ad hoc activity Cash is transferred to previously targeted most vulnerable households

Scenarios 3 and 4

Sale of subsidised cattle feed

H Regular scalable activity

Cattle feed will be purchased and made available to the Departmental Sales Committees.

Scenarios 3 and 4

Screening and management of acute malnutrition

E, G Regular scalable activity

Active and passive screening of acute malnutrition among children aged 0-59 months and women of reproductive age (15-49 years)

Scenarios 3 and 4

6.1. First intervention: Food distribution

Name of intervention: Food distribution

Brief description of the intervention An estimation of the number of beneficiaries and their needs is coordinated by SECNSA. The results are forwarded to the CSA for capture and delivery. Households will be targeted. The quantity of foodstuffs received per household is calculated on the basis of 10 kg per person. The size of beneficiary households will have a ceiling of 10 people. In other words, the maximum quantity of foodstuffs that a household can receive is 100 kg (2 bags of 50 kg).

Substantiating the choice of intervention: The free distribution of foodstuffs constitutes a powerful means of support to enable vulnerable households to cope with shocks resulting from drought. Cereals such as rice and traditional cereals (millet, maize and sorghum) are the basic foodstuffs eaten by Senegalese households. The average consumption for traditional cereals is 72 kg/person/year compared to 64 kg/person/year for rice (CILSS, 2004, p. 52). The distribution of rice will get priority because this cereal does not require much processing before it can be eaten. The intervention will make it possible for rural households in the most vulnerable regions (see above) to ensure their survival while protecting their livelihoods. The gender aspect is always prioritised in targeting beneficiary populations. Female heads of households, handicapped heads of households or those suffering from chronic disease are always prioritised. The distribution of foodstuffs is easy to implement. Purchasing and delivery of rice takes barely 45 days if the funds are available. During the rice purchasing period, targeting can be done within a maximum period of one month. All these operations can be completed within a period of two months. Distribution only takes 10 days if rice is available.

20

Consequently, the intervention complies in all respects with the principle criteria for eligibility defined by ARC and which are related to sensitivity to timing, safeguarding the livelihoods of beneficiary households and the 6 month implementation period.

Implementing partners

Name of Partner Organisation

Name of contact at organisation

Telephone number

Email address Responsibilities

Directorate for Civil Protection

Abdoulaye NABO

(221) 33 889 39 00

[email protected] - ARC Focal point ; - Interface between ARC and Government

Executive Secretariat of the National Food Security Council (SE/CNSA)

Ali Mohamed called Séga CAMARA

(221) 33 865 30 35

[email protected] Intervention Coordinator (targeting, food distribution, monitoring/evaluation, communication, coordination activities, etc.)

Food Security Commission (CSA)

Intendant Colonel Aly MAR

(221) 33 821 61 91

[email protected] Purchasing and delivery of foodstuffs

Organisation chart for the main structures directly involved in the intervention.

Management of funds With the authorisation of the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning, the Ministry of the Interior and Public Security will open a special account in a secondary national bank to receive the funds paid out by ARC. An account manager will be appointed by the financial department in accordance with regulations on public accounting and project management.

SECNSA

Overall

coordination of

the entire

intervention

CSA

Purchasing of

foodstuffs

National, regional,

departmental and

local technical

committees – geographic targeting

Assemblies of villages and

neighbourhoods- household

targeting

Beneficiaries




21

Payments will be made directly to service providers, suppliers, personnel etc. after the service has been rendered and on submission of all substantiating documents duly approved and certified by the operational structure authority and the Director of Civil Protection.

Unit cost The unit cost varies according to the quantity of food received by each beneficiary. In this case, each person will receive a monthly quantity equivalent to 10 kg of rice. Whatever the scenario, the unit cost is estimated at 4,310.625 CFA or USD7.5.1 This cost includes the acquisition of rice, at an average price of 300 FCFA handling, transportation, targeting, monitoring and evaluation, the communication intended for the beneficiaries (375 FCFA for each beneficiary).

Targeting of beneficiaries

What type of targeting mechanism and criteria will be used?

The targeting of the regions, departments and communes will be done by the national committee in charge of the response plan on the basis of the survey results and the harmonised framework. The CDSAs will be targeting villages on the basis of the vulnerability criteria: agricultural situation (production and rainfall); production of biomass; occurrence of perils (epidemics, floods, fires, locust infestations, etc.); occurrence of bushfires (frequency, area burned); zoo-sanitary situation (upsurge of outbreaks of animal diseases). In each targeted village, the selection of recipient households will be through a village Assembly, assisted by members of the national committee, the CRSA or THE CDSA. The households targeting will be based on criteria of vulnerability to food insecurity. The following categories of households will be preferred, ceteris paribus (other things being equal) : households with difficulties to provide three meals per day ; households experiencing a shock (drought, death of a contributor,

fire, floods, etc.); households with an irregular and low income source; households headed by a disabled person or someone who is

chronically ill ; households headed by a poor widow or a poor person over 60

years. After the holding of the village Assembly, a targeting report (PV) would be prepared. It would be approved by the administrative authority prior to being captured on Smartphone. The data and the original PV will be all sent to SECNSA for processing and control.

Who will do the targeting? Targeting will be coordinated by SECNSA. It will be participatory and inclusive.

How will the targeting be paid for?

About 2% will be levied on funds disbursed by ARC to finance the targeting activities.

Is there any process of verification of targeting?

A survey is planned to check the vulnerability of households actually targeted by the village assemblies. It also happens that the administrative authority, on the basis of knowledge of the population operates a first level of verification of the lists submitted to it by the assemblies of villages.

When will the targeting take place in relationship to the ARC payout?

If payment takes place in January of the year 1, targeting will start in February of the same year.

Does this intervention require to go through procurement?

Yes.

1The exchange rate is USD 1 = 574.75 CFA francs. This is the cost to be applied to the transfers according to the

Website of the Central Bank of the West African States (BCEAO or CBWAS) http://www.bceao.int/-Cours-des-devises-contre-Franc-CFA-.html, accessed October 10, 2015 at 6:35pm.

22

Who is responsible for procurement?

The CSA is responsible for the procurement

What are the timelines around procurement?

45 days for restricted tendering

Please list all the items to be procured and the possible procurement sources:

Item Unit Source(s)

Rice Metric ton - Senegal River Valley - Imports from India – bought on local market

Suppliers deliver the rice (bought on local or international markets) to the main distribution points of the targeted local communities. The CSA is responsible for overseeing that the quantities actually delivered by suppliers accord with the quantities previously estimated. Distribution committees which are established by Prefects and Deputy Prefects undertake the distribution of rice to households which receive prior notification through the village leader or neighbourhood delegate. If money is transferred, the implementation partners will sign a contract with a mobile telephone operator. The telephone numbers of beneficiaries are collected and checked during targeting and messages are sent to the beneficiaries to go to the approved distributors to collect the sums allocated. To carry out this operation, the State depends on the experience of partners such as the WFP, the Senegalese Red Cross and Caritas.

Implementation monitoring Data related to delivery and distribution are regularly collected and forwarded to the central authorities by regional and departmental SECNSA officials. Monitoring visits are organised by SECNSA to ensure that distribution operations proceed smoothly.

Does the implementing partner have a monitoring system in place? If yes, please describe this system in as much detail as possible. Is it paper-based? The information gets keyed into an MIS system? Excel? Who can access the information?

The chosen approach is based on three components of the evaluation: a formative evaluation which consists of assessing whether goals set for foodstuff distribution operations (targeting, purchasing and delivery, distribution, disbursement, etc.) are being gradually achieved. Weekly meetings are organised with all stakeholders for this purpose. a diagnostic evaluation which will allow for changes to be made (quotas, needs) depending on changes in the context in which the intervention is being implemented. For example, in 2014, the partners had revised their ambitions downward and SECSNA quickly readjusted the quantity of rice per person to make up for this gap. a summative evaluation will be done once the intervention has been completed. This overall evaluation of the intervention will be carried out with all stakeholders, coordinated by SECSNA, in order to measure the impact of the intervention, learn lessons, identify bottlenecks and work out recommendations for the next time. The report is shared with all stakeholders and any other interested user.

23

If an existing program, has monitoring occurred in the past? What criteria is used to monitor one program or not to conduct monitoring Have any evaluations of the program been detailed in the past?

The program was carried out in the past. Assessments were made. The reports are available

Please detail the data or bits of information to be collected by the monitoring system.

The information to be collected is relative to: the quality of targeting. It is appropriate to assess the

error rate of inclusion, the compliance with the criteria, the conformity of the quotas allocated prior to the targeting;

the quality of the distribution: this would involve evaluating compliance with the planned quantities;

the operations turnaround time; the efficiency and effectiveness of the intervention; the statement of account (account balance).

Who is responsible for collecting this information? Who is responsible for analysing the information?

Information will be collected and analysed by SECNSA, with the technical support of all the partners concerned.

Regarding this specific intervention, how is M&E paid for?

From the ARC Fund, if the amount exceeds USD5 million. Otherwise, it will be financed by SECNSA with the support of partners.

What measures have been introduced to ensure the timely and accurate collection of monitoring data?

SECNSA acquired a functional server when the 2015 response plan was implemented. The department also acquired smart phones and has 104 officials throughout all the regions and departments of the country. These officials have some means of transport (cars or motorbikes) and have been well trained in the techniques of gathering information through smart phones. This device makes it possible to collect all required information accurately to ensure that the intervention is properly monitored/evaluated. This year also a specimen report (using Excel) was designed and made available to all operational partners in order to provide SECNSA with a summary report on all activities that have been conducted.

What is the timing around M&E in relationship to the ARC payout?

From the notification of the possibility of a payout to the end of the products distributions.

To gain a better understanding of how this activity fits into the ARC payout timeline, please insert an implementation timeline for this activity. Please use GANTT chart format where you list the activities in the Activity column and either highlight in colour or use “X’s” to indicate the month(s) in which the activity occurs. In the last column enter the organization or person who is responsible for carrying out the activity.

24

Step

Implementing Body

2016 2017

O N D J F M A M J J A S

Identification of drought conditions

SECNSA

Confirmation of a drought

SECNSA

ARC payout announced

MEFP

Contingency plan adopted

SECNSA

Needs assessment carried out to validate the departments

SECNSA

Targeting of households for intervention

SECNSA

Procurement, foodstuffs purchasing and delivery

CSA

Start of the effective distribution

SECNSA

Monitoring/Evaluation

SECNSA

6.2. Second intervention: Cash transfer

Name of intervention : Cash transfer

Brief description of the intervention: The distribution of cash to previously targeted households. Each household will receive an amount equivalent to 5 000 CFA francs per person. The number of persons per household will be limited to 10, i.e. a single household will not receive more than 50 000 CFA francs. As opposed to food distribution, this activity will be implemented in areas where the market is functioning

Substantiating the choice of intervention: The advantage of a cash transfer is the simplicity of implementing it insofar as it does not require a lot of work involved in procurement, transport costs, handling or guarding of goods, etc. The risks related to inflation or stock-outs are lower in comparison with the distribution of foodstuffs. Moreover, this intervention allows households suffering from drought to have access to a more varied basket of foodstuffs. Like the distribution of foodstuffs, a cash transfer complies in all respects with the main eligibility criteria defined by ARC. To this end the cash will allow vulnerable targeted households to guarantee their food security and therefore protecting their livelihoods. The activity likely to be to be implemented within six months period following the payout reception

Implementing partners

25



Telephone number



Abdoulaye NABO

(221) 33 889 39 00


Executive Secretariat of the National Food Security Council (SE/CNSA)


(221) 33 865 30 35

[email protected] Intervention Coordinator (targeting, food distribution, monitoring/evaluation, communication, coordination activities, etc.)

Food Security Commission (CSA)

Intendant Colonel Aly MAR

(221) 33 821 61 91

[email protected] Purchasing and delivery of foodstuffs

Management of funds With the authorisation of the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning, the Ministry of the Interior and Public Security will open a special account in a secondary national bank to receive the funds paid out by ARC. An account manager will be appointed by the financial department in accordance with regulations on public accounting and project management. Payments will be made directly to service providers, suppliers, personnel etc. after the service has been rendered and on submission of all substantiating documents duly approved and certified by the operational structure authority and the Director of Civil Protection..

Unit Cost The unit cost is USD 13.05.2 This cost includes the cost of contracting with a monetary transfer institution.



See first intervention.

Who will do the targeting? See first intervention.







Does this intervention require going through procurement?

The intervention will require going through procurement. National money transfer institution will be involved.


Executive Secretariat of the National Food Security Council, under the control of the Public Procurement Regulation Agency.

2The exchange rate is USD 1 = 574.75 CFA francs. This is the cost to be applied to the transfers according to the

Website of the Central Bank of the West African States (BCEAO or CBWAS) http://www.bceao.int/-Cours-des-devises-contre-Franc-CFA-.html, accessed October 10, 2015 at 6:35pm.




26


The call for tenders is launched following confirmation of the amount to be received from ARC. A period of two months will be necessary to fulfil the contract.

Information on procurement A contract will be signed with a national money transfer agency (INTA). Once the list of beneficiaries has been thoroughly checked, it will be forwarded to the Director of Civil Protection (DPC) and the INTA. The DPC will give the account manager authority to transfer the necessary amount (including costs) into INTA accounts. All beneficiaries would have to go to a distributor approved by the INTA to receive the proposed amount.

Implementation monitoring


The approach is identical to that adopted for the first intervention.


This is not an existing program.


The information to be collected is relative to: the quality of targeting. It is appropriate to assess the

error rates of inclusion, the compliance with the criteria, the conformity of the quotas allocated prior to the targeting;

the quality of service provided by INTA : this would involve verifying that the amounts distributed to households are complied with ;

the operations turnaround time; the efficiency and effectiveness of the intervention; the statement of account (account balance).




See first intervention



Monitoring & Evaluation schedule See GANTT chart below.


27

Organisation chart of the main structures directly involved in the intervention.

Step

Implementing Body

Year 1 Year 2



SECNSA


SECNSA


MEFP


SECNSA


SECNSA

Targeting of households for intervention

SECNSA

Procurement SECNSA/ARMP

Start of the effective transfer

SECNSA


SECNSA

SECNSA

Overall

coordination of

the entire

intervention

National, regional,

departmental and

local technical

committees – geographic targeting

Service

providers

Cash transfer

Assemblies of villages and

neighbourhoods- household

targeting

Beneficiaries

28

6.3. Third intervention: Cattle feed distribution

Name of intervention: Livestock Safeguard Operation (OSB)

Description of the intervention This would involve purchasing cattle feed from suppliers and making it available to departmental committees which will sell it to pastoralist at subsidised prices.

Justification The OSB will make it possible for targeted farmers to rescue the vulnerable core (gestating females, diseased animals, etc.). This type of livestock urgently needs to be rescued for the survival of the herd. The intervention complies in all respects with the ARC eligibility criteria. To this end the cash will allow sensitive nucleus to guarantee their food security. The activity as in the past is implemented within six months period following the payout reception

Name of Partner

Organisation

Name of contact at

organisation

Telephone number


Director of of Livestock and Animal Production

Dame SOW

+221777404271

[email protected]

Coordination

In the case of a payout, funds will be transferred from the dedicated special account to the suppliers ‘account, after services have been rendered. The MEFP services will carry out all the necessary controls, in accordance with the management rules of public funds.

Define the Unit Cost (cost per beneficiary) to undertake this activity for one (1) month. The unit cost under Scenario # 1 : USD 11.02 (only if the scalable project is underway) Targeting for this activity


There is not a harmonised targeting methodology for this intervention. The Departmental Sales Committees sell the cattle feed to stock farmers at subsidised prices. Identification criteria vary from one Department to the other. These criteria are generally stock farmers’ business card, immunization records and physical recognition.

Who will do the targeting? The Departmental Committees.


This requires no funding.


There is no verification process implemented.


The geographical targeting is done following the need assessment. Targeting of outlet is done one month after the payout.

Does this intervention require going through procurement?

The intervention requires going through procurement.


The Ministry of Livestock and Animal Production (MEPA)


29


In collaboration with the Prime Minister’s Office, the MEPA undertakes a restricted consultation of all the cattle feed manufacturers. In general, three or four companies are usually interested in the operation. A quota is allocated in proportion to their production capacity, and put in place within a well-defined time period.

Please list all the items to be procured and the possible procurement sources:

Item Unit Source(s)

Cattle Feed Metric ton Local Market

Suppliers transport the cattle feed to the level of warehouses located in the most decentralized level of the Department.

Does the implementing partner have a monitoring system in place?

Yes


This is an ongoing programme. The MEPA will verify the identification of bags of feed in

order to better control them.

At a national level, managers from the MEPA will carry out

oversight throughout the country by means of surveillance

and monitoring visits.

At regional and local levels, monitoring will be done by

local administrative authorities and professional livestock

breeders’ organisations (OPE) by virtue of local

committees created for this purpose.

In terms of selling, the administrative authorities will

oversee the selling and will regularly submit reports, as

well as monitoring proceeds from the sales with the

finance body.

A monitoring/evaluation plan will be set up with, as the

indicator, the actual number of beneficiary animals as

compared to the targeted number.


The monitoring data collected includes the number of beneficiaries who have purchased, the amount distributed, the date of distribution, the quantity received, the amount cashed, the amount deposited in Bank, etc..


Departmental livestock inspectors.

30


There is no funding for this monitoring.


A matrix is developed for monitoring. The data is collected and sent to the administrative authorities which will pass them up. As a follow-up to the response plan, sometimes SECNSA collects this data from regional and departmental livestock inspectors.


There is not a defined schedule.

The following organisation chart shows the relationships between the different structures involved.

Step

Implementing Body

Year 1 Year 2



MEPA


MEPA


MEFP


SECNSA

Procurement MEPA/ARMP

Sale of cattle feed MEPA

Monitoring/ Evaluation

MEPA/SECNSA

MEPA (Monitoring and Coordination)

GOVERNORS (Supervision and coordination

at regional level)

RURAL COMMITTEES (Receipt of cattle feed and

delivery to breeders association)

FINANCIAL BODY (Allocation of funds and payments to the mills)

MILLS (Responsible for supplying

the feed)

TRANSPORTERS (Responsible for the distribution of feed to

warehouses at departmental and rural community levels)

DEPARTMENTAL (COUNTY)

COMMITTEES

BENEFICIARIES

31

6.4 Fourth intervention: Screening and management of acute malnutrition

Name of the intervention: Screening and management of acute malnutrition

Brief description of the intervention As far as the food component is concerned, the active screening for acute malnutrition in the population aged from 6 to 59 months in the targeted areas, is carried out by measuring the mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) at the beginning of the first and second quarters of 2016 (January to April). These large scale activities will identify children suffering from moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) and severe acute malnutrition (SAM) and allow them subsequently to be managed. Managing (treating) cases of MAM at community level according to standard norms and protocols (distribution of dry and wet rations, early childhood learning initiatives, outreach/communication activities, vitamin A and iron supplements, anti-parasite treatment) ; Onward referral for children suffering from SAM to health centres with letters for the referral (handed to the mother or caregiver of the child) and their management at community nutrition centres after onward referral ; Outreach/communication activities aimed at households and mothers of children aged 0 to 24 months for proper management (treatment) of the children in cases of malnutrition.

Substantiating the choice of intervention: Acute malnutrition occurs quickly after a shock at the level of the affected populations, and it primarily affects children aged from 6 to 59 months. If Not managed, acute malnutrition moves towards more severe forms leading to the death of untreated children*. Acute malnutrition screening is relatively easy at the community level, through the use of the MUAC tape. The costs for children with moderate acute malnutrition are also relatively light in comparison with those of the management of the children with severe acute malnutrition. Acute malnutrition increases the burden of the disease at the level of families, communities and health structures and leads to increased mortality among the population of children aged from 6 to 59 months. The Nutrition Enhancement Programme (PRN) platform makes it especially easy to implement active screening campaigns for malnutrition and the Ministry of Health (MSAS) mechanism ensures continuous management of severe cases. As a result, most of the costs associated with the implementation of this intervention are already covered by the State of Senegal and its other partners.

Implementing Partners .



Telephone number



Abdoulaye NABO

(221) 33 889 39 00


Unit to Combat Malnutrition (CLM)

Abdoulaye KA

Implementation and monitoring of malnutrition management activities

(221) 33 869 01 99

[email protected]

Management of funds With the authorisation of the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning, the Ministry of the Interior and Public Security will open a special account in a secondary national bank to receive the funds paid out by ARC. An account manager will be appointed by the financial department in accordance with regulations on public accounting and project management.



32

Payments will be made directly to service providers, suppliers, personnel etc. after the service has been rendered and on submission of all substantiating documents duly approved and certified by the operational structure authority and the Director of Civil Protection.

Unit Cost The unit cost per targeted beneficiary (total number of children aged from 6 to 59 months) for the nutrition component to carry out these activities for one month is 60.21 CFA francs. For the six months, the unit cost is 361.29 CFA francs for the total number of targeted children. The unit cost per beneficiary directly cared for (children suffering from MAM and SAM) amounts to 1, 1197.42 CFA francs for the six months. This cost does not include the beneficiaries of the planned communication activities.



Targeting will be done on the basis of active screening campaigns for malnutrition and will be passive at the level of health units. It will be based on the measurement of the mid-upper arm circumference by using the MUAC tape according to standard norms and protocols in nutrition. Screened children will be classified and treated according to their degree of malnutrition (moderate or severe).

Who will do the targeting? Screening campaigns will be carried out by the stakeholders of the PRN.


Targeting will be financed from the ARC funds.


Quality assurance of screening activities will be ensured by the supervision missions of the Unit to Combat Malnutrition (CLM) and the MSAS.


Targeting activities will be carried out over the period February-May of the payout year.

The intervention does not require going through procurement

How the implementation monitoring of this intervention will be carried out?


The PRN monitoring system will be involved in carrying out these activities. Monitoring/supervision activities are carried out at the level of villages/neighbourhoods, local authorities, district, regions and at national level by officials assigned to these tasks. The information collected at different levels, are aggregated in a Excel application that performs a first level of analysis which allows feedback to the different levels. All stakeholders and partners may have access to the generated information.


The PRN was established in 2003 and has conducted numerous activities to promote nutrition and combat malnutrition. Therefore there is a proven experience in monitoring and evaluation of the nutrition support activities

33


These indicators are the following: - Number of children screened - Number of children suffering from MAM - Number of children suffering from MAS - Number of children suffering from MAM managed - Number of children suffering from MAS referred - Number of children suffering from MAM who have recovered after care


The information will be collected and analysed by the CLM and the MSAS.


This component will be financed by the CLM outside the ARC funds.


The mechanism of the CLM and the PRN allow for rapid and accurate feedback across the different levels by the use of different agents and the Internet.


These activities will be ongoing. With or without a payout


CLM

(Monitoring and coordination)

Beneficiaries

CLM

(Monitoring and coordination)

Community Implementation

Agencies

(Implementation and guidance of community

role-players)

Local communities

(Monitoring and facilitation of the

intervention)

Health districts

(Monitoring compliance with

norms and protocols))

Community role-players

(Service delivery))

34

The organisation chart above shows the relationship between the partners involved and the CLM

Step

Implementing Body

2014 2015



SECNSA


SECNSA


MEFP


SECNSA


CLM

Screening campaigns CLM

Managing cases of malnutrition

CLM


CLM

7. Monitoring & Evaluation Framework and Plan

This section focuses on the results of the monitoring and evaluation framework for all interventions included in this operational plan. The aim is to help measure the performance of the roll out of the ARC contingency plan.

Result Indicator Auditing/verification tools

Risks/assumptions

Delivery of ARC funding

-Payout received Notification by ARC

Beneficiaries properly targeted

-Rate of inclusion errors

Verification survey Targeting report

Influence of politicians

The necessary quantity of foodstuffs is purchased and delivered (10 kg x number of targeted beneficiaries)

-Quantity of rice available in targeted communities

CSA report Monitoring reports drawn up by regional and departmental officials of SECNSA

Delays in disbursing funds; Difficulties associated with transport; Availability of foodstuffs on the market; Inflation

Targeted beneficiaries have received their

-Number of beneficiaries who have received foodstuffs;

Report on monitoring visit

35

quota of foodstuffs (10 kg/person)

-Quantity of foodstuffs distributed

Report on final distribution

Beneficiaries have received the proposed amount (5 000 CFA francs/person)

- Number of beneficiaries who have received cash; - Amount distributed

Report of monitoring visit Final distribution report

Disruptions in the INTA network

The committees have received the allocated quota of cattle feed

-Quantity of cattle feed sold;

Monitoring report Final report

Cattle feed is sold at the subsidised price initially decided

-Selling price by departmental committees

Monitoring report Final sales report

Non-compliance with set prices

Active and passive screening for acute malnutrition is carried out

- Number of children screened - Number of children suffering from MAM (Moderate Acute Malnutrition) - Number of children suffering from MAS (Severe Acute Malnutrition) - Number of children suffering from MAM managed - Number of children suffering from MAS referred

Activity report

None

Acute malnutrition management activities are implemented

- Number of children suffering from MAM who have recovered after care

Activity report

None

Improved implementation time for assistance to targeted households

First ‘contact’ with targeted beneficiaries within 120 days of the ARC pay-out received

Activity report Adequate and credible structures, as described in the Operations Plan, are in place

Improved implementation time for ARC activities

Activity completed within 180 days

Activity report

8. Programme Risks and Assumptions

The risks set out in the following table are of such a nature as to impede or prevent the proper execution of proposed activities.

Risk Risk probability

Description of the impact

Mitigation strategy

Currency exchange losses (the dollar rate can change between the time when needs are evaluated and

High This skews evaluations and creates misunderstandings between the

Request ARC Ltd to consider the exchange rate in effect in the country's central bank on the date on which the implementation plan is lodged.

36

Risk Risk probability

Description of the impact

Mitigation strategy

when interventions are implemented)

beneficiaries and those in charge of interventions

Effect of inflation on the products to be distributed between the time of the needs evaluation (Final Implementation Plan, FIP) and the actual purchase of the products

High The proposed quota cannot be bought, the number of beneficiaries will be reduced or the quantity will be reduced

Reducing initial quotas. For example, if 10 kg/person was initially planned, after inflation there may only be 8 or 9 kg/person.

The interventions will not reach the most vulnerable inhabitants

Low The inhabitants will become frustrated and ARC interventions will be discredited

Ensure scrupulous compliance with all criteria during screening; Ensure that distribution operations are properly carried out by the various committees

Delays in the disbursement of funds

High This delays the delivery of interventions and leads to non-compliance with ARC eligibility criteria

Pay ARC funds into an account with a streamlined and audited disbursement mechanism

Delays in the disbursement of ARC funds

Low This delays the delivery of interventions and leads to non-compliance with ARC eligibility criteria

The Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning can deposit funds in advance into the account that was opened

37

9. Definition of Standard Operating Procedures This part focuses on the Standard operating procedures (SOPs) which represent a set of tasks that will need to be completed before, during, and after a payout. The objective is to ensure that the ARC Operations Plan (OP) and Final Implementation Plan (FIP) are implemented accordingly and that funding and benefits pass on to beneficiaries within the ARC-defined timelines. These procedures form the basis of any post-payout audit.

# SOP Name SOP Details Responsible

Officer Timing

Turnaround time (days) Type

Min Max

Informational and Planning Processes

01 Monitor food security and other livelihoods levels

Intense monitoring of ARV and other EW tools to track severity and deterioration of food security situation

Mody DIOP (SECNSA)

Ongoing 30 45 Task

02 Update contact databases

Confirm contact details for TWG members,

implementing partners and other staff involved in

the rollout of a disaster risk management plan

Massamba DIOP (AN ARC)

As soon as possibility of payout is identified

02 04 Task

03

FIP development and submission

Mobilize the ARC TWG responsible for contingency

planning

Abdoulaye NABO


01 02 Task

Decide most likely scenario Abdoulaye NABO (DPC)

04 07 Decision

Decide on most likely regions or districts to receive

ARC funding


03 07 Decision

Decide on most likely interventions to fund given the

scenario

Abdoulaye NABO

04 14 Decision

Estimate the number of vulnerable people targeted

per targeted area

Mody DIOP 02 03 Task

Draft FIP, including detailed budget Mody DIOP 10 21 Task

Obtain internal government approval for the FIP Abdoulaye NABO

As soon as FIP has been drafted

07 21 Approval

Submit FIP to ARC Secretariat for approval Massamba DIOP

Not less than 30 days before

01 02 Task

38


Officer Timing


Min Max

anticipated payout

04

FIP re-submission (if

necessary)

Integrate feedback and resubmit FIP if not approved

by the ARC Board

Massamba DIOP

As soon as FIP Review Process decision has been communicated

05 07 Task

05 Coordinate Needs

Assessment

Work with SECNSA responsible for coordinating the

larger country drought response [enter name here]

to get results from the needs assessment

Mody DIOP 05 07 Task

06 FIP adjustment (if

necessary)

Following the needs assessment adjust the FIP

estimates regarding number of vulnerable people

targeted and how ARC funds will be used

Mody DIOP Following the needs assessment

Task

Financial Processes

07 Notification to financial

institution to receive

ARC funding

Inform National Treasury and/or the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Planning of imminent payout and verify all the bank details.

Abdoulaye NABO

30 days before payout

02 04 Task

08 Notification to

implementing partners of

potential funds transfer

Inform implementing partner(s) and or procurement sources of possible funds transfer and verify the bank details

Abdoulaye NABO

04 07

09 Verify arrival of ARC

funds national account

Ensure that a dedicated account for ARC funds exist Verify that off cycle transfer is possible if ARC funds go to national treasury

Momath NDAO Fanta Sakho SECK

03 06

10 Funds transfer to

implementing partners

Transfer funds to implementing agencies and/or procurement sources in timely manner


After payout 07 10 Task

Ensure that the implementing institutions will cooperate with independent financial auditors by maintaining all the relevant financial records open


03 07 Task

39


Officer Timing


Min Max

Operational Processes

11

Coordination

Inform other implementing partners of the possibility

of payout

Massamba DIOP


03 05 Task

Inform county and sub-county structures of

possibility of payout

Massamba DIOP


03 05 Task

Inform existing programme managers of possibility

of scale up (if selected intervention is scalable)

Massamba DIOP


04 07 Task

12

Targeting and registration

Identify additional beneficiaries and update beneficiaries’ lists

Mody DIOP As soon as payout is confirmed

10 14 Task

Assess completeness of list of beneficiaries in each identified region, department (county) or district


02 03 Task

13

Procurement (if required

by intervention selected)

Identify responsible actors for the procurement of

goods / supplies

Massamba DIOP (vivres) Aba LEYE (OSB)


02 03 Task

Verify that procurement sources and procedures

are functional

Massamba DIOP (vivres) Aba LEYE (OSB)


04 07 Task

14

Verify functionality of

existing systems

Confirm that food transfer distribution/ payment

systems are in place and functional and can handle

additional caseload (in case of scalable

intervention)

Mody DIOP 10 days before payout

07 14 Task

40


Officer Timing


Min Max

15

Communication

Develop clear communication channels among

implementing partners


03 07 Task

16

Monitoring and

Evaluation

Identify additional M&E personnel and training

needs for a possible payout

Mody DIOP As soon as possibility of payout is identified

05 10 Task

Ensure implementing partners are familiar with ARC

M&E requirements (monthly and final

implementation report)


07 10 Task

Ensure that implementing partners submit monthly

progress reports

Mody DIOP Ongoing during payout

07 10 Task

Submit monthly monitoring reports to ARC

Secretariat

Massamba DIOP

Ongoing during payout

04 07 Task

Submit final implementation report to ARC

Secretariat

Massamba DIOP

14 21 Task

Review lessons learned and make decisions about

changes for next payout/intervention.

Abdoulaye NABO

Following the implementation

07 14 Decision

41

Please complete the ARC Standard Operating Procedure timeline based on your country’s seasonal calendar and EW/CP processes. To do so: i) Add any additional SOPs that are specific to your country; ii) Replace the numbers in the month column with those months related to your seasonal calendar and ARC insurance contract; (iii)Either highlight in colour or use “X’s” to indicate the month(s) in which the activity occurs.

# SOP Name

Month

- 2 -1 Harvest (November) +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6

Monitor food security and livelihood levels

FIP development

Update contact databases

FIP submission

FIP re-submission (if necessary)

Coordinate and execute needs assessment

FIP adjustment (if necessary)

Notification to financial institution to receive ARC funding

Notification to implementing partners of potential funds transfer

ARC Payout

Funds transfer

Inform existing programme managers of possibility of scale up

Identify responsible actors for the procurement of goods/supplies

Verify that procurement sources and procedures are functional

Inform implementing partners of possibility of payout

Inform county/sub-county structures of possibility of payout

Identify additional beneficiaries and update beneficiary lists

Assess completeness of beneficiary lists in each identified district/county

42

Develop clear communication channels among implementing partners

Identify independent external financial auditor

Identify additional M&E personnel and training needs for a possible payout

Ensure implementing partners are familiar with ARC M&E requirements

43

10. Bibliography ANSD (National Agency of Statistics and Demography) (2013). Rapport définitif du Recensement général de la Population, de l'Habitat, de

l'Agriculture et de l'Elevage. (Final General Population, Habitat, Agriculture and Livestock Farming Census Report).

World Bank. (2014). Sénégal: Evaluation des risques dans le secteur agricole (Senegal: Risk Assessment in the Agricultural Sector)

CILSS (Inter-State Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel). (2004). NORMES DE CONSOMMATION DES PRINCIPAUX PRODUITS

ALIMENTAIRES DANS LES PAYS DU CILSS (CONSUMPTION STANDARDS OF MAIN FOODSTUFFS IN THE CILSS COUNTRIES).

Kandj, S., Verchot, L., & Mackensen, L. (2005). Climate Change and Variability in the Sahel Region: Impacts and Adaptation Strategies in the

Agricultural Sector.

PSE (2014). Plan Sénégal émergent (Emerging Senegal Plan).

44

11. Annexes Annex 1: Supporting documents

Annex 2: Budget

Table: Budget allocation for a USD 30 million payout (coverage)

Description SHARE COSTS/USD/CFA FRANC

Food Assistance (foodstuff and/or cash) 60%

USA 18,000,000

10,345,500,000 CFA francs

Malnutrition 10%

USD 3,000,000

1,724,250,000 CFA francs

Livestock Safeguard Operation 30%

USD 9,000,000

5,172,750,000 CFA francs

Coordination, supervision Chargeable to budget items of

activities

Monitoring & Evaluation and audit

Total 100%

USD 30,000,000

17,242,500,000 CFA francs

REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL OPERATIONS PLAN · Director of Civil Protection (DPC) Ministry of the Interior...

Documents

Transcript of REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL OPERATIONS PLAN · Director of Civil Protection (DPC) Ministry of the Interior...