CCCM/SHELTER & NFI SECTOR MEETING NEMA OFFICE 28st June 2018

AGENDA Review of Action points Reception Management Strategy Rainy season updates Update on returns to Guzamala, Marte, Abadam and Teacher's village Proposed T-shelter design  AOB

I. REVIEW OF ACTION POINTS

ACTION POINTS Action Points Responsible Status Response in Ngala: Land to aid decongestion close to Arabic camp, PCNI to follow up on formal consent letter. (1) Sector to take the issue of military stopping construction with the requirement of fencing to the civil military coordination (2) PCNI Sector Done Shelter TWG Shelter TWG to finalize Transitional shelter pilot-design by 1st week of June (1) Sector to advocate for funding to enable piloting of proposed Transitional shelter designs targeting mostly returnee population in Bama (As proposed pilot location). (2) Sector to develop justification note for prepositioning and stockpiling of NFI kits, subsequent advocacy with donors for funding.(3) Sector to circulate template with partners to input existing capacities for stockpiled items that allows for flexibility to respond to sudden emergencies. (4) Shelter TWG partners Done (1) Ongoing (2) Ongoing (3) CCCM MHPSS capacity building Workshop to be organized targeting CCCM partners to enable mainstream MHPSS into CCCM. IOM - MHPSS

II. RECEPTION MANAGEMENT STRATEGY Population movements across the north-east continue to pose major issues for the response. The movements are mainly the result of ongoing military operations and hostilities, as well as other push and pull factors. In May, a total of 21,207 people arrived in various locations, further stretching the resources on the ground. With highest number recorded in Bama (3,461), Ngala (3,384), Gwoza (3,047), Dikwa (1,480) and Biu (1,266) LGAs.

RECEPTION MANAGEMENT STRATEGY RECEPTION CENTER MANAGEMENT

PROGRESS ON THE OPERATIONALISATION OF THE RECEPTION MANAGEMENT STRATEGY STEPS PROGRESS Development of the strategy Completed Establishment of the Reception center Almost completed for the selected location Reception of new arrival ongoing Reporting Not started

PHYSICAL ESTABLISHEMENT OF RECEPTION CENTER IN BORNO COMPLETED FACILITIES ONGOING/PLANNED FACILITIES JERE PULKA MAFA (80%) BAMA MONGOUNO DIKWA NGALA Existing unmet needs humanitarian service providers (capacity & commitment)

NEW ARRIVAL TRENDS IN BORNO AND ADAMAWA STATES

PILOT SITES: - PULKA (200 Households) - DIKWA (200 households) - NGALA (XXX households) - MONGUNO (100 households) WASH, PROTECTION, SHELTER/ NFI, CCCM, FOOD SECURITY, HEALTH sectors play key roles at the reception centers Trends of new arrivals are alarming and there is need to highlight the exit plans from the camps to the camps for normal programming. Major challenges revolve around the availability of land. If new arrivals cannot exit the reception centre then this will develop into a new settlement type.

PREPARATION (FOR ARRIVALS) STAGE; CONSTRUCTIONS RECEPTION CENTRE (CCCM PARTNER / RECEPTION CENTRE MANAGER) WASH FACILITIES (WASH SECTOR PARTNER) WATER SOURCE (WASH SECTOR PARTNER +RECEPTION CENTRE MANAGER) FOOD PREPOSITIONING ( FOOD SECURITY PARTNER) ARRIVAL STAGE (services provided and by who) Immediate/Rapid registration ( ETT/DTM) Health screening (HEALTH SECTOR PARTNER) Food and Nutrition. coordinated with FSS, food pipeline is confirm by WFP. Reception centre manager to designate a cooking area for the beneficiaries to prepare their own meals. Only challenge is cooking fuel. (FSS PARTNER AND NUTRITION SECTOR PARTNER) NFI partner to provide NFI kits to the new arrivals. Protection and GBV sub sector. (GBV SUB SECTOR)

EXIT PHASE Recommended length of stay is upto days ( due to shelter and NFI availability as well as pipeline challenges) SHELTER/ NFI PARTNERS TRANSFER to camp or host community and allocation of plot for settlement (CCCM PARTNER) SHELTER ASSISTANCE (SHELTER/ NFI PARTNER) FOOD RATION (FSS PARTNER) TRANSFER REPORT (CCCM PARTNER – RECEPTION CENTRE MANAGER)

JOINT RECEPTION MANAGEMENT SECTORS CHALLENGES CCCM Registration data not harmonized across sector Reception center management not enough inclusive Reception report unavailable SHELTER Provision of Emergency kits upon arrival is inexistent Inexistence of orientation to IDPs to find Shelter solution within the host community HEALTH ? NUTRITION WASH PROTECTION

What are the missing activities ? NEXT STEPS How can we collectively ensure that the reception center are functional with all sectors contribution? What are the missing activities ? Which sectors partners are selected per each location? How can we ensure collectively that IDPs do not stuck in reception center? How can we ensure that the stay period in reception center are not too long?

Update: Progress of Reception management 7 Reception centers to be established in Borno Completed facilities Jere (Custom house) Pulka Mafa Monguno: Almost completed Planned Bama Dikwa Ngala Challenges and Way forward Existing unmet needs humanitarian service providers (capacity & commitment) 174: Food ration 123 HHs: No shelters 698 Individuals (June 1st through 26th) – Dikawa, Konduga & Mafa

III. RAINY SEASON UPDATE

RAIN/STORM DAMAGE SITUATION ATTENTION! Need for Committee to conduct site monitoring visit Distribution of Emergency shelter Kits (Targeted response) Make shift shelter reinforcement Emergency shelter reinforcement Site upgrade Targeted & coordinated response to most vulnerable sites

Guzamala, Marte, Abadam and Teacher's village IV. SITUATION UPDATES Returns to; Guzamala, Marte, Abadam and Teacher's village

V. SHELTER TWG PROPOSED TS DESIGNS

Half plank + half tarpaulin: Half Mud + half tarpaulin: 1 2 Half plank + half tarpaulin: Half Mud + half tarpaulin: Complete mud bricks as walling system: Unit Cost: USD 585.11 Beneficiary contribution: USD 126.73 Actual Unit cost: USD 458.38 3.

Actions/Recommendation Design committee to revise the BoQ for Mud housing to reflect beneficiary contribution in each of its phases and give feedback latest on Monday the 25th of June 2018. Design to be presented at the next sector meeting scheduled for 28th June 2018. Design committee to re-visit the remaining two options to clearly highlight beneficiary contribution in each of the Transitional shelter options. TWG to set up a committee of partners willing to be part of the Shelter quality monitoring before the next TWG. A proposal was meant on the need for the Shelter TWG to establish a quality check committee that will be responsible and act as Technical vanguards for - site monitoring visits to highlight and document best practices in shelter construction, making onsite recommendations where design specifications are not adhered to.

A.O.B