The CCCM sector has learned from its experiences in both conflicts and natural disasters, and has been continuously reviewing its projects, programs and responses. This first edition of CCCM Case Studies presents 12 summaries of CCCM activities from 11 different countries. The purpose of this publication is to provide lessons as a knowledge base to support humanitarian operations (in both emergency and protracted contexts). Programs introduced in these case studies were implemented by CCCM Cluster agencies, as well as national authorities, in response to large-scale displacement caused by different types of humanitarian crises: these include earthquakes (Haiti), floods (Namibia, Thailand, Pakistan), typhoons (the Philippines), conflicts (Burundi, Kenya, Myanmar, Pakistan, Uganda, Yemen), and complex emergencies (Colombia). In light of these diverse contexts, each case study portrays experiences, successful practices, challenges and lessons.

Background

Since the beginning of the conflict in June 2011 an estimated 100,000 people have been displaced. To date,

no official registration has taken place. IDPs are displaced in over 150 sites. The majority of IDPs are living in planned camps but some reside in self-settled camps, host communities, or are scattered in small groups in forests. Camp sizes range from a few families to over 5,000 people. Approximately 40 percent of the IDPs are displaced in government controlled areas and 60 percent in non-government controlled areas, namely the Kachin Independence Organization/Army areas. International humanitarian organizations have very limited access to these non-government controlled areas. The CCCM/Shelter/NFI Cluster was activated in January

2013. In the Kachin and Northern Shan States, the CCCM Cluster specifically works with five local NGOS who act as implementing partners. These organizations have greater access to certain areas. The camp operational costs cover over 130 camps, which are funded through the CCCM Cluster, and camp activities are implemented by local NGOs. Additionally, the cluster provides funding for the training of CCCM focal points across all camps. Due to the sensitivities of the situation, neither the Government of Myanmar nor the Kachin Independence Organization/Army has any involvement in the cluster. However, they do play a role in CCCM activities through their involvement in camps in areas under their control.

Actions Taken

A large consultation was organized to agree upon a strategy to obtain accurate data from as many locations as possible. This consultation included international NGOs and local NGOs, which agreed on a standard questionaire.

A pilot questionnaire was carried out to test its applicability.

Technical support mission.

In March 2013 an interagency project that specializes in profiling exercises in IDP situations visited Myanmar on a technical support mission to help systematize the process. As a result of this mission the methodology, data collection tools, training strategy and implementation process were finalized through a series of collaborative workshops and meetings.

Translation of final tools.

Questionnaires, a training curriculum for enumerators and manuals for enumerators and data entry staff were

translated into Myanmar and Kachin languages.

Training for enumerators was provided by the cluster prior to field assessments.

Collection of camp profiling data.

Due to the aforementioned reasons, local NGOs played a central role in carrying out the data gathering exercises.

Data consolidated.

Camp snapshots and inter-camp analyses compared data across all camps at specific time frames.

Meeting consultation held with the cluster at national and state level to make the results of all 126 camps available through the cluster website and on flashdrives.

A consensus was reached that humanitarian actors could contact the CCCM Cluster directly for the raw

data.

A two-day workshop was conducted to determine lessons learned and possible next steps. Despite the recognition that it was a complex and resource-intensive exercise to deliver, it was agreed amongst participants to have regular workshops.

Challenges

Access: Most areas could not be reached directly by the cluster coordination team. This made it problematic to thoroughly assess and monitor the quality of the work being conducted by the enumerators.

Varying degrees of capacity: Due to the large area that needed to be covered and the many number

of sites, logistics were stretched. The quantity of human resources required was huge, and over 80 enumerators

were mobilized to carry out the exercises. Therefore, it was difficult to ensure that all enumerators had sufficient capacity (including required literacy level) to gather the data; there is a limited number of

qualified staff available in the North of Myanmar. This led to some questionnaires lacking information.

Possible use of pre-existing data:

The camp profiling methodology identified a number of different data sources including a camp level data collection form, the CCCM camp list for geographic data and assistance providers serving the different camps. Due to the varying capacities and resources in individual camps, it was sometimes challenging to find reliable existing data on the camp population to systematically compile the profiles.

Successes

Baseline data established.

Sufficient information was collected and compiled for 126 camps out of approximately 150. This is the largest overall collection of data since the Kachin crisis began and is often referred to and cited by various sectors and stakeholders.

Skill building of local partners and staff.

These actors gained expertise and skills by participating in the exercise which will be useful in future data collection and recording exercises. Furthermore, the exercise and the lessons learned serves as a basis for future capacity building efforts by the CCCM Cluster.
 

Lessons

Have clearly designated and qualified team leaders to certify quality data collection processes.

Ensure teams are of mixed capacity to have a balanced level of skills across all teams.

Translate tools into the local language with implementing partners. For this round it was done externally, leading to a lack of clarity in some translations.

Foster ownership of local actors participating in and supporting the exercise. For example perhaps organize and deliver some of the trainings.

Engage all clusters and sectors during the process of defining indicators to instill a greater sense of responsibility. Additionally encourage their commitment to provide the analysis of the results for their own clusters/sectors.

Collecting baseline data for each camp should become a recurrent standard practice.

Analysis and reporting phases posed some technical and coordination challenges, which should be strengthened for implementation in the second round. Input to the cross camp analysis report

should be collected in a more efficient manner to allow for quick dissemination.