Once assessments have been completed and you are sure to proceed with a CBI, donors may be solicited. When drafting proposals to fund CBI-related projects, certain key information must be included to meet donors’ minimum requirements. This includes, among others, specifying conditionality and restrictions (if any), frequency and value of transfers, delivery mechanisms and complaint and feedback mechanisms. When necessary for proposals, use CVA or CTP if the donor uses those terms.
CBI proposals should include the following information:
- Market Analysis & Response Analysis: Findings of the market analysis and the first step of justification that explains why cash or vouchers is an appropriate modality to achieve the project’s objectives.
- CBI risk assessment findings: Findings from the Risk Analysis and protection risk analysis and planned mitigation measures. Choice of CBI modality: A clear justification for the choice of modality should be included.
- Choice of CBI delivery mechanism: The selected delivery mechanism(s) should be described in detail and why, including the controls in place to ensure its accountability and the security of beneficiaries and (partner) staff.
- Size of the transfer: How this was calculated and what needs are expected to be met with this transfer amount; whether the transfer is index-linked (e.g. will the size of the transfer change based on factors such as market prices).
- Frequency of the transfer and the total duration of the CBI: Will this be a one-off transfer or will the transfer be monthly and if so, how long will the programme last.
Table 1: Cash Feasibility – Key Considerations to Verify
| Criteria | Key considerations | Yes | No |
|---|---|---|---|
| Needs to be met by intervention | Can the needs be met through specific commodities and/or services? | ||
| Funding | Is CBI within donors’ funding policies and framework? | ||
| Government policies | Is CBI in accordance with local government policies? Ensure that there is no prohibition. |
||
| Market assessment | Is the economy monetized and are people used to handling money? | ||
| Does the population usually use markets to access their needs? | |||
| Are markets accessible? Consider age, gender, diversity issues to understand if there are particular groups or parts of the community who may face barriers accessing markets. | |||
| Are needed items available in sufficient quantity and at acceptable prices in the local markets? | |||
| Are prices likely to remain stable in the coming weeks or months? | |||
| Are traders able and willing to adapt to an increased demand? Consider transportation, stocking, quality and quantity issues. | |||
| Are financial service providers available and do they have the required infrastructure,capacity and liquidity to meet the project’s needs? Are they operational and accessible to the targeted population? | |||
| Organizational capacity | Does the IOM office have the internal capacity (programmatic, financial, logistic) toimplement a CBI? Consider previous experiences and potential partnerships. | ||
| Beneficiary preference | Is CBI a preferred option for the beneficiaries? | ||
| Are beneficiaries financially and technically literate? (This is particularly the case whendigital transfers are being considered.) Consider empowerment, dignity issues andbeneficiary capacity to deal with technology (mobiles, cards, etc.). | |||
| Are communities used to handling cash and how may personal safety or household dynamics be affected by cash? Consider differences in language and how it can affect the use of delivery mechanisms and access to the assistance provided. Consider persons with disabilities, women and minorities’ barriers to engage as well as their abilities and willingness | |||
| Infrastructure and services | Are the infrastructure and services needed to transfer cash to beneficiaries available? | ||
| Delivery mechanism | Which delivery mechanisms are most inclusive, user-friendly and best able to support local economies? Consider financial and technology requirements. | ||
| Risk | Are the risks associated with CBI acceptable or possible to mitigate? Consider beneficiary and staff security and assess protection risks, including sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) and gender-based violence (GBV) risks. |
||
| Timeliness | Is it possible to set up and implement a CBI with the necessary speed and at the intended scale? Consider the time that might be required to roll out the different deliverymechanisms. |
- Beneficiaries: The proposal should clearly identify vulnerable groups and their specific needs.
- Capacity Assessment and Building: The proposal should include the findings of the Capacity Study and steps of the capacity development plan. Be aware: capacity-building measures include (partner) staff members and beneficiaries on functional financial literacy.
- Monitoring, evaluation and accountability plan: This needs to include process, output and outcome monitoring (in particular monitoring the delivery mechanism and use of cash or vouchers) and the complaint mechanism (including impacts on gender power relations), market monitoring, planned evaluations and further accountability measures. Any unintended harmful consequences caused by cash distributions should be monitored.
- Gender and disability: The minimum data collection should have sex and disability disaggregated data and relevant information on needs, roles and responsibilities and power relations. For disability, different methods can apply, including the Washington Group Questions.
- Flexibility: As in any other humanitarian response proposal, ensure that all early proposals include flexibility (where possible), to allow adjustments to the changing needs of beneficiaries and availability and cost of commodities and/or services and as needed to minimize protection risks.