Urban displacement and outside camps (UDOC)

Assessment report
Norwegian Refugee Council Myanmar
March/April 2015

Rafael Abis
Kelly Flynn
Giovanna Federicci
CCCM Consultant
Norwegian Refugee Council

1
1. Background

1.1 General Background

Myanmar today is a country of dichotomies at play. Whereas since early 2011, the new nominally
civilian Government of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar (GoRUM) has been lauded
worldwide for launching a series of rapid democratic reforms and peace-building efforts, the
country is also seeing the outbreak of new conflicts at the same time resulting to significantly
increasing humanitarian needs.

At present, Myanmar faces very distinct situations of conflict and displacement in different
geographic corners of the country. One of the areas that continue to experience an on-going
emergency is Kachin State in the northern part of the country.

The re-escalation of hostilities in Kachin State in 2011 has led to multiple displacements affecting
many people for almost four (4) years now. As of February 2015, the estimated numbers
according to the HCT run up close to 100,000 IDPs already1 including figures from its neighbouring
Northern Shan State. Humanitarian access remains a key protection concern. As of June 2014,
over 50% of the displaced people reportedly live in areas beyond government control where
international organizations have limited access. Local NGOs and national focal points have been,
and will continue to be central to the humanitarian response in Kachin State, but more regular,
predictable and sustained access by international organizations is needed to reach the required
levels of quality assistance in all IDP areas. There is an estimated 12,000 (13%) displaced
population that have been known to be living with the host community since the beginning of the
emergency in June 2011.

Based on the reflections presented in the CCCM Global Cluster desk review on urban and outside
camps displacement, Myanmar was selected by the CCCM Cluster to be one of the countries that
will be a pilot to explore how Camp Management expertise could be adapted for an out of camp
response. Kachin State in the north of Myanmar continues to experience on-going emergency and
the humanitarian needs for assistance and protection of many IDPs living outside camps,
particularly in the townships of Myitkyina and Bhamo where most of them are reportedly living in
continue to be unmet.

Through this assessment, it is hoped that the CCCM partners and other actors could have an initial
appreciation of the scope of humanitarian needs, gaps as well as programmatic opportunities
concerning IDPs living outside camps and what might be out-of-camp response. In support of the
CCCM Cluster in Myanmar, this assessment will inform appropriate adaptation of basic camp
management principles and practices coordination, information sharing and joint programme
response both on the part of NRC being the lead agency in this assessment and with key CCCM
cluster stakeholders and/or partners. The UDOC approach provides an opportunity for
1
HCT /OCHA Feb 2014 Humanitarian Report
The boundaries and names and the designations used on this document do not imply official endorsement or
acceptance by NRC and/or the CCCM Cluster
2
programmatic engagement that would bridge traditional cluster approaches by combining
development and humanitarian interventions together. It also facilitates a range of important
advocacy initiatives in behalf of the IDPs living outside camps and for the host community who
suffer equally from the impact of displacement.

Displacement during the Assessment

In the last week of March 2015, hundreds were again reportedly fleeing once more from their
habitual residences towards Bhamo township due to the most recent bombing campaign by the
Myanmar Air Force into the areas controlled by KIA northeast and southeast of Mansi. This
scenario, coupled with the region’s chronic underdevelopment compounded by protracted
periods of armed conflict and the worst landmine contamination in the country have resulted in
the wanton destruction of homes, livelihoods, water resources, health and education facilities
and other public infrastructure, all the while eroding the resilience of communities and increasing
the vulnerability of hundreds of thousands of affected population. The current conditions do not
inspire confidence that refugees and IDPs can safely return to their homes or otherwise seek a
durable solution. Access to villages of origin remain tightly controlled and made difficult for
humanitarian agencies

1.2 Profile of displacement

On record, there are 99,070 IDPs in Kachin State and about 12,684 (~13%) who are recorded to be
living within host communities in urban or peri-urban areas2. Approximately half of the displaced
population are reportedly living in rural areas that are generally difficult to access particularly to
international organizations. Majority of the IDPs are ethnic Kachin from six different tribes and are
generally Christians from various denominations, majority of which are Baptist or Catholic
believers. There are also a small number of IDPs who are from the Buddhist Shan minorities who
In Bhamo Township, there are only 7 IDP families who are known to be Muslims.

At the onset of the displacement, the displaced population sought refuge in church or monastery
compounds where they are affiliated by faith. “Some IDPs opted not to live in camps for a number
of reasons, including protection concerns. There is also a small number of families with the
financial ability and have managed to acquire rented accommodation in town”3.

“As an ethnic group, Kachin people are not used to staying in camps. In the context of this displacement,
our people prefer to live with relatives and friends. They do not unnecessarily occupy vacant public places
and pitch tents there as it is contrary to our culture. In Kachin however, the Government has put up the
PaLaNa (or Pyan Le Nay Yar Cha Htar Yay). Roughly translated, it means resettlement / retirement village
which has been a customary practice of the government for their retirees.

U Aung Wah
Founder Kachin Development Network Group and Member of United Kachin Democratic Party

2
Myanmar Humanitarian response Plan 2015, United Nations & Partners – Humanitarian Country Team
3
Interview with two KBC operations staff
3
1.3 Existing or planned profiling/assessment exercises

There has been no profiling exercise to map-out the population of IDPs living outside the camps.
Several organizations are planning or have started their own independent assessments to look
into needs and gaps of populations living outside camps not only in the urban areas but also in
rural areas. Some recent studies include:

 Solidarites International (SI) has embarked upon a “Rapid Assessment: Situation in Isolated
Villages in Kachin”. This looks into an array of issues confronting those displaced in three far-
flung isolated, hard to reach villages in Kachin State.4
 Solidarites International has conducted another study concerning the return of IDPs to
specific return areas as well as the relocation of IDPs into the government organized
relocation areas called PaLaNa 4 which is a model village set up by the government. 5
 CESVI has conducted a study to look at access to water for both camp and UDOC IDP
populations
 UNDP-led Joint multi-cluster Rapid Assessment is also being conducted
 UNDP assessment to do a mapping/profiling of the involvement of Civil Society Organizations
(CSOs) in the displacement situation in Kachin.
 UNDP Assessment on Early Recovery

2. Need Assessment

2.1 Methodology

The assessment was conducted from March to the 8th of April 2015 by Rafael Abis, NRC CCCM
expert. The assessment focused in two townships only namely Myitkyina and Bhamo due to a
combination of practical factors such as access, reported larger concentration of IDPs residing
outside camps.

The assessment intends to scope out the following:

a) The needs and gaps that the IDPs outside camps are facing in Kachin State
b) Traditional camp management methodologies and approached that could be adapted in
responding to identified IDP outside camps needs and gaps
c) Potential Programmatic synergy for existing NRC core competencies in-country that can be
done in Kachin around this target population as well as for other CCCM cluster members in
Myanmar.

Initially, the geographical focus was Myitkyina District with intention to expand it to Bhamo and
Muse Townships. The assessment was to cover these townships in 6 weeks. In the course of the
assessment, Muse Township was dropped from consideration due to prevailing security and

4
Returnees monitoring tool – SI camps of intervention - Kachin State
5
Rapid Assessment Report, Situation in Kachin Isolated Villages, Momauk Township - 18th to 20th February 2015, Solidarites
International

4
access concerns. During individual meetings with Government officials however, this assessment
mission received strong indications from the local officials concerning the sensitivity of the subject
matter for reasons that, other than in Bhamo Township, IDPs living with host community in Kachin
State are not formally registered therefore not officially recognized. Such a strong indication
provided the guidance to focus the assessment in Bhamo Township where there is indication of
support from the General Administration Department (GAD) Officer. A team also deployed to
Myitkyina Township for the same purpose with discreet steps. The assessment employed 4 native
Kachin speaking enumerators who are fluent in the various Kachin dialects / languages and in
Myanmar language. This team of enumerators was led by a local team leader who is fluent in both
Myanmar and English. The teams were split into two to each handle the two geographic locations
of Myitkyina and Bhamo townships. The assessment basically employed the following modalities
in consulting with IDPs and Host Community members.

 (H-H-I) House to House interviews

 Focus Group Sessions
 (KIIs) Key Informant Interviews
 Review of relevant documentations

More specifically, the group met with the following:

 Individual key informant interviews with 20 Host families

 Individual Key informant interviews with 10 LNGOs staff members and heads of agencies
 Individual Key informant interviews with 14 INGOs staff members and heads of agencies
 Individual key informant interviews with 12 leaders of Faith based organizations
 Individual meetings with 23 UN International and national staff members
 Individual Meetings with 12 Government Authorities (4 state level and 8 ward level)
 Group Sessions with 11 Jamee Mosque Trustees and Muslim Traders
 Group Session with 5 Chinese Traders

2.2 Key Issues

Identification of displaced population: In Kachin State, IDPs living in camps are the only ones
recognized by the Government officially. IDPs living outside the camps are not officially registered
so despite four years of displacement, they remain to be a “hidden” IDP population. The only
exception to this situation are the IDPs living outside camps and with host community reportedly
in Bhamo Township camps who appear on official list of both the township officials and the camp
management who are distributing their regular food entitlements from the beginning of the
emergency influx. Being a “hidden” IDP population, it was challenging to reach them. The
assessment team had to send word through various intermediaries in various villages, through civil
society leaders to reach out to the IDPs outside camps at least one day prior to any meeting with
them. The following are the modalities in the registration of IDPs in Kachin State:

1. Registered in the camp and living inside the camp

2. Registered in the camp but living outside the camp (with friends, relatives or may be in rented
accommodation).
5
3. Registered with the local Ward or Village as IDPs and living outside the camp thus able to
receive entitlements monthly.
4. Not registered in the camp and not registered as IDP therefore not recognized officially hence,
without access to basic assistance and protection.

Table 1: Statistics as of 08 April 2015

Statistics Household Individuals Analysis

The numbers are mostly collected by

Total number of IDPs in
Kachin State*
IDPs living outside camps
and within Host Community
Number of Registered IDPs
living outside camps in
Bhamo Township
Mansi township has the
most number of IDP
households living outside
camps
IDPs living in camps in
Waingmaw Township has
most number of persons per
household
 * Source: Kachin and Northern Shan States – IDP Location List of 01 Jan 2015
 ** This highlights the need to map out and create a data base to understand better the affected
 population (IDPs outside camps and to include the host community
18,684 91,260 CCCM Partners (KBC, KMSS, Shalom
and Metta Foundation)
No profiling or mapping activity has
been officially done to understand the
situation of IDPs outside camps and to
2,509 13,803
create a credible data base concerning
their numbers, location, needs and
gaps
It is only in Bhamo Township where
IDPs living outside camps are included
335 1475 in the official list of the local
authorities and WFP for food
distribution.
Averaging 4.8 per HH. This is at
present the site of on- going
480 2372 displacement due recent spate of
bombing campaign northeast and
southeast of the township.
This is unusually a very high average of
355 4,450 12 persons per household which could
be a possible discrepancy **

Table 2: Key Results from Interviews (Out of 71 UDOC IDP respondents):

% of
Particulars Remarks / Analysis
respondents
Anecdotes reveal that there are a small number of
households of IDPs who rent apartments or a room
in the community. Recently, UNHCR colleagues have
been receiving reports about those who were
initially renting accommodation but are unable to
Respondent IDP’s living outside camp who
100 % sustain the cost recently due to the irregularity of
claimed they are living with relatives
livelihood sources and have sought help from the
camp management agencies to be accommodated
in the camps. This survey has not encountered any
IDPs living outside camps who admitted that they
are in rented accommodation.
Respondent IDP’s living outside camp who Respondents mentioned the need for support for
100%
claimed they need inputs in terms of shelter materials for an extra room, an annex room,
6
 shelter
Respondent IDP’s living outside camp who
claimed they need support in terms of
WaSH facilities (toilet, septic tank)
Respondent IDP’s living outside camp
who claimed having irregular jobs
Respondent IDP’s living outside camp
who claimed they needed assistance on
civil documents /Citizen Scrutiny Card6
Respondent IDP’s living outside camp
citing needs in Education e.g.: Catch Up
/ Tuition/, lack of classroom materials &
equipment
Respondent IDP’s living outside camp
who live within 5-kilometer radius from
an IDP camp
*MOIP = Ministry of Immigration and Population
Tension with Host Community:
 The local hospitals in Kachin State are operating on very limited resources and are struggling
to meet the health needs of the community. The sudden increase in the population due to the
influx of IDPs living outside camps compounds this particular burden of limited health
6
According to the Myanmar Citizenship Law of 1982. Also commonly known as National Registration Card
or a loft to accommodate their family members and
decongest the house. This requires a thorough
assessment in order to identify the most
appropriate approach to assist the host families’
shelter needs as suggested by the respondents
either through cash programming etc.
Respondents also expressed the need for WaSH
support. Construction of additional toilet if
there is sufficient space in the compound in
order to ease the queuing particularly in the
100% morning rush hours. Another request is for a
possibly bigger septic tank to augment capacity
of existing ones. The WaSH sector is interested
to further assessing what might be an
appropriate response.
Most of the IPDs outside camps find
employment as daily labourers in local
construction work and in farms. Women have
opportunities to engage in selling vegetables
and other farm products. IDPs living outside
camps are able to access to local jobs but not
any more than what is generally available for
61%
everyone in the local job market. There has
been no tension observed in relation to
competition in the labour market except to
some host families who mentioned that they
now have to go deeper into the forest to gather
forest products and view the IDP population in
general as competition.
AS per MOIP, Operation Moe Pwint is on hold
for Kachin State pending a more solid peace
55% agreement per Directive from Nay Pyi Taw *
This does not negate targeted “Moe Pwint”
work for special cases.
According to Bhamo Township GAD, the
government has appropriated resources for
68%
2016 to increase number of classrooms already.
FBO leaders point to a tendency for IDPs living
100% outside camps to be more “nomadic” in search
for job opportunities in other locations in town.
7
 resources. This burden is felt even more in Bhamo Township where 65 % of vehicular road
traffic accidents involve IDPs (inside and outside camps) generating concerns from the host
community as these accidents demand medical attention that further impact on the meagre
public health resources.
 Primary schools have become congested. There is a lack of school furniture and other
classroom materials and equipment to address the increase in school-going population.
 CESVI is about to conclude a study on access to water and their study appears to confirm
claims by some members of the community that a certain percentage of the population may
not have access to safe drinking water sources.
 Tension also arises from a tug of war on rights. The right for shelter (IDPs having occupied
church premises/compound) versus the right to education (nursery and kindergarten schools
in churches affected by the presence of IDPs pitching temporary accommodation within the
limited confines of the church compound).
 Tradition/Culture: Tension likewise occur as the host community have to postpone their
perceived right to practice their church activities, rituals and traditional events for the longest
period since the church compounds are now catering instead to the care and maintenance of
the IDP dwellings inside their compound.

Table 3: Priority Needs and Gaps Identified by Respondent IDPs outside camps:

Key Findings considered URGENT by IDPs living

outside camps:

 100% of respondents mentioned the need for

Shelter inputs in terms of materials that will
allow building an annex room or a loft to
create more space and ease congestion at
home
 100% of respondents mentioned the need for
construction of an extra toilet and septic tank
within the compound to ease the burden on
limited WaSH resources at host family.
 68% of respondents cited need for inputs to
education e.g. annex classroom and basic
furniture to accommodate more students.
 Host community parents concerned about
the quality of education knowing that
teachers had to do double shifting.
 55% of respondents cited need to obtain
personal identification documents/card.

Information and Communication: Information and communication to the IDPs living outside
camps is usually disseminated through informal means such as text and phone messaging for IDPs
living outside camps for those that have the means and access. There is also no formal platform

8
for information dissemination. Instead, the churches play a big role in information sharing during
church activities as IDPs usually attend Sunday church services. Most of the organizations have a
webpage or a social media page like Facebook e.g. The Kachin Baptist Convention (KBC), a key
camp management agency in Kachin, has a face book account and a media unit who are proactive
in updating it with news and related events. Social media pages can only be effective to a certain
extent as a form of mass information dissemination tool due to poor internet connectivity in the
whole Kachin State.

Community Engagement: Leaders of faith-based groups (Priest, pastors and Monks assisted by
their elders, deacons, youth leaders) traditionally represent the affected population. If the
chairman of the village of origin is also one of those displaced, he/she automatically continues
such role as the main representative of the IDPs. No election is conducted to select leaders for the
IDP population both in and outside the camps however, new leaders may be appointed to newly
established structures such as camp committees in IDP camps based on recommendations from
respected members of the camp community endorsed by their spiritual and/or village leadership.
The camp management committee members are initiated to some form of TOR and CoC by
UNHCR.

Myanmar has a well-established system of governance that is fully functioning and the host
community are subject to the existing government structure and leadership such as established by
law. This assessment has not observed or heard reports of meaningful community engagement /
participation of the host community and the IDPs living outside camps in activities that cater to
addressing their needs within the context of the displacement.

Coordination of response toward IDPs living outside of camps: OCHA is present and leads
coordination of humanitarian activities in Kachin State. There is no official coordination platform in
relation to IDPs living outside camps. Coordination at the township level is focused but not limited
to or mainly for the IDP living in camps. Meanwhile, the faith-based groups informally bridge that
coordination gap with the IDPs living outside camp and host community. The Government through
the township General Administration Department (GAD) and/or the Relief and Resettlement
Department (RRD) under the Ministry of Social Affairs are the government authorities who usually
coordinated either bilaterally or jointly with respective stakeholders depending on the context.
The GAD is also vested to authorize or restrict travels for humanitarian workers within the State.

Challenges of coordination at the community level:

 Travel restrictions
 Unpredictable movement restrictions
 Unstable Safety and Security situation
 Distance
 Very poor communication network (phone, internet, sms)
 To some extent, language barrier (There are 6 different tribes within the Kachin Ethnicity
speaking different languages)
 Absence of a platform for dialogue with the affected population (Host Community+ Hosted
Population of IDPs outside camps + IDPs in camps)

9
Durable Solution options: Due to the current instability and the return areas not being conducive
for a safe return (presence of landmines, on-going clashes), certain local organizations involved in
the management of a number of IDP camps is encouraging their members to remain where they
are (in camps & within host community alike) until end of the year 2015. The general tone of their
message to the IDPs under their care is to start exploring the possibility of return only in the year
20167.
This decision might be affected by recent dynamics in the round of peace talks and the recent
announcement of the President concerning the draft Peace Accord document which, at the time
of this assessment, was reportedly approved by all the armed groups for the very first time since
the National Cease Fire Agreement Team was formed. The government has been vocal about their
intention to see a decrease in the number of IDPs in general and in view of their return agenda.
Meanwhile, spontaneous return is taking place but definitely not yet en masse.

100 % of respondents said that they are not ready to return to their village of origin as of yet.
Several reasons affect that decision as follows:

 Insecurity in areas of return

 Presence of Land Mines
 Damaged Infra/basic services, livelihood
 Continuing HR violations
 Heavy militarization in return areas

Capacity Building: There are currently no actors providing training to the IDPs living outside camps
and within the host community. The churches where the IDPs are commonly attached to are the
ones providing training but mostly related to religious or spiritual and moral exhortation.
Trainings in churches normally occur through their Youth Christian Fellowship, Men’s and
Women’s Fellowship. There are a number of UN and INGOs who have been conducting various
training for partners and national authorities. The Government however is particularly sensitive to
capacity building training targeting its line ministry staff. Prior authorization / consent need to be
obtained before any training is allowed.

Security – Bhamo Township has remained calm and peaceful amid the re-escalation of the conflict
in its neighbouring townships four years ago. It has remained to be stable and has not been
subjected to bomb attacks, sporadic gun fights and other fatal incidents related to the conflict.
Bhamo Township is one destination for the displaced seeking refugee from the effects of conflict.

Access – Based on the circular issued by the Ministry of Immigration and Population, Bhamo
Township remains to be one of the townships open and accessible to tourists. Several expatriate
staff members from INGOs maintain presence in this township up to present times.

Criminality: There is anecdotal evidence that drug pushing and substance abuse leading or
resulting to prostitution and petty crimes are beginning to be a menace in Bhamo and Myitkyina
Townships. There have been anecdotal reports that some IDPs living in and outside camps may
have been involved in these activities.

7
Interview with the leader of one faith-based group in Kachin State.

10
Table 4: Voices from the Field

Voices from the Field: The statements below reflect some of the views and opinions shared by various
respondents who have agreed to go on record in the course of individual and/or group interviews
where they were asked a variety of leading and follow up questions.

“We are doing this out of brotherly love. We also feel tired in caring for the IDPs but we are
compelled to do so out of our spiritual obligation towards them”

Fr. Noel Naw Lat, KMSS

“In keeping the displaced in camps, we are actually promoting dependency to them. The UN,
INGOs and the donor community better pool their yearly allocation (budget) for the IDPs and
divide them with the total number of IDPs and then give those resources in cash as a start-up
fund for each household so they could regain their lives and dignity back rather than being
dependent on aid. Isn’t it your goal to end displacement as international community”?

Venerable Thaik Tha

Senior Monk, Bhamo

“Local labour market is decreasing due to the shutting down of Jade mines, Amber mines,
timber smuggling and Gold exploration. Trade between China has also decreased due to the on-
going conflict. Purchasing power of people is getting low these days as the economy is getting
difficult thereby affecting the local community in reality.
Group of Chinese Traders in BhamoTownship

Due to the influx of IDPs, the number of school-going children also increased demanding for
more resources from the government. The budget allocation for school constructions (new
buildings, annexes to existing buildings) has become very huge for Education department and
we hope that most of these construction projects will be completed before next academic year”

Group of Local Bhamo Traders

“Host community has been suffering as consequence to the influx of IDP. The host community
usually keeps quiet about these sufferings. Only when they felt that these problems harm them
already (pollution, noise, spread of disease and tensions in the community especially among
youth) will they alert the authorities or camp management concerning their feelings or disdain
for IDPs. Those things cannot be solved out with programmatic approach most of the time.
Some of these matters find expressions in confidential reports from concerned stakeholders as
these issues are preferably kept unexposed.”
Member: Technical Advisory Group
(Peace Process and National Ceasefire
Coordination Team - NCCT)

“Generally, IDPs living in host community have found a coping mechanism but some of them are
engaged in unlawful activities such as illegal logging, timber smuggling, drugs pushing, small
time illegal gold mining”

A UN local Staff member in

11
 Myitkyina

“It would be completely wrong for you to put your resources and think only of those in urban
displacement. Generally, they are able to care for themselves, as they have demonstrated in the
last 3 years since the resurgence of the conflict. UDOC project should focus on those who the
international community could not reach, those who are trapped between the Ayeyawaddy
river and the railway tracks, those in the other areas (read: NGCA8 or non-government
controlled area) as they are the ones famished, surviving on meagre food and lacking basic
services. You can reach them through the churches who have access there”
Bishop Zaw Li
Anglican Church, Myitkyina

4. Project risk analysis

4.1 RISKS:

1. Infrastructure: UDOC approach promotes the use of centrally located drop-in / activity
center. Most of the centres utilized in the humanitarian response belong to the different
faith-based groups. This may have implication to humanitarian principles of neutrality for
the UN and INGOs which needs careful balancing. In Myitkyina however, there are
structures that could either be rented or renovated to cater to the intended purpose.

2. On-going Emergency/Conflict: Pockets of armed conflict continue to rage in several

geographical locations in Kachin State. According to several key local leaders there is a high
possibility that the conflict would escalate further. This could derail activities that might be
introduced and could potentially expose staff and property to security and safety issues.
Bhamo township has three exit points: the airport, the seaport and via land travel. All these
exit points can be potentially blocked in an instant if hostilities will escalate further. Bhamo
Township could potentially and easily be cut – off from the rest of the country so that an
extraction might become necessary.

3. Partners: The Joint Strategy Team (JST) has been vocal about wanting to engage in
partnership in relation to any programmatic intervention for the displaced population in
Kachin State. Whilst willing and committed to providing such key partnership, they admit
to their lack of technical and financial capacity in camp management and in other
specialized skills in the over-all humanitarian work. Entering into the 5th year of
displacement, fatigue is also setting in. Partnership with them therefore has its definite
challenges.

8
NGCA – meaning non-government controlled area.
12
 4. Perception: Programmatically, it is less risky to engage with out of camp responses for the
IDPs living outside camps in Bhamo Township because identification and counting them
will not start from scratch. In Myitkyina however, such engagement has inherent
challenges because of the position of the local government against increasing the number
of IDPs. Considering that this is the election season, any profiling activity may be fraught
with perception issues (politicized) that may deter greater and wider participation of the
IDPs living outside the camps.

5. Funding: The context in Kachin State has now entered into its fifth year. Many
organisations have expressed concern that donor interest for the Kachin context
apparently is low as opposed to their keen interest to support efforts in Rakhine State and
despite Kachin State being on-going emergency. Humanitarian activities in Kachin State
may face a dearth of funding issues in the next year.

5. Stakeholders analysis

5.1 Access to Basic Services and Local Structures:

The Ministry of Social Affairs is the mandated government agency in Kachin State to respond to
displacement triggered by man-made or natural causes. This Ministry has representations at the
State, District and township levels and is assisted by its various specialized departments within the
ministry at state level such as Department of Education, Department of Social Welfare, the Relief
and Resettlement Department. These departments are also assisted in turn by local level
authorities such as the township General Administration and the ward and village chair persons.
The Police also play a role in terms of maintaining public order, safety and security of the civilian
population which includes the IDPs context and during any movements, the services of the police
force can be requested as deemed necessary. These government structures function normally
within their mandates in delivering basic services to the people. The host community, the IDPs
living in the camps and IDPs living outside camps are all subject to existing government rules and
regulations. In Kachin State, certain medical fees are supposed to be waived by the local hospitals
for the displaced population but in reality, they are still asked to pay for services.

6. Main recommendations:

6.1 What can be done for the IDPs outside camps in Kachin?

 Adaptation of UDOC Outreach Center Model (see more details below).

 Identification, counting and registration of IDPs living outside camps and their host
community
 Updating information on the needs and gaps initially identified during the UDOC
assessment and then provide the information to the information management system
through the CCCM Cluster for referral and coordination of possible response.
 Immediate humanitarian assistance and protection to the recently displaced individuals
and families.
13
  Immediate humanitarian assistance and protection for identified extremely vulnerable
individuals (e.g. shelter, WaSH, GBV etc.)
 Facilitate / coordinate responses through appropriate referral within the cluster members,
inter-cluster and then within the greater and wider humanitarian /development actors in
Kachin State.

6.2 Adaptation of the UDOC Outreach Center Model:

 The approach is to identify a centrally-located facility out of the currently existing

multipurpose community structures/facilities (daycare center, community hall, etc.)
 Conduct community meetings to negotiate the expanded use of the infrastructure with
intention to augment its’ material and spatial capacity so it can accommodate a reasonable
number of people for intended activities.
 Such a centrally-located facility could be multi-functional for various capacity-building
activities such as information dissemination and sharing, awareness promotion,
community training sessions and workshops (Mobile Vocational Training e.g. life-skills,
vocational skills, camp management training and coaching among others).
 This centrally-located facility could serve as temporary base for visiting field teams where
they could conduct meetings and other related activities targeting IDPs living outside
camps. It can be set up with bulletin boards for information sharing and feedback as well as
with information / technology materials and equipment in order to process documentation
for information sharing and advocacy.
 INGOs running education program (ex: NRC Education Team) may have the capacity to
conduct a careful market study that would serve as a basis for vocational training activities
that could even potentially link up individuals receiving vocational training to potential
livelihood opportunities in the market.
 The approach should be light by maintaining one outreach center in the beginning and
expand incrementally into other geographic locations as acceptance increases and as
understanding of the context deepens.
 Since the IDPs living outside camps are spread out in the ten quarters of Bhamo Township,
a pilot area could be situated first in the north eastern quadrant of the township as this is
reportedly where most of the IDPs outside camps are concentrated. This augmentation can
come in the form of material support such as furniture and other session room facilities
etc. that will remain for the use of the facility at the end of displacement in order to benefit
the host community.

6.3 Government Support:

 The State Minister for Social Welfare, the State and Township Director of the General
Administration Department (GAD) and the Deputy Director of the Relief and Resettlement
Department / Head of Kachin State have expressed support to this approach with
admonition to “build within existing structure and not create parallel systems”.
 The adaptation of the UDOC concept is likewise supported by the CCCM Cluster, the UN
agencies, INGOs, the Joint Strategy Team and civil society at large.
14
6.4 Role of Local Authorities:

 Support and promote acceptance and ownership of UDOC approach to community

 Formally support the conduct of profiling exercises for the IDPs living outside camps
 Co-facilitate specific meetings upon invitation where the host community is involved as they hold
formal authority over them.
 Support and approve activities that will involve gathering of more than 5 people consistent to local
legislation to ensure legality.
 Support and issue travel authorizations to humanitarian staff members
 Provide more space for greater and wider coordination on out-of-camp responses

6.5 CCCM / UDOC Pillars:

 Coordination – Advocating for the official identification, counting and registration of IDPs living
outside camps needs to be coordinated well with the local authorities, the UN and INGOs at various
levels. Such registration leads to official recognition of the status of IDPs living outside camps and
their eventual access to entitlements. The information drop-in and activity center could be a place
for coordination as well for various humanitarian activities targeting IDPs living outside camps and
their host community. Through the existing coordination platform, other actors can be encouraged
to engage in out-of-camp responses.

 Participation - IDPs living outside camps need to establish and maintain a functioning structure
through a voluntary and transparent selection process to select leaders/focal persons in locations
where there is large concentration of IDPs living outside camps. Through focus group discussions
with facilitation, jointly and/or severally, from various CCCM actors he Government, UN and other
actors, needs and gaps of the host community and the IDPs living outside camps may be identified
as well as recommended solutions and practical approaches to address them. The aim is to increase
awareness, promote ownership, clarity of roles and responsibilities, accountability and
participation of women, youth and those living with disability. Selected representatives from the
IDP outside camp and the host community will be provided appropriate training. Any projects that
will be implemented will consider labour or other forms of equity share from the IDP outside camps
as well as their host family or community.

 Information Management – The eventual profiling of IDPs living outside camps could be a joint
exercise and assessment of needs and gaps. UNHCR as CCCM cluster lead could take the lead in
gathering the data with official permission from the local authorities. UNHCR will act as the
depository of data collected concerning the IDPs living outside camps. Such database could be used
as a tool for advocacy targeting a whole range of actors in order to encourage response to existing
humanitarian needs and gaps identified during the profiling exercise. Such database can further
become a tool for coordination through combined cluster meetings or bilateral linkages with the
UN, INGOs, JST as well as the local government structures for service provision/response.
 The information drop-in and activity centre will likewise function as a conduit for information
gathering and sharing both formally and informally through IEC materials, information bulletin,
leaflets, information sessions, etc.

Needs identified in Shelter and WaSH Sector: During the UDOC assessment undertaken by NRC,
100% of the respondents cited the need for shelter and WaSH support as a top priority.
Respondents claimed that many IDPs living outside camps live in cramped accommodation with
inadequate/insufficient toilet facilities particularly where the host families and the IDP outside
camps coexist under one roof. This creates tension in the community and relationships erode by
the day.

15
Recommendation:

 Identify IDP families outside camps who are living within host families
 Cluster lead/members to encourage a coordinated response amongst various shelter actors.
 Advocacy with the CCCM cluster for a harmonized assessment form, common design for a shelter
annex or extension structure matched with suggested price range
 The annex/extension structure will have DRR designed-in features and safe shelter materials in
consideration consistent to camp management principles.
 Discussion with host families on equity share (labour) to encourage participation.
 Input information into the database with IOM/CCCM Cluster

Needs identified in Education:

 During the UDOC assessment undertaken by NRC, 100% the respondents identified the lack of
classrooms, furniture and other basic teaching materials as one priority need due to the sudden
increase of school-going population resulting from the influx of IDPs living in their community
 While there is no clear statistics relating to birth rates, one can project that a good number of
children out of the 3,500 displaced families would be school-going soon after 4 years of
displacement (nursery to kindergarten or even grade school) further aggravating the need.

Recommendation:

 Educ/Shelter/WaSH teams may collaborate to identify the number of schools that are in this
particular situation and share this information to the CCCM Cluster as well as input into the
database managed by IOM for potential response.
 Coordination amongst various education actors for possible response
 In order to augment the absorption capacity of the school, provision of furniture, school teaching
materials and construction of an annex classroom is necessary.
 The annex building may be utilized in the future by the school as a library or practical arts
classroom at the end of displacement.
 Based on a thorough market study, programmatic interventions may be designed by various actors
from the education cluster particularly targeting the youth from the IDPs living outside camps as
well as the youth of the host community for meaningful skills training program.
 Education cluster members in Myanmar may have a package of modules designed to cater to
specific needs and target groups based on market study.
 The idea of a roving vocational training can also play a significant role in relation to the information
drop-in cum activity center.

Needs identified in Personal / Civil Documents:

 During the UDOC assessment undertaken by NRC, 55% of the respondents identified needs to
obtain national ID cards and other civil documents.

 Recommendation:

 NRC ICLA in Myanmar runs a civil documentation program. Whilst it does not have formal
authorization to expand into Kachin yet, it can be requested to conduct mobile same day, one-stop
free of charge services together in coordination with the Ministry of Immigration and Population.
Information on procedures and administrative requirements are first steps that can be introduced
that could provide knowledge and awareness to both IDPs living outside camps and the host
community.

16
Key Advocacy Issues: At the onset of the emergency, the humanitarian response focused on short
term responses such as distribution, assuming that the emergency would soon be resolved. This
has proven to the contrary and there was no strategy that clearly defined the humanitarian
response. Almost four years after the re-escalation of the conflict, the whole response continues
to straddle a seeming “humanitarian treadmill” that just maintains the daily care and maintenance
classic of a protracted displacement situation.

Along with the UN and I/LNGOs, the CCCM cluster should, in various fora, strongly advocate for
the following:

 Legal recognition of the IDPs living outside camps in Kachin State and highlight their needs and
gaps alongside that of the host community.
 Humanitarian out-of-camp responses to address the needs and gaps of IDPs living outside
camps.
 Quick Impact projects that are geared towards promoting social cohesiveness to reduce
tension in the community and mitigate the impact of displacement similarly experienced not
only by the IDPs but by the host community.
 In drafting the durable solutions framework, UNHCR and UNDP + OCHA is presented with an
opportunity to engage the government for the inclusion of the IDPs living outside camps into
the planning considerations because of they would have a definite implication to budgetary
requirements along with other practical planning considerations e.g. transport, return package
and other entitlements. It is better to include them at the onset rather than at a later stage as
donors need to also be informed of credible planning figures. What might persuade the
Government to rethink their position about officially registering the IDPs living outside camps
is to link this issue to a Durable Solutions Framework arguing the necessity and benefits of
including them beginning from the mere statistical count to improving lives and bringing
dignity to IDPs living outside camps and the host community.
 Mainstreaming the IDPs living outside camps into the coordination mechanism in order to engage more
responses from the humanitarian and donor communities.

Donor Support: The CCCM cluster lead (UNHCR), the UN and INGOs should continue strong advocacy for
donors to support activities that would address outstanding needs and gaps experienced both by the IDPs
living outside camps. UNHCR and NRC may opt to do a round of donor visits in order to present the
UDOC approach to them with clear recommendations for out-of-camp responses and linkages
between humanitarian and development initiatives under the approach. Some of the main donors
that expressed initial interest in UDOC are DFID, AusAid, and USAid. Other non-traditional donors
may also be approached such as private in-country establishment (Telenor, Ooredoo etc.)

Key Principles:

 Encourage target beneficiaries to provide labour as their equity share.

 The participation of women in the decision-making process is a must.
 Consent must be secured in advance so that the host families fully agree to the
construction of such an annex/extension structure to their house.
 The host family stands to own the shelter extension or annex by the time that the hosted
IDP family returns to the village of origin or relocates elsewhere.
 Protection must be mainstreamed in all activities.

17
  All material support will remain for the use of the community facility at the conclusion of
the activities / project

Partners:

1. UNHCR - CCCM Cluster lead

2. CCCM Cluster members
3. Joint Strategy Team (8 members – a group of local NGOs and Faith Based Organizations who have
set up this forum as a place to define their priority needs and modalities for engagement with the
affected population)

List of Annexes:

Annex 1 – Source of available information

Annex 1A – Encounters with IDPs outside camps in Bhamo Township
Annex 1B – Encounters with IDPs outside camps in Bhamo and Myitkyina Townships
Annex 1C – Encounters with IDPs outside camps in Myitkyina
Annex 2: Summary of GPS Points of Encounters with IDPs outside camps in Kachin State
Annex 3: Locations of Focus Group Sessions
Annex 4: Breakdown of Needs and Gaps Identified by IDPs outside camps
Annex 5: Summary of Respondents
Annex 6: List of Meetings and Presentations

Acknowledgement:

This assessment was made possible with valuable contribution from U Myat Thar, national
consultant whose thorough knowledge and understanding of the context in Kachin State
contributed significantly in contextualizing this study. Together with his team of 4 Kachin
enumerators, together they formed the backbone of this study.

18
Annex 1

Sources of available information:

- The MiMu website: http://www.themimu.info/

- Minutes of interagency meetings in Kachin State
- DRAFT Durable Solutions Framework
- Forced Migration Review Issue 48 November 2014
- UDOC Desk Review 2014
- Ending Displacement: Finding Durable Solutions for Displaced Persons in Kachin and
Northern Shan States, A Strategy for Long Term Recovery and Reintegration , Version 3/ 23
January 2015
 Durable Solutions to Displacement in Kachin and Northern Shan States, Guidance note on
Standards and Principles, August 2014
 Landmine and Explosive Remnants of War Victims Survey in Kachin State and Kayah State,
Myanmar, DRC/DDG, Survey conducted by Pascal SIMON 20/2/2015
 Individual interviews and Focus Group Sessions with 71 IDPs outside camps + 20 Host
Families + 11 Ward Authorities
 JIPS Camp Profiling Exercise April 2014
 Monitoring and Sustaining Durable Solutions in Kachin State, The Pa La Na Relocation
Report, June 2014
 Myanmar Humanitarian Response Plan.
 Joint Strategy for Humanitarian Response in Kachin and Northern Shan States (2013-2015)
 The Protection Survey Report, Metta Foundation, November 2012
 Durable Solutions to Displacement in Kachin and Northern Shan States, Guidance note on
Standards and Principles, Humanitarian Country Team, Myanmar, August 2014
 Myanmar, A Call for Humanitarian Aid, January – December 2015, OCHA
 Annual Report 2013, Karuna Myanmar Social Services

19
Annex 1A – Encounters with IDPs living outside camps in Bhamo Township

Note:

Red Triangles = IDP Camps

Blue Dots = IDPs living outside camps

20
Annex 1B – Encounters with IDPs living outside camps in Bhamo and Myitkyina Townships

Note:
Red Triangles = IDP Camps
Blue Dots = IDPs outside camps

21
Annex 1C – Encounters with IDPs living outside camps in Myitkyina

Note:
Red Triangles = IDP Camps
Blue Dots = IDPs outside camps

22
 Annex 2: Summary of GPS Points of Encounters with IDPs living outside camps in
Kachin State

Annex 3: Locations of Focus Group Sessions

23
Annex 4: Breakdown of Needs and Gaps Identified by IDPs living outside camps

 Key Findings that are considered URGENT and tension –

 reducing by the UDOC IDPs:

1. Shelter inputs in terms of materials that will

allow for construction an annex room or a loft to
 create more space and ease congestion at home
 2. Construction of an extra toilet and septic tank
 within the compound to ease the “traffic” at host
 family.
3. Inputs to education. Annex room to
 Annex 5: Summary of Respondents
accommodate more students, additional
classroom furniture and related materials

24
Annex 5: Summary of Respondents

25
Annex 6: Summary of Meetings and Presentations

Date Time Particulars Location

18 Feb 1400h to What is UDOC? A presentation to members of the UNOCHA Meeting
2015 1600h CCCM Cluster in Myitkyina District, Kachin State Room
19 Feb 0830h to Meeting with U Aye Maung Kyi, State Director, GAD Office,
2015 0900h General Administration Department Myitkyina
19 Feb 1500 to Meeting with the U Min Thein, Deputy Director and RRD Office,
2015 1630h Head of Relief and Resettlement Department, Myitkyina Township
Myitkyina, Kachin State.
20 Feb 1400h to U Sein Myint , Township Director , Relief and RRD Office, Bhamo
2015 1500h Resettlement Department, Bhamo Township township
27 Feb 1500h to Presentation of UDOC short study results to CCCM UNHCR Meeting
2015 1630h Cluster in Bhamo Township Room
01 April 1030h to Presentation of UDOC short study results to UNOPS meeting
2015 1150h National CCCM Cluster level in Yangon, Myanmar room
02 April 0900h to Presentation to Early Recovery Workshop - Round Best Western Green
2015 1500h Table Discussion and in Plenary Hotel
07 April 0830h to Presentation to INGO Forums for Heads of Agencies Relief International
2015 1000h and Donors (OFDA, ECHO and DFID) Meeting Room

26