Start Network's Hara Caracostas reviews how the Migration Emergency Response Fund (MERF) has met the complexities of the mixed migration crisis and how this affected the implementation of a rapid response mechanism.
Over the past year, the Start Network has tested the flexibility, adaptiveness and peer-review decision making of the Start Fund in a larger and highly volatile humanitarian crisis, the migration crisis in the Mediterranean region.
The rapidly changing context, emerging spikes and unforeseen needs within this wider and highly politicised humanitarian crisis meant the Start Fund mechanism had to be applied at a different scale. The Migration Emergency Response Fund (MERF) was established in January 2017 to address this challenge.
In its first year the MERF, which is funded by the UK government and run in partnership with 15 Start Network member organisations, has implemented 15 projects in four countries (Niger, Morocco, Serbia and Bulgaria), reaching over 30,000 beneficiaries. Through learning exchanges, discussion groups and surveys, the MERF team and Start Network members have been reflecting on this first phase of the programme to provide learning for the next iteration of the fund.
Speed and transparency
The majority of respondents to our final feedback survey considered the MERF mechanism to be transparent, commenting that documents were shared in a “timely manner” and were brief and comprehensive enough to enable prompt funding decisions. Start members also felt positively about DFID’s (the UK’s Department for International Development) involvement as an equal decision making partner, and strongly supported the continuation of this level of transparency in the future.
Operational presence and capacity of NGOs
As a rapid response fund, the MERF requires agencies applying for funds to be already operational in the affected areas . This enabled 87% of the projects to start delivering humanitarian assistance within seven days of the funds being awarded (with the other 13% starting within two weeks). Furthermore, bridging the gap between development work and humanitarian assistance through capacity building, in some areas would allow humanitarian needs be identified and responded to as soon as they appear.
As a context-specific contingency fund, it was considered key for the MERF to work more closely with the longer-term humanitarian response plans, to be able to identify gaps swiftly and set up regular information loops that would allow a more informed decision making. For this reason, the Start Network advised DFID to create a strong coordination structure at a higher level for the next phase of their migration response. As a result, DFID is now putting together a coordinated 27-month programme where the MERF will be closely linked with all implementing agencies.
Adapting to the context
The MERF was initially set up with strict parameters around project duration and focus, which were tailored to the European context. This presented challenges in other contexts, such as North Africa and Niger, where “spikes” in need are often part of wider, systemic problems. In one such instance, migrants in the forests of Nador and Tangier in Morocco (the two border cities with Spain), were unable to access food, basic hygiene products and health services because they were prevented from entering the cities. This was part of an ongoing problem that was not being covered – which made it difficult for agencies to use the MERF mechanism, given its focus on “spikes” in crises. Similar incidences can be found in other North African settings. Libya does present spikes, but is a very difficult working environment where agencies struggled to begin activities or make impactful interventions within the strict timeframes.
We responded to these challenges by developing a second model of the mechanism, which allowed for a longer implementation period, more flexibility in the start of activities and no budget restriction per allocation. These changes, approved by DFID, had a positive effect in Morocco and Niger, where needs were met in the second half of the programme.
Challenging the way NGOs traditionally apply for funding
Raising an alert for the MERF requires agencies to have an awareness of all aspects of a crisis, as this enables better decision making when proposing and selecting projects. This encouraged strong coordination on the ground, which in turn led to greater awareness of the context and therefore more alerts being raised in the second half of the programme.
This increase was also due to our decision to offer more training for field teams, and tweak aspects of the alert process. Improving the way NGOs and donors operate is necessary; however, change takes time. The Start Fund experienced similar issues when it was created and the longer the programme runs, the more fluid the process becomes. One of the Start members said:
Organisations in Start need to invest more in the alert raising process, which is a very new process for teams in countries where the Start Fund is not being used. It is long term capacity building which will be improved with time if the MERF continues.
Informed and impartial decision making
The MERF uses the Start Fund’s peer reviewed decision-making process. The information provided in the alert note, the feedback collected through the survey and the knowledge and experience of peers enable impartial and objective decisions, made by a committee of members who contribute as humanitarian experts rather than representatives of their own agencies. One member noted that “even organisations that raise an alert are unbiased when reviewing the feedback and discussing the wider points”.
Members of the allocation committee felt that some areas could be improved to aid decision making further; namely, increased participation in surveys and the provision of third-party information (such as the ACAPS briefings that inform Start Fund alerts). We responded by proposing ways to incorporate those elements in the alert process – such as increasing member engagement in the field, and providing briefings and sourcing data from existing migration analysis platforms.
What next?
In addition to our internal reflection, the Start team has commissioned an external research piece that will aim to analyse the complexities of the mixed migration crisis and how this affects the implementation of a rapid response mechanism. Through this piece, we hope to answer the questions at the heart of this initiative – specifically, to explore the outcomes of the programme in relation to its objectives; the importance of speed, flexibility and local presence of NGOs for an effective, needs-based response; and ultimately the value of a context-specific contingency fund such as the MERF.
The research will be completed and shared early next year, along with our plans for the next phase of the programme.