Strategic Goal 10: Humanitarian Response - Performance Results for Performance Goal 1
VII. Performance Results
PERFORMANCE GOAL 1EFFECTIVE PROTECTION, ASSISTANCE, AND DURABLE SOLUTIONS FOR REFUGEES, |
INITIATIVE/PROGRAM (I/P) #1: REFUGEE ASSISTANCE |
JUSTIFICATION (VALIDATION): The crude mortality rate is the mortality rate from all causes of death for a defined population. It is an accepted indicator of the extent to which the international community is meeting minimum standards of care (see www.sphereproject.org) and by extension the overall impact and performance of the international relief system (www.smartindicators.org). Criteria developed by UNHCR and the Sphere Project establish regional CMR thresholds for emergency response based on long-term CMR data in these areas. | ||
FY 2005 Performance |
Target | Complex humanitarian emergencies do not exceed a CMR of 1/10,000 people/day. Support efforts to improve data collection, e.g., expand pilot data collection effort to other countries and partner organizations, and to take other measures to address any problems of excess mortality. |
---|---|---|
Results |
| |
Rating | On Target | |
Impact | The Department's contributions to international humanitarian efforts saved refugee lives, as indicated by CMR below emergency thresholds. In a few cases, CMR exceeded emergency thresholds. In complex humanitarian crises, this is typically due to high rates of malnutrition, outbreaks of disease, and in some cases, insecurity in refugee camps and settlements. In some Sudanese refugee camps in Chad, for example, severe acute malnutrition (including Kwashiorkor) and outbreaks of Hepatitis E caused deaths at a rate that exceeded acceptable levels. In these cases, the Department will target funding and programming to address these major causes of death and bolster health and nutrition services. | |
Performance Data | Data Source | Reports from Complex Emergencies Database, WHO, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA), WFP, UNHCR, and non-governmental organizations. Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) program officers in Washington and refugee coordinators in the field collect data from these sources. |
Data Quality (Verification) |
The Department actively monitors Crude Mortality Rates reported by UNHCR, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and other international and non-governmental organizations. Refugee coordinators and program specialists monitor performance in the field and through regular consultations with partners in Washington and Geneva. The Complex Emergencies Database provides accessible, high quality data in an increasing number of countries, as well as information regarding the methodology, accuracy and reliability of the data reported. | |
Past Performance |
2004 | In June 2004, CMR exceeded 2/10,000/day among Sudanese refugees in Chad. The Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters has created an online Complex Emergencies Database to track data on CMR and nutritional status. |
2003 | Available data from partners and refugee coordinators shows that CMR did not exceed 1/10,000 people/day in refugee populations targeted by PRM. | |
2002 | Where data were available, refugee crisis did not exceed a CMR of 1/10,000 people/day. State/PRM and USAID developed tools and conducted a training workshop to measure and track CMR and under-five child nutritional status under the Standardized Monitoring and Assessment of Relief and Transitions initiative. |
JUSTIFICATION (VALIDATION): Nutritional status is a basic indicator for assessing the severity of humanitarian crisis, together with Crude Mortality Rate. In emergencies, weight loss among children 6-59 months is used as a proxy indicator for the general health and well being of the entire community. Global acute malnutrition (GAM) is the term used to include all malnourished children whether they have moderate wasting, severe wasting or edema, or some combination of these conditions. GAM is defined as weight-for-height ratios that are less than 2 standard deviations below the mean (Z score of less than -2), or less than 80% median weight-for-height, or the presence of nutritional edema. (See www.sphereproject.org) | ||
FY 2005 Performance |
Target | In complex humanitarian emergencies, less than 10 percent of children under five suffer from global acute malnutrition. |
---|---|---|
Results | In 7% of targeted sites (16 sites out of over 225 refugee camps and settlements worldwide), more than 10% of children under age five suffered from global acute malnutrition. During FY 2005, GAM rates exceeded 10 percent in eleven camps in Chad, seven camps in Ethiopia, and one camp in the Central African Republic. For example, GAM rates among Sudanese refugees in Chad have declined since FY 2004; however, they remain at serious levels (around 15%), according to May 2005 surveys. The Department is working with UNHCR and other international and nongovernmental organizations to ensure that less than 10% of children under age five suffer from global acute malnutrition in refugee camps. | |
Rating | Below Target | |
Impact | Elevated rates of GAM directly contribute to increased rates of morbidity and mortality in children under five years of age. Malnutrition may also threaten refugee protection in terms of camp security, vulnerability to exploitation, and in extreme cases, involuntary return. | |
Reason for Shortfall |
| |
Steps to Improve |
| |
Performance Data | Data Source | Reports from CE-DAT, WHO, UNOCHA, WFP, UNHCR, and nongovernmental organizations. |
Data Quality (Verification) |
CE-DAT provides information regarding the methodology, accuracy and reliability of the data reported. PRM routinely monitors the nutrition surveillance and feeding programs of international and non-governmental organizations through refugee coordinators in the field and specialists based in Washington and Geneva. | |
Past Performance |
2004 | In 8% of targeted sites (20 sites out of over 225 refugee camps and settlements worldwide), more than 10% of children under age five suffered from global acute malnutrition. For example, in June 2004, surveys conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 36-39% of children under age five, among Sudanese refugees in Chad, suffered from global acute malnutrition. The Department and USAID continued supporting new tools/measures to improve data collection and reporting on nutritional status. |
2003 |
Baseline:
| |
2002 | N/A |
I/P #2: PROTECTION |
JUSTIFICATION (VALIDATION): Adoption of standard codes of conduct for protection represents partners' commitment to eradicate exploitation, and can help spur awareness of protection issues among all staff. The U.S. Government believes that implementing codes of conduct is an important step toward promoting a universal protection mandate for refugees and vulnerable populations. | ||
FY 2005 Performance |
Target | 100% of all overseas partners have instituted codes of conduct, 100% have developed awareness training, 100% have implemented reporting and follow-up mechanisms, and 90% of investigations are launched within 60 days of a case report of exploitation. |
---|---|---|
Results | 100% of all overseas partners have instituted codes of conduct, 100% have developed awareness training, 100% have implemented reporting and follow up mechanisms and corrective actions are taken in response to case reports. | |
Rating | On Target | |
Impact | Humanitarian partner organizations improve institutional efforts to prevent and respond to exploitation. Protection of refugees and other vulnerable populations is improved as the threat of exploitation in humanitarian operations is reduced. | |
Performance Data | Data Source | Codes of Conduct and reporting on anti-exploitation mechanisms submitted to PRM by NGO partners and shared by international organizations. |
Data Quality (Verification) |
PRM tracks codes of conduct and their implementation by partner organizations through monitoring at headquarters and in the field. | |
Past Performance |
2004 | All of PRM's NGO partners operating overseas are required to sign codes of conduct in order to receive funding. All international organizations have adopted the Inter Agency Standing Committee common elements in developing codes of conduct. |
2003 | All of PRM's NGO partners operating overseas are required to sign codes of conduct in order to receive funding. All international organizations have adopted the Inter Agency Standing Committee common elements in developing codes of conduct. | |
2002 | PRM did not have monitoring mechanisms in place in FY 2002. This indicator was established to take effect in FY 2003. |
I/P #3: REFUGEE ADMISSIONS TO THE U.S. |
JUSTIFICATION (VALIDATION): This indicator measures the effectiveness of the refugee admissions program overall. To the extent that the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) has control of the process, it also measures PRM's performance in managing the program. | ||
FY 2005 Performance |
Target | 100% of the regionally allocated ceiling of 50,000 refugees. This number is set by the President for each fiscal year. |
---|---|---|
Results | 107% of the regionally allocated ceiling of 50,000 refugees (53,813) have been resettled to the U.S. as of September 30, 2005. | |
Rating | Above Target | |
Impact | Refugees and their families achieved a durable solution and started new lives in communities across the United States. | |
Performance Data | Data Source | The Department's Refugee Processing Center collects data on refugee arrivals in the U.S. |
Data Quality (Verification) |
The Department's Refugee Processing Center collects, records, and analyzes data on refugee admissions to the United States using the Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System (WRAPS). | |
Past Performance |
2004 | 106%. 52,868 refugees were resettled in the U.S., surpassing the allocated ceiling of 50,000. |
2003 | Out of a ceiling of 70,000 refugees, 28,422 (or 41%) were resettled. | |
2002 | Out of an allocated ceiling of 70,000 refugees, 27,113 were resettled. This number was significantly affected by developments since the events of 9/11. | |
1 The ceiling is established by Presidential determination each year through consultations with voluntary agencies, Congress, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Health and Human Services. (back to text) |
NOTE: This indicator has been deleted. Please see Appendix for details. |
I/P #4: HUMANITARIAN DEMINING |
JUSTIFICATION (VALIDATION): The Department oversees bilateral humanitarian mine action programs worldwide by supporting national programs through strategic planning, capacity development, mine action training, victim's assistance and mine risk education. This indicator captures the total level of national programs that have been assisted and graduated to either self-sustainment or attainment of mine impact-free status compared against the total mine action budget of the U.S. Department of State Humanitarian Mine Action program. | ||
FY 2005 Performance |
Target |
This target has been revised. Please see Appendix for details. |
---|---|---|
Results |
| |
Rating | Above Target | |
Impact | Accelerates strategic objective to graduate mine-affected countries to either self-sustainment or attainment of mine impact-free status. | |
Performance Data | Data Source | Department reporting from nation-partners, implementing partners, and U.S. Embassies of the successful completion of host-nation strategic and national objectives. |
Data Quality (Verification) |
The Department of State oversees humanitarian mine action programs worldwide and works with national partners and implementing partners to track levels of self-sustainment and the attainment of mine impact-free status. | |
Past Performance |
2004 |
|
2003 |
| |
2002 |
|
Burundi Repatriation
Burundi refugee women load luggage onto transport trucks in preparation for a convoy to depart for their home country, May 2005. State Department Photo |
I/P #5: WORLD FOOD PROGRAM DONOR BASE |
JUSTIFICATION (VALIDATION): The effectiveness of multilateral organizations can be compromised by over-reliance on contributions from a single donor. More contributors and greater contributions from existing contributors are needed to keep WFP's crisis response capacity at its current level. WFP operates on a calendar year, while the U.S. Government operates on a fiscal year. | ||
FY 2005 Performance |
Target |
|
---|---|---|
Results | As of September 26, 2005, there were four new donors: Azerbaijan, Liechtenstein, Namibia, and Trinidad and Tobago. As of September 26, 2005, WFP had received $2.08 billion in contributions, of which $934 million were from the United States. Non-U.S. Government contributions were 55% of total contributions. | |
Rating | Above Target | |
Impact | Contributions to WFP enable it to provide both emergency and development food aid to people in need. | |
Performance Data | Data Source | Documents prepared by WFP for the Executive Board's annual session and available on WFP's website. |
Data Quality (Verification) |
The performance indicator can be easily tracked and verified through WFP's accounting, which is available to the Department. | |
Past Performance |
2004 | As of October 4, 2004, there were seven new donors: Madagascar, Guatemala, Ecuador, United Arab Emirates, Iran, Pakistan, and Zimbabwe. As of October 4, 2004, WFP had received $1.562 billion in contributions, of which $718 million were from the United States. Non-U.S. Government contributions were 54% of total contributions. |
2003 | As of September 22, 2003, WFP had nine new donors: Cameroon, El Salvador, Greece, Kuwait, Malta, Marshall Islands, Qatar, Russia, and Vietnam. As of September 22, 2003, non-U.S. Government contributions to WFP totaled $877 million, compared to $871 million as of December 31, 2002 (an increase of 0.7%). | |
2002 | Baseline: Of the $1.8 billion, U.S. contributions were 52% and non-U.S. Government contributions were 48%. |
Humanitarian Mine Actions
U.S Ambassador William Wood watches two soldiers test mine detectors donated by the U.S. Government during a ceremony in Bogota, Colombia, October, 2004. AP/Wide World Photo |
I/P #6: PARTNER ACCOUNTABILITY |
JUSTIFICATION (VALIDATION): Financial transparency is essential to ensuring responsible programming and effective oversight. | ||
FY 2005 Performance |
Target | 95% of PRM's overseas partners have taken corrective action in response to any "critical recommendations" in financial audits conducted of their organizations. |
---|---|---|
Results | 95% of PRM's overseas partners have taken corrective action in response to any "critical recommendations" in financial audits conducted of their organizations. | |
Rating | On Target | |
Impact | Partner organizations demonstrate a commitment to accountability and to improving their financial performance on behalf of beneficiaries and taxpayers. The U.S. Government has confidence that its resources for humanitarian response are being used wisely and responsibly. | |
Performance Data | Data Source | Financial audit reports of the Department's partner organizations. |
Data Quality (Verification) |
Periodic external audits are conducted on all PRM's NGO and non-UN international partners (e.g., ICRC and IOM). Data on states, local governments, and non-profit organizations comes from OMB A-133 audits. UN organizations are audited by the UN Board of Auditors. | |
Past Performance |
2004 | 95% of our partners have taken corrective action in response to any "critical recommendations" in financial audits conducted of their organizations. |
2003 | 95% of our partners have taken corrective action in response to any "critical recommendations" in financial audits conducted of their organizations. | |
2002 | N/A |
UN HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES |
JUSTIFICATION (VALIDATION): This indicator measures the UN High Commissioner for Refugees' (UNHCR) efficiency of tracking procurements through implementation of its Management Systems Renewal Project (MSRP). | ||
FY 2005 Performance |
Target | Tracking items procured at headquarters, the ratio is 1.5:1. |
---|---|---|
Results | Continuing its 2004 performance, UNHCR is on track to achieve its 2005 target; final results will be available after the close of the calendar year. | |
Rating | On Target | |
Impact | Equipment and supplies (e.g., computers, telecommunications equipment, office supplies) essential for UNHCR's humanitarian response are procured efficiently, increasing the timeliness and performance of response efforts, and generating cost savings that allow greater resources to be spent directly on refugee programs. | |
Performance Data | Data Source | UNHCR calendar year financial statements. |
Data Quality (Verification) |
The Department monitors UNHCR's implementation of the Management Systems Renewal Project and tracks its results (including efficiency) as part of the U.S. Government-UNHCR Framework for Cooperation. | |
Past Performance |
2004 | 1.5:1 (Ratio A:B, where A=$2.3m and B=$1.5m). |
2003 | 1.8:1 (Ratio A:B, where A=$38.7m and B=$21.8m). | |
2002 | 2.4:1 (Ratio A:B, where A=$36.2m and B=$14.8m). |
REFUGEE ADMISSIONS TO THE U.S. |
JUSTIFICATION (VALIDATION): This indicator measures the efficiency of the U.S. Refugee Program overall. Declining per capita costs reflect the Department's efforts to manage the program effectively and in the interests of U.S. taxpayers. | ||
FY 2005 Performance |
Target | $3,700. |
---|---|---|
Results | $3,568. | |
Rating | On Target | |
Impact | Relevant U.S. Government agencies and partner organizations used available resources efficiently to maximize benefits to refugees. | |
Performance Data | Data Source | The Department tracks program costs; the Department's Refugee Processing Center collects data on refugee arrivals in the U.S. |
Data Quality (Verification) |
The Bureau's Admissions Office and Comptroller track financial reports from implementing partners. Partners are audited in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 to verify compliance with U.S. Government requirements. | |
Past Performance |
2004 | $3,500. |
2003 | $4,428. | |
2002 | Baseline: $4,445 per refugee in the U.S. |
A Look to History: Humanitarian Response
Civilian war refugees from occupied Europe are shown at Fort Ontario, Oswego, NY., August 5, 1944. AP Photo |
HUMANITARIAN MIGRANTS TO ISRAEL |
JUSTIFICATION (VALIDATION): Humanitarian migrants leave absorption centers when able to secure permanent housing. Leaving absorption centers reflects their ability to make this critical step toward achieving self-sufficiency and integration into Israeli society. Reduction in the amount of time spent in absorption centers represents efficiency in reaching this goal. | ||
FY 2005 Performance |
Target | 2% reduction in average cost . Target Average Cost: $6,123. |
---|---|---|
Results | The United Israel Appeal reports on a calendar year basis; its report for 2005 is pending. | |
Rating | On Target | |
Impact | Humanitarian Migrants from the former Soviet Union secure housing and take steps to become self-sufficient in a timely way, resulting in time and cost savings. The United Israel Appeal demonstrates program efficiency. | |
Performance Data | Data Source | Reports from the United Israel Appeal, as well as reporting from the Department's staff monitoring visits. |
Data Quality (Verification) |
Grant-specific site visits are conducted at least once a year by PRM/Washington staff. PRM's refugee coordinator in Amman also conducts site visits. | |
Past Performance |
2004 | 467 days or $6,248 (a 25% reduction). |
2003 | Baseline: Average stay is 601 days or $8,041. | |
2002 | N/A |
NOTE: This indicator has been combined with Indicator #6 in this section (I/P #5). Please see Appendix for details. |
< Go to Previous Page Go to Next Page >