REGIONAL COMMITTEE Sixty-second Session Kathmandu, Nepal 7–10 September 2009
Provisional Agenda item 14.1 SEA/RC62/14 18 July 2009
FOLLOW-UP ACTION ON PENDING ISSUES AND SELECTED REGIONAL COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS/DECISIONS FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS: SOUTH-EAST ASIA REGIONAL HEALTH EMERGENCY FUND The South-East Asia Regional Health Emergency Fund (SEARHEF) was established through the Regional Committee resolution SEA/RC60/R7. As per the fund’s policies and guidelines, a working group was established to oversee the management of the fund. The working group comprised representatives nominated by all the 11 Member States of the South-East Asia Region. The fund’s resources have been successfully managed and utilized in respect of the following emergencies since it was made operational in January 2008: Cyclone Nargis (Myanmar, May 2008); flash floods (Sri Lanka, June 2008); Kosi river floods (Nepal, September 2008); and the civil conflict in the north of Sri Lanka. In efforts to sustain the fund and improve mechanisms for replenishment of its resources, the Regional Committee, vide resolution SEA/RC61/R2 requested the Regional Director to take steps to roll-over assessed contributions of the fund. Having received an unfavourable response from WHO headquarters to this request due to legal constraints, practical alternatives can be found including a commitment to provide an Assessed Contributions (AC) allocation for 2010-2011 as was done for the 2008-2009 biennium. Increasing the corpus of the fund through Voluntary Contributions (VC) and adopting replenishment procedures will also help in sustaining the fund. The attached working paper was submitted to the High-Level Preparatory (HLP) Meeting for its review and recommendations for consideration by the Sixty-second Session of the Regional Committee. The HLP meeting proposed a draft resolution for the consideration of the Regional Committee. The paper is now submitted to the Sixty-second Session of the Regional Committee for its consideration, and for its decision regarding the resolution proposed by the HLP meeting.
SEA/RC62/14
Background Establishment of the South-East Asia Regional Health Emergency Fund (SEARHEF) 1. The Regional Committee resolution SEA/RC60/R7 established the South-East Asia Regional Health Emergency Fund (SEARHEF), thereby creating a mechanism to facilitate rapid response to natural and man-made disasters. This fund is created essentially to meet immediate financial needs and to fill critical gaps, and is not intended to fund bulk relief, long-term recovery, reconstruction or rehabilitation work. It does not replace existing and well-established mechanisms such as Flash Appeals, the Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) and Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF); these will continue to be the main funding sources for emergency and humanitarian programmes. 2. The SEARHEF is composed of: • • •
US$ one million allocated in January 2008 under the Regular Budget (2008-2009). US $ 100 000 was donated by the Royal Government of Thailand as part of the Voluntary Contribution. US$ 1.5 to US$ 2 million targeted as additional support, to be mobilized by the Regional Office from donors, countries and other agencies.
3.
The following criteria determine the use of resources of the fund: • • •
Declaration of a state of health emergency/disaster; Official request for external assistance by national government; or Appointment of a humanitarian coordinator by the UN Secretary-General for that particular emergency.
4. As per the policies, guidelines and procedures of the SEARHEF, funds are released within 24 hours of the request. The first tranche has a ceiling of US$ 175 000 and can be released and implemented for the first month. The second tranche, also with a ceiling of US$ 175 000, can be implemented in the next two months. Thus, the total funding possible for one event can amount to US$ 350 000. 5. The SEARHEF was made operational in January 2008 as per RC resolution SEA/RC60/R7.
Creation of the SEARHEF Working Group 6. A SEARHEF Working Group comprising representatives from all 11 Member States was constituted to monitor and review the management of the fund. As per the Policy, Principles and Guidelines for the SEARHEF, this group was set up to provide oversight and guidance to the management of the fund in accordance with its guidelines and principles.
SEA/RC62/14 Page 2
7. The first meeting of this Working Group was held on 5 July 2008, in New Delhi, when the need and timely use of SEARHEF were validated. These were amply demonstrated during the post-Nargis health emergency interventions. Other countries such as Sri Lanka and Nepal have also availed of funds from the SEARHEF during recent emergencies. Discussions were held on the guidelines, policies and procedures governing the fund and suggestions made regarding the criteria for use of the fund’s resources, and for monitoring and reporting of its activities. 8. The South-East Asia Region is home to one fourth of the world’s population and is one of the regions worst affected by natural disasters. As experiences of Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Nepal have indicated, the operation of SEARHEF goes a long way to help save lives.
Use of the fund 9. For all these countries, as per the policies of SEARHEF, the funds were released within 24 hours of receipt of the request. The fund has been used for following emergencies: Emergency Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar Flashfloods in Sri Lanka Kosi river floods, Nepal Sri Lanka – Health interventions for internally displaced populations (IDPs) in conflict-affected areas in northern Sri Lanka. Date May 2008 June 2008 September 2008 September 2008; January 2009 Contribution US$ 350 000 US$ 23 000 US$ 325 000 US$ 350 000
10. In all these operations, the funds were mainly used for the following: • • • • •
Support to initial and periodic assessments; procurement and distribution of essential medicines and emergency relief supplies such as tents, bleaching powder and other support materials; support to coordination activities; mobility of health staff in affected areas and to displaced populations; support for the conduct of specific health interventions such as improved surveillance, water and sanitation and psychosocial and mental health.
11. The HLP noted the usefulness of the fund, and how it had provided timely and appropriate support to Member States in recent emergencies. It was also noted that the fund was managed efficiently and with transparency according to agreed-upon procedures.
SEA/RC62/14 Page 3
Replenishment strategies 12. As per discussions in the HLP, the participants expressed support for sustaining the fund and for efforts to increase its corpus. It was stressed that supporting replenishment mechanisms recommended by the SERHEF Working Group will be the key to the sustainability of the fund. The SEARHEF Working Group at its meeting held in July 2008 identified the following mechanisms that will support replenishment of the funds and increase its corpus: • •
Fund-raising with support of countries: Countries will cooperate actively to raise funds for the SEARHEF through donors present in their respective countries. Open several options for donors to donate to SEARHEF—the following were identified: Donate unspecified funds to SEARHEF. Donate funds through SEARHEF for a specific emergency or country. Donate a proportion of funds meant for a specific emergency to replace funds that may have already been released out of SEARHEF.
•
Replenishment of SEARHEF contributions to an emergency once the larger contributions have come in from CERF, Flash Appeal or CAP.
Next steps 13. The key issues for the fund are growth of its corpus and its replenishment mechanism. In this regard, the SEARHEF Working Group has identified the following options: • • •
Improve advocacy for the fund now that it has supported many emergencies; request Member States to voluntarily donate to SEARHEF and support fund-raising activities for SEARHEF through donor missions present in their respective countries; request donors/partner agencies to consider several options and donate to SEARHEF: through unspecified funds as part of the SEARHEF corpus; for a specific emergency or country; a proportion of funds meant for a specific emergency to replace funds that may have already been released out of SEARHEF; and
•
once the bulk funding form existing emergency funding mechanisms (e.g. CERF, Flash Appeal) has been received, countries should be able to replace SEARHEF allocations.