To: Members of the Senate Judiciary and Finance Committees From: Senator Grassley, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee Member, Senate Finance Committee Date: June 15, 2016 Re: Investigation of the American Red Cross Dear Fellow Committee Members: I am writing in regards to my investigation into the American Red Cross (ARC) to share the results. ARC is a congressionally chartered instrumentality of the United States Government and was originally chartered in 1900.1 ARC performs valuable work across the United States and the world, conducting disaster response and other relief activities. Many thousands of Americans have donated time, energy, and money to its cause. As expressed on ARC’s website, it is different from other congressionally chartered organizations because it “maintains a special relationship with the federal government” as a federal instrumentality that is required to “carry out responsibilities delegated to [it] by the federal government.”2 Given that role, Congress plays an important function in maintaining effective oversight of the organization. The Judiciary Committee has jurisdiction over congressional charters and the Finance Committee has jurisdiction over tax-exempt entities. Thus, I am transmitting this memorandum to members of both Committees. In the immediate aftermath of the Haiti earthquake in 2010, ARC started the Haiti Assistance Project (HAP) to provide medical, food, and housing assistance for the displaced and vulnerable Haitian people. ARC received donations from all over the world totaling approximately $487 million to fund HAP. In some respects, HAP was successful; it funded food rations for over 1 million people and built thousands of temporary shelters across Haiti.3 ARC’s successes in HAP were eclipsed by news reports in June 2015 indicating that ARC’s operations in Haiti were plagued by inefficiencies and waste.4 Mr. Lee Melany, a former ARC official in Haiti, stated that ARC leadership was more interested in projects generating 1 36 U.S.C. § 300101. American Red Cross description of its relationship with the federal government, available at http://www.redcross.org/about-us/history/federal-charter. 3 Attachment F; Attachment G at 1; see also, Attachment H, at 13 et seq. 4 Justin Elliot, “How the Red Cross Raised Half a Billion Dollars for Haiti and Built Six Homes,” PROPUBLICA (June 3, 2015) (available at https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-red-cross-raised-half-a-billion-dollars-for-haiti-and-built-6homes); Lauren Sullivan, “In Search Of The Red Cross’ $500 Million In Haiti Relief,” NAT’L PUB. RADIO (June 3, 2015)(available at http://www.npr.org/2015/06/03/411524156/in-search-of-the-red-cross-500-million-in-haiti-relief.) 2 1 good publicity than those that would provide the most homes.5 One former ARC official stated that the Haiti disaster was viewed internally as a fundraising opportunity.6 There were reports of systemic problems throughout the organization. Then-director of HAP, Ms. Judith St. Fort, wrote that serious program delays were caused by “internal issues…due to lack of staff and training.”7 She also noted that morale was low due to a “lack of leadership” in the field.8 Furthermore, many employees “resigned due to their discontentment about the work environment created by [senior] Management.”9 As a result of these challenges, ARC struggled to fulfill some of its pledges for Haiti. For instance, ARC pledged to create 700 permanent homes in the neighborhood of Campeche in Haiti.10 Despite hundreds of millions of dollars in donations and hundreds of volunteers and employees, ARC managed to build only six permanent homes.11 News reports have detailed other instances of waste and inefficiency in ARC’s handling of operations in Haiti.12 In response to these news reports, I began an inquiry into ARC and its disaster response efforts in Haiti. I wrote to ARC on July 8, 2015. That letter described how I personally met with the President and CEO of ARC, Ms. Gail McGovern, and her team, in March 2015. That was before the negative reports ran in the press, and she assured me that ARC had made substantial steps forward in improving efficiencies and reducing waste, fraud, and abuse within the organization. However, in light of the news reports, it seemed as though ARC had failed to live up to its responsibility to be a standard-bearer of transparency, efficiency, and good-will among the charitable community. Non-profit entities have a special tax-exempt status and therefore have a responsibility to be as honestly, efficiently, and transparently operated as possible. Just as importantly, nonprofits have a moral obligation to spend the vast majority of their resources furthering those causes for which the organizations were created. That is, after all, why Congress created the taxexempt status in the first place. It stands to reason, then, that the public should know how ARC performs its work in pursuit of its stated mission. The inquiry focused on several areas: (1) ARC’s cooperation—or lack thereof—with the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) audit on ARC-related disaster programs; (2) whether or not ARC was able to properly track donor money in Haiti and what degree of oversight was performed over HAP; and (3) ARC’s internal governance structure, specifically its investigations unit – the Office of Investigations, Compliance, and Ethics (ICE). 5 Id. Id. 7 Judith St. Fort, Red Cross Haiti Program Director Judith St. Fort Memo, ProPublica (May 2011) available at: https://www.propublica.org/documents/item/2081560-red-cross-haiti-program-director-judith-st-fort.html. 8 Id. 9 Id. 10 Elliot, Sullivan, supra, nt. 5. 11 Id. 12 Id. 6 2 During the course of the investigation, ARC indicated that it retained $69,574,880 of the $487,640,522 donated to HAP. The $69.6 million was used to pay for salaries, contract services, travel expenses, and other HAP related items, otherwise called “program costs.”13 The majority of HAP projects were farmed out to 50 partner organizations to execute. In addition, ARC spent $43,877,059 of donor money on management, general and fundraising expenses (MG&F) relating to HAP, which is separate and distinct from the $69.6 million in program costs. The MG&F was approximately 9% of the total HAP funds.14 ARC also spent $10,424,667 in “contingency” costs to cover ARC from liabilities that may occur in the course of implementing HAP.15 Overall, ARC spent $123,876,606.58 out of $487,640,522.14, or 25.4%, on all three categories: MG&F, program costs for all of HAP, and contingency. The remaining funds—approximately $363.7 million—were provided to partner organizations. With respect to program costs, ARC does not track costs on a project by project basis; instead it uses a complex, yet inaccurate, process to track its spending. 16 According to ARC, it separates projects by sector, weighs each sector’s spending against the others, and based upon that comparison, it estimates its own program costs.17 Thus, a $30 million grant to a partner, once “weighted,” may end up costing $32 million, but not even ARC is sure of the actual cost. Therefore, ARC is unable to inform Congress, or the public, of the exact cost of each project that it funded with donor dollars. ARC defends its lack of precision by relying on non-profit accounting standards, which allow for the use of estimates rather than actual numbers.18 I also requested that ARC provide a detailed accounting of how project money was spent as it relates to oversight and evaluation, and explain how it justified the spending. In reply, ARC provided categories of activity to which it charged money, but was unable to provide a ARC defines these program costs as the following: “Per the Financial Accounting Standards Board, program costs result in goods and services being distributed to beneficiaries that fulfill the purposes or mission for which the Not For Profit (NFP) exists - in this case, disaster relief and recovery in Haiti. These costs ensure delivery of assistance and all services provided in Haiti: shelter, water and sanitation, livelihoods, disaster risk reduction, health and cholera prevention; and include things like: i) salaries, wages and benefits for staff working on our Haiti Assistance Program in the field and at headquarters; ii) travel and maintenance costs for all staff working in Haiti or traveling related to the program; iii) oversight of grants awarded to local NGO or Red Cross member society to support disaster response; iv) accountability, monitoring and evaluation.” Notably, the $69.6 million, according to ARC, also includes costs for HAP partners’ program service costs. However, ARC did not provide a clear delineation. Attachment T at 22; see also, Attachment E. 14 ARC described MG&F costs as the following: “Expenses incurred by the American Red Cross in undertaking management, general and fundraising activities as such activities are defined by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). Such expenses do not include expenses incurred by the American Red Cross in undertaking activities that result in goods and services being distributed that fulfill the purposes or mission for which the American Red Cross exists. According to FASB, examples of MG&F activities include record keeping, budgeting, financing, fundraising campaigns, maintenance of donor mailing lists, and distributing fundraising materials.” Attachment T at 22. 15 Attachment T, p. 22 16 Attachment B at 3-5. 17 Id.; see also, Attachment A at 8; Attachment C. 18 Attachment C; see also, FASB ASC 958-720-20. 13 3 comprehensive accounting of HAP with respect to oversight activity.19 For example, in two letters, ARC stated that a portion of the $69.6 million accounted for oversight and evaluation of the projects in Haiti, but those categories of spending were not included in the final accounting.20 Moreover, President and CEO McGovern attempted to terminate a GAO audit and Mr. David Meltzer, the General Counsel, was able to limit the scope of the GAO’s inquiry.21 Although their efforts to terminate the review were unsuccessful, they were successful in limiting the scope of the report.22 In addition, ARC failed to provide to GAO a substantial volume of requested material.23 When Ms. McGovern was questioned about this lack of access she stated, “[w]e gave [the GAO] everything that they asked for.” This is contrary to the documentary evidence of communications between GAO and ARC. And finally, my staff interviewed the ICE Unit’s chief, Ms. Teala Brewer, Vice President of the ICE unit, to gain an understanding on how ARC manages its internal investigations and ensures that its work and projects are properly overseen. Based on the information provided by ARC, the ICE unit is severely understaffed and underfunded, which, of course, would greatly impact ARC’s ability to police itself.24 ARC ATTEMPTED TO TERMINATE A GAO AUDIT AND SUCCESSFULLY LIMITED ITS SCOPE. On June 19, 2014, ARC officials met with GAO personnel regarding a study request submitted by Representative Bennie Thompson. That meeting began a series of back and forth communications between GAO and ARC on the scope of the review. GAO made clear that it planned to cover both internal oversight and external oversight relating to ARC disaster services.25 Notably, ARC’s congressional charter states the following: Section 11 – Authority of the Comptroller General of the United States The Comptroller General of the United States is authorized to review the corporation’s involvement in any Federal program or activity the Government carries out under law.26 Based upon a plain reading of Section 11, GAO oversight of ARC would reasonably extend to the internal process and procedure related to its involvement in federal disaster response. 19 In two letters provided to the Committee, ARC stated that a portion of the $69 million accounted for oversight and evaluation of the projects in Haiti but those categories of spending were not included in the final accounting provided to the Committee. See, e.g., Attachment A. 20 Attachment C; Attachment A at 2. 21 Attachment D. 22 Attachment O at 1; Attachment L. 23 Attachment L to 8-10. 24 See infra, p. 16-18. 25 Attachment O at 1. 26 36 U.S.C. § 300111. 4 Further, Congress certainly has an obligation to understand any shortcomings within ARC that could interfere with its mission to assist during disasters. Based on material provided by the GAO, ARC did not believe that GAO had the authority to “research ARC corporate governance and decision-making processes… that don’t involve federal funds” even when it impacted federal activity.27 Specifically, ARC objected to GAO’s attempt to analyze “the nature and extent of the oversight to which the agency’s disasterrelated services are subject.”28 On June 30, 2014, Ms. McGovern wrote to Rep. Thompson to request that he “consider… meeting face-to-face rather than requesting information via letter” in order to “end the GAO inquiry.”29 Ultimately, ARC failed in its attempt to terminate the GAO study. However, ARC’s lack of cooperation led GAO to modify its scope in consultation with its congressional requester and caused significant delays in the completion of the GAO report. After learning of ARC’s attempt to terminate the GAO report, I requested that GAO provide all relevant material relating to its communications with ARC on the study.30 On November 6, 2015, GAO provided documentation relating to its effort to study ARC’s domestic disaster response process.31 In addition, GAO provided a second update on May 2, 2016.32 In emails from July 2014, ARC’s General Counsel made clear from the beginning his desire to limit GAO’s scope of review: “One issue on which I would appreciate the Office’s views is the legal authority of the Office to research non-federally funded programs of the American Red Cross.”33 In reply, GAO said:34 Mr. Meltzer – I was surprised to see this issue raised in your response, as I thought that we had established the outlines of a plan for moving forward at our June 19 meeting. Did something change between then and now? Mr. Meltzer replied: We appreciated the meeting as it addressed many of our concerns. However, questions still remain as to the authority for GAO to research ARC corporate governance and decision-making processes as well as ARC programs that don’t involve federal funds. Before resuming the work needed to respond to GAO’s requests, we would 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Attachment L at 3-4. Attachment O at 1. Attachment D. Attachment U. Attachment L. Attachment O. Attachment L at 4. Id. at 3-4. 5 appreciate first being informed as to GAO’s views on its authority to conduct a review of this scope, including our non-federal programs. In response, GAO stated the following:35 David--We have considered the concerns you and your colleagues have raised about our ongoing review of the Red Cross in the wake of our meeting of June 19th and subsequent email communications. We believe that a reframing of our objectives to more closely reflect the language of the 2007 American National Red Cross Governance Modernization Act may help to address your concerns, while also satisfying the continuing interest of our congressional requester. In that regard, the revised objectives of our review are as follows: - How are the nature and extent of Red Cross’s disaster-related services determined when it is involved in Federal programs or activities? - What oversight applies to the Red Cross’s disaster-related services when it is involved in Federal programs or activities? After the August 1, 2014, email, the ARC General Counsel did not respond, ending the email chain. Later, in a September 2, 2014, meeting between GAO officials and ARC’s General Counsel and Associate General Counsel, Ms. Lori Polacheck, there was a dispute over the meaning of ARC’s Section 11. Specifically, ARC challenged the GAO’s new scope and focused on what “involvement in any Federal program or activity” means.36 In essence, ARC took the position that “involvement in any Federal program or activity” is limited to those disasters in which ARC receives federal funding or is operating in its co-lead role with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).37 Thus, ARC maintains that the 35 Id. Attachment L. 37 GAO appeared to read the plain language literally, which would allow it to review ARC’s involvement in a domestic disaster even if ARC did not receive federal dollars for it. Specifically, under Emergency Support Function #6, a Department of Homeland Security document that guides the interrelationship between multiple department agencies in support of disasters, noted that ARC is the “co-lead for mass care and support agency for ESF #6.” ESF-6 further notes that ARC “works with DHS/FEMA…”, “[p]rovides mass care technical assistance to DHS/FEMA…”, “supports DHS/FEMA in working with designated state agencies…”, “[w]orks closely with DHS/FEMA at designated DHS/FEMA locations to support EFS #6…”, and “[][i]n conjunction with DHS/FEMA [] facilitates the mobilization of NGO and private sector partners…” In these functions, ARC appears to accept GAO’s jurisdiction to look at ARC records but Mr. Meltzer and Ms. Polacheck did not believe that 36 6 GAO may only look into the delivery processes employed to fulfill the mission of the disaster in those two situations. This conflicted with GAO’s scope, which included “looking for information about how the Red Cross makes decisions in allocating funding among disasters and what oversight the Red Cross conducts over how the funding is used.” Such a scope would arguably include the impact of the decision-making process on federal activity or federal funding, yet ARC still argued against that scope of review. In a September 2, 2014, phone call to GAO, ARC noted that there were few disasters where ARC received federal funding and therefore most disaster relief work would fall out of GAO’s purview. During the course of communications with GAO, ARC held firm in the position that there must be a funding nexus between the federal government and ARC before GAO is able to review the type of internal oversight that ARC performs for any given disaster. According to the GAO, ARC did not dispute that its Emergency Support Function-6 (ESF-6) planning and coordination responsibilities and performance would entail involvement with the federal government, specifically FEMA. However, ARC claimed that its decisions to allocate resources that did not include federal dollars in a particular disaster precludes the GAO of access to its books, records, and internal oversight processes.38 The GAO further stated that ARC “believe[d] such requests for internal decision-making, internal oversight, and internal funding allocation are outside of GAO’s authority.” ARC made the distinction between coordination at the federal level, such as under the ESF-6 rubric, and its responsibilities under its service provision, such as setting up a shelter. In other words, ARC took the position that its decisionmaking process with respect to how it allocated funding in a disaster was off-limits, unless those funds directly involved federal monies. In a September 26, 2014 follow up phone call with GAO, ARC elaborated on its position and provided an example to provide additional clarity: if ARC is in the coordination tent with FEMA and a need for blankets is identified, and ARC has blankets to dispense, the implementation of the delivery of the blankets is outside the scope of federal involvement, but the conversation in the tent is within the scope of federal involvement. At the end of the September 26, 2014, conversation, GAO notes of that conversation state that ARC did not want “to open the door to a long, endless GAO review,” particularly on internal oversight. Ultimately, due to ARC’s lack of cooperation, GAO removed internal oversight from its review in consultation with its congressional requester in order to move forward with the work and provide at least some congressional oversight of ARC. The initial scope of review was the following: 39  How are the nature and extent of the American Red Cross' disaster-related activities determined? ARC’s decisions to allocate resources to a particular disaster are subject to GAO’s jurisdiction unless and until those resources contain federal funds. ARC further noted that in its role as a “service provider,” where ARC works mostly with state and local governments, it is not subject to GAO’s jurisdiction at all. Attachment K at 12. 38 See generally, Attachment L. 39 Attachment O. 7  What is the nature and extent of the oversight to which the agency’s disaster-related services are subject? And the final reporting objectives were as follows:    What key factors affect the nature and extent of the Red Cross’s disaster-related services? How does the Red Cross coordinate with the federal government on disaster assistance? What external oversight exists of the Red Cross’s disaster services? In addition, in the course of GAO’s review, ARC was not fully cooperative in providing requested documentation and interview subjects, contrary to ARC’s claims.40 During an April 5, 2016, phone call between my staff and Ms. McGovern, Mr. Meltzer, Ms. Teala Brewer, and Ms. Suzy DeFrancis, Chief of Public Affairs, Ms. McGovern stated twice that “we gave [the GAO] everything they asked for.” Further, Mr. Meltzer’s characterization of the back and forth with GAO over the scope of its review was much different than GAO’s. Mr. Meltzer stated that “[the GAO] didn’t disagree with us” when referring to GAO’s scope of review. That position is contradicted by the records of communications between GAO and ARC.41 In a November 6, 2015, letter, GAO stated that ARC failed to provide a number of requested documents and interviews. An example of those requests include the following:42       40 41 42 Examples of the Board of Governors’ strategic oversight activities related to effectiveness and efficiency of disaster services. A brief description or examples of how the Board of Governors assesses the performance and effectiveness of disaster assistance. Examples of how the most recent such report addressed effectiveness of disaster services, such as key metrics, findings, or recommendations. Examples of the types of issues related to fraud, waste, or abuse in disaster services that have been identified through the Concern Connection Line (CCL) Hotline. A brief description of chapter quality assurance activities. Examples, not specific details, of the types of issues related to disaster services that have been investigated by the Investigations, Compliance & Ethics (IC&E) division. Attachment L at 8-10. See generally, Attachment L; Attachment O. Attachment L at 8-10. 8   Summarize the purpose, activities, and any known impacts of the Disaster Response Unit within IC&E division. Interviews with ARC chapters and regions involved in Hurricane Sandy, the May 2013 Oklahoma tornadoes, and April 2014 floods in northern Florida. My staff talked with Ms. McGovern, Mr. Meltzer, and Ms. DeFrancis on June 10, 2016, regarding ARC’s failure to cooperate in full with the GAO and provide all requested documents. ARC disagreed with the assessment and asserted that it was cooperative during the GAO review and that it did provide everything the GAO requested. ARC noted that it created a chronology of events after learning of my September 28, 2015, request letter to the GAO for all documents relating to its review of ARC in anticipation of my having questions. However, ARC did not share that chronology with my staff until June 13, 2016.43 However, nothing in the chronology contradicts the finding that ARC resisted the GAO’s scope of review, causing GAO to limit the review. Pointedly, ARC’s June 13 chronology states, “[] at no point did the Red Cross refuse to provide requested information.”44 Despite this conclusory assertion, the weight of the evidence shows that ARC failed to produce all requested material.45 In ARC’s view, the GAO simply “revised” its research questions.46 Indeed, the timeline of events provided by ARC shows a long period of debate over the scope of review. The GAO first reached out to ARC in January 2014, and in October 2014 – 9 months later – GAO was able to finally reach an agreement with ARC over the newly limited scope.47 Based on communications between my staff and the GAO as well as documentation acquired from the GAO and ARC, it is clear that ARC did not provide the GAO with everything it asked for, contrary to Ms. McGovern’s multiple claims that it did. Further, emails exchanged between GAO and ARC, as well as the interview notes, illustrate that the GAO did disagree with ARC’s position on the scope of the impending review and its own authority to review ARC activities, contrary to Mr. Meltzer’s statement. ARC DOES NOT KNOW HOW MUCH EACH PROJECT ACTUALLY COST. ARC is unable to determine how much each project in Haiti actually cost. ARC has stated, “although [ARC] program costs per sector were spread across projects within each sector for illustrative purposes, these costs are not tracked by project.”48 ARC has stated that non-profit accounting standards permit estimates. ARC provided two spreadsheets that list each partner and project funded in Haiti. One spreadsheet includes HAP “Projects and Partnerships” while the 43 44 45 46 47 48 Attachment X. Attachment X at 2. Attachment L and O, generally. Attachment X at 1. Attachment X at 3-6. Attachment B at 3 [emphasis in original]. 9 other includes just partnerships while also listing each partner’s Management, General and Fundraising Costs (MG&F), which is essentially the amount of money each partner takes from the check ARC sent it to support the overall function and management of the non-profit.49 For example, many partners have an MG&F rate of 6.5%. That means that for each dollar granted to the organization, 6.5 cents is used by the organization toward the overall function and management of the non-profit. ARC’s June 1, 2016, production to the public regarding its spending spreadsheet did not provide this information. In addition, for all of HAP, ARC totaled $43,877,059 in MG&F costs, causing a 9% MG&F rate.50 Separate from MG&F, and for the entirety of HAP, ARC charged on average 14.27% for its “program services” or “program costs” which equaled approximately $69.6 million.51 According to ARC, these program costs include the following:52 a. b. c. d. e. All services provided in Haiti: emergency relief, shelter, water and sanitation, livelihoods, disaster risk reduction, health and cholera prevention; All salaries, wages and benefits for staff working on our Haiti Assistance Program (HAP); Travel and maintenance costs for all staff working in Haiti or traveling related to the program; Oversight of grants awarded to non-governmental organizations or Red Cross member societies to support disaster response; Accountability, monitoring and evaluation. Further, ARC has stated that “program services” expenses “incurred by ARC in undertaking activities related to its partners’ work in Haiti” is borne out of the following types of work:53 a. b. c. d. e. On-sight project oversight; Monitoring and evaluation; Grant management and oversight of partner monthly/quarterly reporting; Financial risk and project management; Human resources management to attract and retain high caliber staff for projects managed by external partners and/or internal project sub-teams. Given the vast amount of money ARC attributes to overall costs, it is important for the public to understand how ARC arrives at its estimated project costs. ARC uses a complex method to calculate and allocate cost categories. First, ARC separates the total program costs for HAP 49 50 51 52 53 See, e.g., Attachment F; Attachment G. Attachment T. Attachment B at 1; Attachment E. Attachment C. Attachment A at 2. See also, Attachment C. 10 across seven sectors – Emergency Relief, Shelter, Water and Sanitation, Livelihoods, Disaster Preparedness, Health, and Cholera Prevention. Next, ARC spreads program service costs across all seven sectors according to Level 1 and Level 2 allocations. Level 1 allocations are “costs directly attributable to a particular project.”54 Examples include goods and staff hired for a particular project. Level 2 allocations are costs that impact all seven sectors. These costs are allocated using a weighted average and are then “spread against the seven sectors based on the weight of spending in each sector relative to all funds spent and committed.”55 These costs include oversight, monitoring, and evaluation of grants. ARC provided the following hypothetical: 54 55 Attachment C. Id. 11 ARC’s hypothetical illustrates how programs expenses are broken down. First, ARC uses the amount of grant expenses for each sector to acquire the percentage of each sector relative to the others. Here, for example, the funds provided by ARC to partners in Haiti for Emergency Relief is $200 or 4% of the total. From there, ARC determines its total program services costs, labeled “management expenses,” and allocates expenses per sector based on the share of ARC’s grant to that individual sector. So, for purposes of explanation, ARC assumes $1,000 in program service costs across all seven sectors and divides by 4% for the Emergency Relief sector to arrive at $40 for program service costs. And finally, ARC adds the total grant amount to the individuals sectors, here the Emergency Relief sector, which is $200, to the program service costs which 12 were determined to be $40. That brings the total program costs to $240 for Emergency Relief. But, given the fact that ARC’s calculation is at the first step based on a percentage that is acquired from a weighted allocation (4%), ARC’s determination of program services costs can never be accurate. Using the first project according to ARC’s spreadsheet as a real world example, ARC spent $32,179,672 on the World Food Program (WFP). However, that is not the actual amount spent. ARC transferred only $29,929,039 to WFP on January 19, 2010.56 The difference between the two is $2,250,633, and that amount consists of program services costs, the amount which ARC estimated for work performed for that project. As laid out above, the $2 million is not exact rather it is an estimation because ARC determines program costs by spreading the total amount ($69.6 million) across all seven sectors and allocating them based on the weight of each sector. ARC, therefore, does not know how much each program, each project, or partnership actually cost. ARC RETAINED $69.6 MILLION IN PROGRAM SERVICE EXPENSES BUT IS UNABLE TO INFORM CONGRESS HOW MUCH OVERSIGHT AND EVALUATION IS INCLUDED IN THAT AMOUNT. As of February 10, 2016, the total program service costs ARC incurred from HAP was $69,574,880, or 14.27% of HAP. This is the amount of money ARC estimates that it used to support its work performed on Haiti projects. According to ARC, the $69 million accounts for the following categories:57 TABLE A Salaries and Wages Employee Benefits Travel and Maintenance 31,196,265.44 9,467,347.54 3,260,685.88 44.84% 13.61% 4.69% Equipment 3,247,095.66 Maintenance/Rental 4.67% Supplies and Material 1.75% 56 57 1,216,356.03 Flights (including from the US to Haiti); Meals and lodging for staff traveling to Haiti for meetings and monitoring of projects. Computers, printers and other similar office equipment; Equipment rental and leases (including vehicles in Haiti); Equipment maintenance and repairs; Auto fuel and maintenance. Office supplies; Training supplies; Copying and printing supplies; Promotional materials; Books; and Subscriptions. Attachment G at 1. Attachment I and J. See also, Attachment M regarding full time employees working on HAP. 13 Contractual Services 19,959,019.51 28.69% Financial and Material Assistance 1,219,492.17 1.75% Depreciation and Amortization 8,617.77 0.01% 69,574,880.00 100% Professional fees; Building maintenance; Office and residence rental; Utilities; Communication expenses; Call center charges; staff hired through a temporary agency; Bank charges; Software licenses; Postage; and Shipping. Payments to the International Federation to cover expenses incurred by the International Federation to coordinate response and recovery efforts; American Red Cross staff training. ARC made clear that a portion of the $69.6 million included performing project oversight, monitoring and evaluation, and other general oversight activities:58  On-sight project oversight; Monitoring and evaluation; Grant management and oversight of partner monthly/quarterly reporting; Financial, risk and project management; Human resources management to attract and retain high caliber staff for projects managed by external partners and/or internal project sub-teams (directly implement programs). In addition, ARC described an intense focus on oversight: 59 ARC plays a significant role in partner and project management and oversight throughout the project management cycle of ARC-funded grants. Subject to a variety of factors such as partner capacity, scope and complexity of work being carried out and budget, the degree of ARC’s engagement in partner oversight and project management will vary. However, regardless of the conditions granted to partners, ARC ensures that industry grant management standards are upheld at all times to ensure quality of service delivery. In order to be excellent stewards of our donors’ contributions, as well as to assure the people we help that our assistance is timely and effective, experience in many disasters has demonstrated the value 58 59 Attachment A at 2; Attachment J. Attachment B at 3. 14 of making reasonable investments in partner oversight that spans the project management cycle. Absent such oversight, the risk of waste, mismanagement and fraud significantly increase – particularly in developing countries that lack the infrastructure needed to assure program quality. ARC has also provided a general overview of its partner oversight.60 Specifically, ARC attempted to explain the program service costs for a sample of three projects: 1) All International Federal of the Red Cross (IFRC) projects61 2) United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) T-Shelter project62 3) Cooperative for Relief and Assistance Everywhere (CARE) Cholera Response and Treatment Efforts project.63 As of November 3, 2015, the amount of donor money ARC transferred to IFRC for all its projects was $51,985,457.64 ARC’s program service costs were $7,778,677, bringing the total project cost to $59,764,134.65 The UNOPS project received $6,592,827 from ARC and an additional $1,050,586 was allocated for ARC’s program expenses, bringing the total donor funds used to $7,643,413.66 For the CARE project, ARC supplied $1,249,137 in donor money and incurred $189,969 in program expenses bringing the total to $1,439,106.67 ARC was asked to explain for what the program expenses were used. ARC’s explanation of the costs is as follows: 68 [T]hese program services expenses refer to the program infrastructure in place to oversee the partnership program from the full bidding process, selection of the right partner, and including the comprehensive due diligence process; ensure day-to-day partner oversight; activities related to monitoring & evaluation (as needed); grant management & oversight of partner monthly/quarterly reporting; and, financial management (disbursements to partners). Despite this explanation, ARC is unable to provide any financial evidence that oversight activities in fact occurred. Thus, a granular breakdown was requested of the oversight activities throughout HAP that would help to justify the $69.6 million, which would, of course, include the specific projects listed immediately above. 60 Id. at 6. See also, Attachment A, p.4 These projects involved the following sectors of work: Emergency Relief, Shelter, Cholera, Water and Sanitation, Livelihoods, Disaster Preparedness. 62 This projects involved the following sector of work: Water and Sanitation 63 This project involved the following sector of work: Cholera 64 Attachment A at 4. 65 Id. 66 Id. 67 Id. 68 Id. 61 15 ARC’s initial response was Table A, supra. Notably, it neither includes any oversight nor evaluation of Haiti projects, despite the fact that ARC said that those activities were part of the $69.6 million expended on oversight. Further, because ARC does not track costs on a project by project basis, it is unknown how much effort, energy, and money, if any, was actually expended for oversight and evaluation of any particular project, let alone the IFRC, UNOPS, or CARE projects. On April 20, 2016, my staff spoke with the Mr. Meltzer and Ms. DeFrancis. During the course of that phone call, the issue of whether or not ARC spent donor money for oversight and evaluation of projects came up again. Staff noted that they have still not received any evidence that any portion of the $69.6 million was spent on oversight and evaluation of partner projects. In a follow up email on April 26, 2016, staff made clear that they were requesting, again, evidence to show that such spending did in fact take place.69 In response, on May 10, 2016, over three months after the original request for the information on January 27, 2016, ARC provided a report on “Monitoring, Supervision, and Evaluation of Work Performed by Partners.”70 The document details ARC employees’ conduct and activity in projects, including Haiti. Notably, the document states that, “[a]s of December 2015, this group [the monitoring and evaluation group of four “experts” in Washington, DC] has overseen 38 evaluations of projects implemented with American Red Cross funds in Haiti.” Therefore, it appears that some monitoring and evaluation has occurred. However, despite the information provided in ARC’s eventual response, ARC still has failed to provide sufficient documentation evidencing the quantitative value of its oversight and evaluation of projects in Haiti. Thus, without this information, it is not possible to assess how well or to what degree ARC oversaw the operational aspects of projects in Haiti, or the actual cost of that oversight. CHIEF OF THE INVESTIGATIONS, COMPLIANCE, AND ETHICS OFFICE CURRENTLY REPORTS TO THE GENERAL COUNSEL, CREATING INDEPENDENCE ISSUES. The Office of Investigations, Compliance, and Ethics (ICE) is the office designated to “conduct formal investigations into allegations of fraud, waste, abuse, Red Cross policy violations, illegal or unethical conduct or other improprieties regarding the Red Cross.”71 As such, it plays a major role in making sure ARC maintains its ethical and legal standards, which in turn support ARC’s overall mission. The ICE unit’s current set-up has caused independence issues with ARC management. Currently, the ICE unit is only comprised of three individuals: the Chief, the primary investigator, and a compliance coordinator. Notably, the primary investigator is located in New York, not ARC’s Washington, D.C., headquarters. The compliance coordinator performs call intakes and triages; he has no investigative function. This leaves only two investigators in the 69 70 71 Attachment Q. Attachment P. Attachment N. 16 ICE unit – one of whom is located in New York, away from ARC’s headquarters, and the center of its power and bureaucracy. Thus, the ICE unit appears to be severely undermanned and underfunded, and therefore unable to perform its primary function; namely, to perform investigations, ensure compliance, and maintain ethical standards. 72 These are important duties within every organization, especially one that receives hundreds of millions of dollars in donations because of the special status afforded to it by the Federal government. In addition, the current reporting structure for ICE requires the Chief to report to the General Counsel.73 With respect to that reporting structure, the General Counsel also determines the number of staff who are employed in the ICE unit, which requires the ICE Chief to request additional hires from the General Counsel. This is a problematic arrangement because the ICE unit has been kept understaffed for several years since Hurricane Katrina, when the ICE unit maintained approximately 65 employees, but now consists of only three. In practice, when a request for a new ICE employee has been made, it has resulted from time to time in a new ARC employee, but not always a new ICE-specific employee, according to ICE officials. For example, in the past several months, the ICE Chief, Ms. Teala Brewer, has requested additional personnel to assist with auditing ARC projects and programs for fraud, waste, and abuse. In response, ARC has only hired one additional auditor and that individual does not report directly to Ms. Brewer. Instead, that individual was effectively hired by the Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel, and reports to them with a dotted line to Ms. Brewer. Ms. Brewer has informed my staff that this arrangement simply does not work because the employee is not under the authority of the ICE unit. This arrangement suggests that ARC appears to be reluctant to support the very unit that is designed to police wrongdoing within the organization. An organization as large as ARC and as widespread throughout the world requires internal oversight and regulation. Indeed, ARC said that performing formal investigations is the ICE unit’s primary purpose and function. It is clear that ICE is unable to perform those functions as intended. My concerns were relayed to Ms. McGovern, Mr. Meltzer, and Ms. DeFrancis in a June 10, 2016, phone call. In response, Ms. McGovern noted that ARC had drafted a proposal to the 72 For example, it appears that due to the lack of employees in the ICE unit, ARC has had to outsource investigations to outside law firms, such as Ballard Spahr, LLP. By way of example, ARC received a whistleblower complaint regarding its Nursing Assistant training program in North Carolina. That training program received direct funds from ARC for each student that it signs up. The head of the North Carolina program allegedly instructed his subordinates to falsify ten names resulting in $10,000 program costs that should not have occurred. In response to these findings, ARC hired Ballard Spahr, which assigned two personnel to investigate the situation. According to ARC employees, this is not the first time outside personnel have been hired to perform an investigation. Consequently, it is the opinion of ARC employees that the organization spends more money on outside investigators than it would using its in house investigations unit. The need to hire outside firms to investigate potential wrongdoing all the while an internal investigations unit exists, is an indication that internal investigations unit is not only undermanned but underutilized. 73 Attachment S. 17 Board of Governors that would subsume the Office of the Ombudsman into the ICE unit.74 While this was portrayed as a positive step for the ICE unit, this change does not make the necessary adjustments to ICE. As such, the inherent problems with respect to the ICE unit will remain even if the proposal is accepted by the Board. ARC HAS MADE ADJUSTMENTS DURING THE COURSE OF THE INVESTIGATION. In the beginning of the investigation, I requested that ARC provide the most up to date accounting of the amount of money transferred to each partner in Haiti. In total, ARC entered into 64 agreements with 50 partners.75 After that request was made, ARC indicated that contracts with those partners prohibited ARC from disclosing partner dollar values to Congress and the public without prior approval.76 In essence, the contract ARC required every partner to sign, required that ARC first receive permission from the partner to report the donated amount to Congress and the public. ARC tied its own hands with regard to transparency. I made my concerns about that arrangement very clear: Congress—but most importantly, the donating public—has a right to know where the money is going. As a result, ARC has since changed its contract language so that it now has the right to publicly release information relating to the grant without the prior authorization of the grantee. This is an example where ARC looked inward and realized its own shortcomings. However, three partners have still refused to provide permission to disclose financial information.77 Prior to this inquiry, ARC never publicly posted information relating to the budgeted amounts for each project along with a description of the project. During the course of the inquiry, ARC agreed to publicly post the following: Name of Grantee, Budgeted Amount of Project, Start Date of Project, End Date of Project, and a Description of Project.78 This is a welcome improvement and a step toward transparency. The donating public has a right to know how much of its money is being spent on particular projects and partners. On June 1, 2016, ARC finally released that information to the public. However, the information provided does not illustrate the full picture. For example, ARC’s release does not show the MG&F rate for individual partners, or for itself, which is an important factor in determining the overall cost of a project and information the public ought to know. In addition, ARC merely lists the “Project Agreement” dollar value, rather than the estimated cost of the project which includes the $69.6 million spread across HAP. Thus, the “budgeted amount,” which would include the weighted $69.6 million for HAP spread across each project, was not provided to the public. More detailed information has been 74 Attachment W. Attachment V at 1-3 as amended by Attachment B at 1. Note that Attachment B updated the number of partners from 45 in Attachment V to 50. 76 See, e.g., Attachment R. 77 International Organization for Migration, Pan American Health Organization, and the International Rescue Committee. Attachment F; Attachment G; see also, Attachment H at 13; Attachment U. 78 Attachment Q. 75 18 provided to Congress than to the public, and it is troubling that ARC has decided not to provide the same material to the public. CONCLUSION: THE WAY FORWARD. There are substantial and fundamental concerns about ARC as an organization. First, ARC’s President and CEO attempted to terminate a GAO review and ARC successfully limited the scope of the GAO’s review by indicating a refusal to cooperate with information requests. Even when ARC submitted to GAO’s scope of review, it still did not provide all the requested information, contrary to the claims made by Ms. McGovern. Second, ARC was unable to precisely communicate how much each project cost and how much money, and therefore focus, was actually spent on oversight during the course of HAP. Third, ARC is not properly supporting its ICE unit. The unit only has one full time investigator. The ICE unit is meager, underfunded, understaffed, and therefore is unable to fulfill its designed role, which is to perform investigations, ensure compliance, and maintain ethical standards. As an investigative unit, it is troubling that even after repeated requests of ICE leadership to supply more investigators, ARC leadership has failed to do so. A more robust ICE unit would serve the interests of ARC and its donors. Fourth, ARC’s June 1, 2016, production to the public regarding its HAP spending practices failed to provide the full picture. ARC provided significantly more detail and explanation to Congress with respect to its HAP financials than it provided to the public. As I have made clear in all my oversight activities, the donating public has a right to know how its money is being spent. ARC’s June 1 disclosure is a welcome improvement, but it failed to provide the detail that the public deserves. I appreciate ARC’s willingness to meet with my staff over the course of the past year. Their communications have been helpful and as responsive as possible. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me or Josh Flynn-Brown of my Judiciary Committee staff. Sincerely, Charles E. Grassley Chairman Committee on the Judiciary 19 Attachment A: November 3, 2015 response International Services Haiti Assistance Program Follow-up to Chairman Grassley Questions 10/26/2015 The American Red Cross is already rated in the highest category of transparency and accountability by BBB and Charity Navigator and we are happy to work with Chairman Grassley to raise the bar even further to provide the public with clearer insight into how their generous donations were used in Haiti. In raising the bar, we are mindful of the need to avoid creating confusion around what is commonly called overhead and what are legitimate expenditures needed to implement a project that provides speedy and effective assistance without incurring significant risk of fraud, waste, or mismanagement. Striking the wrong balance will harm the Red Cross and the people we help. Regarding your request for insight into program costs incurred by the Red Cross in implementing projects with partners, we provide the requested information below. In doing so, we very much want to stress the following:  Spending funds to put people in Haiti and Washington whose job it is to ensure that our partners are spending our donors’ funds in a responsible, effective, and timely manner is a proven effective manner to implement a relief and recovery program.  Working through approximately 100 people dedicated to the Haiti Assistance Program (HAP), approximately 90 of whom have been Haitian, over the last five plus years has resulted in significant achievements which are even more noteworthy given the challenges present in Haiti around government, corruption, and the aftermath of an earthquake that devastated the country’s political and financial capital.  The Red Cross has been efficient in utilizing funds to implement the degree of program oversight needed to ensure responsible, effective, and timely performance by our partners as well as our own projects.  Although not as precise as some might prefer, allocating program costs by sector in the manner in which the Red Cross has employed is consistent with accounting guidelines. Allocating and isolating these costs at a level below the sector level makes the numbers less meaningful. We are unaware of any non-profit publicly reporting on program costs allocated by sector or project level as such a report will cause many in the public to mistakenly consider such costs as “overhead”. Below are the responses to the questions posed in your email of October 26. In the interest of providing the most complete response possible by the July 22, 2015, deadline to the 17 questions posed in the July 8, 2015, letter from Chairman Charles Grassley, the American Red Cross (ARC) produced two spreadsheets in response to:  Question 2 (Q2): a list of partner organizations with corresponding project descriptions and financials, and 1  Question 3 (Q3): a list of all the work managed by ARC with corresponding project descriptions and financials, respectively. While our financial systems track all budgets and spending in accordance with standard financial management requirements, minor errors were unfortunately made when manually preparing the spreadsheets in response to the July 8 letter but, subsequently, corrected in the spreadsheet provided on October 9. Other differences were the results of further clarifying our partners’ roles and determining instances where they could more clearly and accurately be described in the October 9 version of the spreadsheet than had been provided in the July 22nd version. Below are detailed explanations for such changes that respond to the questions posed in your email received on Monday, October 26. We understand your most recent request as requesting more information regarding program expenses, with particular emphasis upon program expenses incurred by ARC in undertaking activities and methods for allocating such program expenses as compared to expenses incurred by our partners. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) guidelines treat expenses incurred by ARC and our partners the same; i.e., as “program services” expenses. Program service expenses are real direct costs and include:      All services provided in Haiti whether directly by the American Red Cross or our partners such as providing: emergency relief, shelter, water and sanitation, livelihoods, disaster risk reduction, health and cholera prevention; All salaries, wages and benefits for American Red Cross and partners’ staff working on our Haiti Assistance Program (HAP); Travel and maintenance costs for all American Red Cross and partners’ staff working in Haiti or traveling related to the program; American Red Cross oversight of grants awarded to non-governmental organizations or Red Cross member societies to support disaster response; Accountability, monitoring and evaluation of all projects – both those implemented by the Red Cross and those implemented by partners. With regard to “program services” expenses incurred by ARC in undertaking activities related to its partners’ work, these expenses arise out of the following types of activities:      On-sight project oversight; Monitoring and evaluation; Grant management and oversight of partner monthly/quarterly reporting; Financial, risk and project management; Human resources management to attract and retain high caliber staff for projects managed by external partners and/or internal project sub-teams (directly implement programs). It is important to note that no “program services” expenses would have been incurred if there was no Haiti program. This is the key distinction between “program services” expenses and “supporting activities” expenses (i.e., Management, General, & Fundraising expenses) as “supporting activities” expenses would have been incurred by ARC even if there never was a Haiti program. 2 “Program services” expenses are very similar to the definition USAID uses for Program Management costs1: “activities required to ensure effective oversight of USAID programs. It includes direct administrative costs, and monitoring and evaluation.” According to USAID, “Examples of Program Management include: · · · · Salaries and benefits for program funded personnel; Administration and oversight; The development of needs assessments, baseline studies, and targeted evaluations, and Information gathering efforts for the design, monitoring, and evaluation of USAID programs.” Importantly, USAID states that “Program Management” costs are “not broken down by sector or subsector, because efforts are cross-cutting.” REQUEST #1 “We’d like to take a deeper dive with respect to program expenses for the following: 1. All IFRC projects 2. UNOPS project, p.5 HAP Q3 3. CARE project, p. 12 HAP Q3” Although we understand the thrust of the request relates to program service expenses incurred by ARC that have been allocated to these projects, the chart below also provides information relating to the expenses incurred by the partners in implementing these projects. 1 https://results.usaid.gov/faq-page/faqs/what-program-management-why-are-there-no-results 3 ANSWER # 1 Program Expenses incurred by ARC and partners Project name All IFRC Updated Q2 IFRC Consolidated “Partners Spent to Date” Amount projects (Actuals): $51,985,457 See attached IFRC reports for description of IFRC activities funded by ARC project grants. Explanation for ARC program service expenses As these are partner implemented projects, the only type of ARC program service expenses applied here are level 2 allocations2. ARC Program Costs allocated to the pledges: $7,778,677 Updated Q3 IFRC Consolidated “Total Spent to Date” Amount: $59,764,134 More specifically, these program services expenses refer to the program infrastructure in place to oversee the partnership program from the full bidding process, selection of the right partner, and including the comprehensive due diligence process; ensure day-to-day partner oversight; activities related to monitoring & evaluation (as needed); grant management & oversight of partner monthly/quarterly reporting; and, financial management (disbursements to partners). UNOPS Updated Q2 “Partners Spent to Date” Amount (Actuals): $6,592,827 T-Shelter See Annex 1- for breakdown of costs for UNOPS T-Shelter Project project, p. 5 HAP ARC Program Costs allocated to the project: $1,050,586 Q3 Updated Q3 “Total Spent to Date” Amount: $7,643,413 CARE Updated Q2 “Partners Spent to Date” Amount (Actuals): $1,249,137 Cholera See Annex 2- for breakdown of costs for CARE Cholera Response and Response Treatment Efforts As previously explained, the and allocation of these costs is Treatment ARC Program Costs allocated to the project: $189,969 done first at the sector level, Efforts, and then spread across the project, p. Updated Q3 “Total Spent to Date” Amount: $1,439,106 projects. 12 HAP Q3 2 Level 1 allocation - these are costs directly attributable to a particular project. For example, the goods and activities delivered and the staff hired to implement a specific project within each sector in HAP are charged directly to that particular project. Level 2 allocation - these are costs for activities that impact all seven sectors, or are not attributable to a given sector but still directly support and ensure sound service delivery to beneficiaries in Haiti. For example, the level of effort of the HAP Accountability Officer, the HAP Operations Director, or the HQ-based Haiti support team are bundled with all other cross-sector activities under a management category. Using a weighted average, these costs are spread against the seven sectors based on the weight of spend in each sector relative to all funds spent and committed. 4 REQUEST #2 “With respect to the projects listed above, we’d like an explanation regarding the change in status from the earlier spreadsheet.” ANSWER #2 Below are explanations of the change in status for each of the listed projects as well as an explanation of the change in the budgeted amount for IFRC noted in your email (see item 13 below): # Observation(s) 1 WFP (p.1): change in the partnership and budgeted amount; was $30,000,000 and $32,215,079. Now is $29,929,039 and $32,179,672. 2 IFRC (p. 1) - Emergency Relief Sector: change in the budgeted amount; was $7,018,524. Now is $7,027,433. 3 4 GTG (p. 4): new addition PSST (p. 3): new addition 5 IFRC (2,400,000/3,013,705): new addition Explanation regarding change of status from spreadsheets submitted on July 22, 2015 to the spreadsheets submitted on October 9, 2015 ARC awarded a grant to WFP in the amount of $30,000,000; however upon more detailed review of our final project records following the July 22nd submission, and in consultation with WFP, we made a correction to reflect the final amount spent of $29,929,039. The balance of $70,961 was returned to ARC and reprogrammed for other Haiti recovery activities. Consequently, the ARC Program Costs in the “Budget Amount” column in Q3 were recalculated and re-spread accordingly. This explains the variance of $35,407 between the original figure in the amount of $32,215,079 and the revised amount of $32,179,672. For further details on cost allocation method, please refer to Answer #3. The increase in the amount of $8,909 in the updated Q3 spreadsheets between the original “Budgeted Amount” figure of $7,018,524 and the revised amount of $7,027,433 is due to the fact that other corrections were made within the Emergency Relief Sector and therefore the Program Costs were recalculated and updated accordingly across the projects within that category. For further details on cost allocation method, please refer to Answer #3. The GTG Phase II WASH Project and the PSST Livelihoods Project are not new additions. You will note that in the original July 22nd Q3 spreadsheet, p.46, line “Community Investment Fund (CIF) Balance Line”, the two projects were mentioned in the project description column. In the interest of clarity, as we were updating the Q2 and Q3 spreadsheets that were ultimately submitted on October 9, we decided to list the GTG Phase II WASH Project and the PSST Livelihoods Project in separate lines and adjust the “Community Investment Fund (CIF) Balance Line”, accordingly. The IFRC Relocation Pledge in the amount of $2,400,000 is not a new addition. You will note that this pledge was mentioned in the July 22nd Q2 and Q3 spreadsheets in the project description column under the “Contribution to IFRC Appeal” line in the Shelter Sector. 5 # Observation(s) Explanation regarding change of status from spreadsheets submitted on July 22, 2015 to the spreadsheets submitted on October 9, 2015 Of the 13,000 families (65,000 beneficiaries) targeted for relocation assistance by the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement, the American Red Cross funded the relocation of 5,347 of these families (26,735 people) through three pledges as listed in the original and revised Q2 and Q3 spreadsheets as detailed below: IFRC Relocation Mais Gate, $2,000,000 IFRC Relocation Carrefour-Feuilles, $4,000,000 IFRC Relocation Additional Camps, $2,400,000 6 7 through 11 12  IRC (p.7): written approval now required  PAHO (p. 13): written approval now required  IRC (p.15): written approval now required  IRC p. 15): written approval now required  IOM (p.18): written approval now required In the interest of clarity, as we were updating the Q2 and Q3 spreadsheets that were ultimately submitted on October 9, we decided to list the 3rd relocation pledge separately rather than keep it within the “Contribution to IFRC Pledge” line which also explains the reduction you noted under point #13 below. We accidentally miscoded this ICRC amount with an IFRC expense in the July 22nd versions of the spreadsheet. The correct amount of the ICRC amount should have been $236,988 instead of $158,919 (difference of $78,069) which was corrected in the updated spreadsheets submitted on October 9, with the program costs allocated to this amount recalculated and updated. For further details on cost allocation method, please refer to Answer #3. When the spreadsheets were produced on July 22nd, ARC was then contractually prohibited from releasing any project information regarding twelve projects administered by seven partners ((USAID, UN-Habitat, Habitat for Humanity, Canadian Red Cross, Partners in Health, International Medical Corps and World Wildlife Fund) and this was noted in the spreadsheet. Subsequent to the July 22nd submission, ARC succeeded in obtaining the requisite consents from all seven partners needed to release the information to you. Accordingly, none of twelve projects that were redacted in the July 22nd submission are redacted in the submission made on October 9.  WWF (p. 21): new addition With respect to the issue of releasing project information to the media or public, following the July 22nd submission and at your request, ARC undertook an effort to secure the requisite consents from our HAP partners to release project information to the media and public and the great majority of our Haiti partners have now agreed to release of project information to both the media and the public. Unfortunately, three partners have still not provided the requisite consent to release project information to media or public despite ARC’s repeated requests. These three partners are IRC, IOM and PAHO and this corresponds to items 7 through 11 in your October 26 email. The new WWF Haiti Environmental Scoping Analysis project listed in the amount of $35,000 in Q2 and $51,452 in Q3, was miscoded ICRC (p.6): change in the partnership and budgeted amount; was $199,317 and $191,853. Now is $236,988 and $277,386. 6 # Observation(s) 13 The budgeted amount for IFRC (p.5 HAP Q3) was $16,629,901 but is now $13,537,317 Explanation regarding change of status from spreadsheets submitted on July 22, 2015 to the spreadsheets submitted on October 9, 2015 under ARC Program Costs in the July 22nd submission and was recoded and listed accordingly in the October 9 submission. Please see answer above under point 5). REQUEST # 3 “We’d like a more in depth explanation regarding the methodology used for allocating program costs in Haiti. Specifically, we’d like more context with respect to bullet point two (Level 2 allocation).” ANSWER # 3 Level 2 allocations are costs for activities that impact all seven sectors (i.e. cross-cutting), or are not attributable to a given sector but still directly support and ensure sound service delivery to beneficiaries in Haiti. These cross-sector activities are all HAP specific and for purposes of efficiency in our accounting administration are bundled under a general management category. For example, the level of effort of the HAP Accountability Officer, the HAP Operations Director, and the HQ-based Haiti support team along with their respective travel costs are considered cross-cutting activities. As mentioned before, we apply principles of efficiency when putting in place systems, tools and processes. We use an allocation methodology to distribute cross-cutting expenses to the other sectors instead of, for example, asking those performing these cross sector activities to complete timesheets. Such an effort would significantly increase ARC’s program costs; thereby reduce funds available to provide assistance to Haitians. ARC does not believe the benefits of creating and implementing such a cost tracking system would be the best use of donor dollars. To illustrate how expenses under the management category are charged back to active sectors, see the purely illustrative example below: 7 Period x Expenses (HAP) Sector 1, Emergency Relief: Sector 2, Shelter: Sector 3, Health (Excluding Cholera): Sector 4, Cholera: Sector 5, Water & Sanitation: Sector 6, Livelihoods: Sector 7, Disaster Preparedness Grant Expenses $ 200 $ 350 $ 500 1,500 $ $ 2,340 $ 150 $ 120 $ 5,160 Share of All Expenses 4% 7% 10% 29% 45% 3% 2% 100% If, in the example above, the actual management expenses for the period were $1,000, then we would use the weighted average above to allocate these management expenses to the seven sectors. Consequently, the management expenses for each sector in the above example would be as follows: Sector 1, Emergency relief: Sector 2, Shelter: Sector 3, Health (Excluding Cholera): Sector 4, Cholera: Sector 5, Water & Sanitation: Sector 6, Livelihoods: Sector 7, Disaster Preparedness Mgmt Expenses $ 40 $ 70 $ 100 290 $ $ 450 $ 30 $ 20 $ 1,000 Share of all Mgmt Expenses (i.e., 4% of $1,000) (i.e., 7% of $1,000) (i.e., 10% of $1,000) (i.e., 29% of $1,000) (i.e., 45% of $1,000) (i.e., 3% of $1,000) (i.e., 2% of $1,000) (i.e., 100% of $1,000) Finally, the total “program services” expenses for each sector (i.e., project expenses plus management expenses) would be as follows: Sector 1, Emergency relief: Sector 2, Shelter: Sector 3, Health (Excluding Cholera): Sector 4, Cholera: Sector 5, Water & Sanitation: Sector 6, Livelihoods: Sector 7, Disaster Preparedness Program Services Expenses $ 240 (i.e., $200 + $40) $ 420 (i.e., $350 + $70) $ 600 (i.e., $500 + $100) $ 1,790 (i.e., $1,500 + $290) $ 2,790 (i.e., $2,340 + $450) $ 180 (i.e., $150 + $30) $ 140 (i.e., $120 + $20) $ 6,160 (i.e., $5,160 + $1,000) 8 ANNEX 1 UNOPS, T-Shelter Project, Program expenses as of November 2011 per the final financial report Budget category Personnel Benefits Travel Project costs Supplies Equipment Building & Occupancy Professional & Consultancy Support and other services UNOPS – Indirect costs Total – UNOPS ARC Program Costs Total Actuals 1,180,341 19,051 5,100 4,078,418 27,642 475,273 273,240 33,000 40,664 460,098 6,592,827 1,050,586 7,643,413 ANNEX 2 CARE, Cholera Response and Treatment Effort, Program expenses as of October 2011 per the final financial report Budget category Actuals Personnel Benefits Travel Project costs Supplies Equipment Building & Occupancy Professional & Consultancy Support and other services CARE – Indirect costs Total – CARE ARC Program Costs Total 207,224 94,456 12,030 690,119 8,217 92,461 24,732 8,305 0 111,593 1,249,137 189,969 1,439,106 9 Attachment B: November 18, 2015 response We are grateful for the opportunity to meet with you to better address your remaining questions regarding our Haiti Assistance Program (HAP). As discussed, we share the commitment to increasing the public’s visibility into HAP and we appreciate your willingness to explore ways to increase transparency in a way that will be beneficial to the public, the American Red Cross and our partners. We particularly appreciate Chairman Grassley’s call for increased transparency by the non-profit sector and we hope the American Red Cross can play a positive role in increasing the sector’s transparency. As requested in our recent meeting, below is information which: 1. Provides additional information on the work performed by the American Red Cross in connection with grants such as grants given to: a. IFRC b. UNOPS c. CARE 2. Provides information on how the percentages for each of the seven sectors of our Haiti Assistance Program were derived. Before turning to these two requests, we wish to address the question whether the American Red Cross incurring program costs associated with administering HAP equivalent to 14.27 percent of the entire program is reasonable. As we noted during our meeting, we have found no charity, or charity watchdog, which draws a distinction between costs incurred in directly providing services and costs incurred in implementing a program that include overseeing a partner’s work. Similarly, non-profit accounting guidelines do not draw a distinction between such costs as both types of costs are considered “program services” expenses. The only comparable figure that we could uncover is provided by USAID which reports having spent 11.23% of their $884.1 million in program spend for Haiti from FY ‘11-FY’14 on “Program Management”.1 Given that USAID possesses efficiencies of scale derived from running a program that is 80 percent larger than the American Red Cross’ $488 million HAP, and that USAID has a taxpayer-supported recovery infrastructure that can be leveraged, which the American Red Cross does not possess, we believe the program costs associated with administering HAP are reasonable. As further support for the reasonableness of such program costs, we point to the following factors which contributed to the need for the American Red Cross to incur such program costs:  Given the large sums of money entrusted to the American Red Cross and the large amount of service delivery provided through more than 100 different aid projects and 502 partners , significant resources needed to be devoted to ensure soundness of the selection, performance, and quality of our grantees and the use of our donors’ funds; Program management is defined by USAID as including “activities required to ensure effective oversight of USAID programs. It includes direct administrative costs, and monitoring and evaluation. Examples of Program Management include: 1 · Salaries and benefits for program funded personnel; · Administration and oversight; · The development of needs assessments, baseline studies, and targeted evaluations, and · Information gathering efforts for the design, monitoring, and evaluation of USAID programs. 2 This represents three new partnerships since the spreadsheets representing 47 partnerships as of June 30, 2015 was submitted to your office. 1  Haiti’s challenges prior to the earthquake (e.g., ranking 161 of 175 on Transparency International’s index of countries’ corruption and an adult literacy rate below 50%) were exacerbated by the 2010 earthquake which destroyed both infrastructure and government institutions. Such challenges – particularly in an urban setting – required significant investment in program oversight to ensure that our donors’ funds were spent efficiently and effectively.  The American Red Cross’ experience managing large recovery programs such as the $581 million 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami recovery program, the $87 million 2013 Philippines typhoon Haiyan recovery program and, most recently, the $40 million 2015 Nepal earthquake is that reasonable investments must be made in managing a recovery program in order to assure our donors that their funds have been spent efficiently and effectively. Contrasted with the need to make reasonable investments in managing recovery programs in the developing countries covered by these disasters is the situation following the 2011 Japan tsunami for which our program costs were miniscule given the sophistication of the Japanese Red Cross. We believe the investment made in managing the Haiti Assistance Program has paid significant dividends which can be seen in the many projects successfully implemented by the American Red Cross and our partners. Finally, as discussed during our meeting of November 3, the American Red Cross agrees with Chairman Grassley’s call for increased transparency over our Haiti program. To that end, we propose to take the following steps with regard to our Haiti program as well as future large scale disaster relief programs: 1. Include a provision in all template grant agreements that gives the American Red Cross the right to publicly release information relating to the grant without the prior authorization of the grantee3 2. Publicly post the following information relating to all grants made by the American Red Cross: a. Name of Grantee b. Budgeted Amount of Project c. Start Date of Project d. End Date of Project e. Description of Project This information is contained in the spreadsheet already provided to you in response to Question 3 of Chairman Grassley’s July 8, 2015 letter. We believe such information will not only increase the level of transparency in the American Red Cross’ Haiti program, it will serve to raise the bar for the entire non-profit sector. We hope you share our conviction that this is the right thing to do and we look forward to learning your reaction to this proposal. We now turn to the information requested in our most recent meeting. 3 As previously shared, we have already instituted this change. 2 Question 1: Work Performed by ARC in Connection with Grants Such as Grants Given to IFRC, UNOPS and CARE In response to your request during our recent meeting for further information as to why we incurred program costs of $7.8 million in granting $52 million to the IFRC and, similarly, why we incurred $1 million in granting $6.6 million to UNOPS and $190k in granting $1.25 million to CARE, we would like to underscore that although American Red Cross (ARC) program costs per sector were spread across projects within each sector for illustrative purposes, these costs are not tracked by project. As detailed below in response to the request made for an explanation of how the percentages of ARC program costs were derived, we use an allocation methodology to distribute cross-cutting expenses to the other sectors instead of, for example, asking those performing these cross-sector activities to complete timesheets. Completing and tracking detailed timesheets would significantly increase ARC’s program costs; thereby reducing funds available to provide assistance to Haitians. ARC does not believe the benefits of creating and implementing such a cost tracking system would be the best use of donor dollars. Through partnerships, including those with the IFRC, UNOPS and CARE, ARC fosters joint project “ownership” and builds capacity for the partners and communities we serve through sustainable and high-quality interventions. In this light, ARC plays a significant role in partner and project management and oversight throughout the project management cycle of ARC-funded grants. Subject to a variety of factors such as partner capacity, scope and complexity of work being carried out and budget, the degree of ARC’s engagement in partner oversight and project management will vary. However, regardless of the conditions granted to partners, ARC ensures that industry grant management standards are upheld at all times to ensure quality of service delivery. In order to be excellent stewards of our donors’ contributions, as well as to assure the people we help that our assistance is timely and effective, experience in many disasters has demonstrated the value of making reasonable investments in partner oversight that spans the project management cycle. Absent such oversight, the risk of waste, mismanagement and fraud significantly increase – particularly in developing countries that lack the infrastructure needed to assure program quality. A description of the role played by ARC in managing projects in which partners will play an implementation role, such as the role played by the IFRC, UNOPS, and CARE, is set forth in Attachment No. 1 to this document. Question 2: Determination of Level 2 Allocation Percentages In response to your question how the percentages of ARC program costs were derived, below is an explanation. As previously stated, there are two different types of allocations: Level 1 and Level 2. - Level 1 allocation - these are costs directly attributable to a particular sector. For example, the goods and activities delivered and the staff hired to implement a specific project within each sector in HAP are charged directly to that particular sector. - Level 2 allocation - these are costs for activities that impact all seven sectors, or are not attributable to a given sector but still directly support and ensure sound service delivery to beneficiaries in Haiti. For example, the level of effort of the HAP Accountability Officer, the HAP Operations Director, and the HQ-based Haiti support team are bundled with all other cross-sector activities under a management category. Similarly, staff on the ground in Haiti 3 who support multiple projects are included in this area as well. Using a weighted average, these costs are spread against the seven sectors based on the weight of spend in each sector relative to the total funds spent and committed (as indicated in table 2 below). As table 1 below shows, each sector has both level 1 and level 2 allocations of HAP program costs. Level 1 allocations are a direct charge to the sectors, and in our accounting records are directly traceable to the relevant sector while level 2 allocations - which are not attributable to a given sector and are cross-cutting - are driven by the weight of the sector in the total costs. This explains why the percentage of allocations is not the same or each sector. Table 1 – ARC Program costs, level 1 & level 2 allocation by sector Sector Emergency Relief Shelter Health & Disease Control (excl Cholera) Cholera Water & Sanitation Livelihoods Disaster Preparedness/OD Total Spent Level 1 Level 2 allocations allocations a b 89,464 4,114,714 2,278,244 16,222,747 Committed Level 1 & 2 allocations c 7,661,740 Total Spent & Committed d = a+b+c 4,204,178 26,162,730 846,298 6,631,676 5,332,681 12,810,655 302,319 1,320,112 1,399,596 2,369,003 4,625,964 4,488,586 824,026 481,060 1,078,237 3,495,348 6,427,136 6,966,419 668,110 4,395,863 4,444,441 9,508,414 6,904,143 42,848,553 19,822,185 69,574,880 Table 2 below illustrates how the Level 2 allocation percentages were determined. 4 Table 2 - Illustration of Level 2 allocation to the sectors ARC Program Costs Activities/Sector Costs Spent $ Weight of Sector (%) i4 Emergency Relief Shelter Health (Excluding Cholera) Cholera Water & Sanitation Livelihoods Disaster Preparedness Total 55,907,399 125,681,868 16% 35% 51,377,324 18,353,283 14% 5% 35,838,552 34,774,248 10% 10% 34,055,906 355,988,580 10% 100% Committed Total Spent & Committed Contingency MG&F Level 1 & 2 allocations iv v = ii+iii+iv vi vii 10% 38% 7,661,740 4,204,178 26,162,730 6,631,676 15% 5,332,681 12,810,655 302,319 2,369,003 6% 824,026 3,495,348 1,320,112 4,625,964 11% 481,060 6,427,136 1,399,596 4,488,586 10% 1,078,237 6,966,419 668,110 4,395,863 10% 4,444,441 9,508,414 6,904,143 42,848,553 100% 19,822,185 69,574,880 Level 1 allocations Level 2 allocations ii iii 89,464 2,278,244 4,114,714 16,222,747 846,298 Weight Level 2 allocations (%) Since the Emergency sector ended in FY11, no additional program costs were allocated there. 4 Cost in column i were incurred by the American Red Cross in implementing programs – either directly or through a partner. 5 Total Costs 5,903,122 5,945,101 15,589,788 viii = i+v+vi+vii 66,056,678 173,337,508 3,437,610 660,205 6,652,434 2,226,149 74,278,023 24,734,985 69,657 1,908,304 4,187,012 4,316,931 46,522,357 47,965,902 6,221,103 18,200,003 4,959,644 43,877,059 54,745,068 487,640,522 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PARTNER OVERSIGHT I. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION AND DESIGN: ARC works internally and externally with partners and key stakeholders to define needs, explore opportunities, analyze the project environment, and design alternatives for project design. The decisions made during this phase set the strategic and operational framework within which the project will subsequently operate. Tasks include: A. Project Formation - An idea for a program/project is formed by the field and/or ARC’s National Headquarters (NHQ) taking into consideration, how strategy aligns with other actors, country government, funding constraints, etc. A work design team is created with members from NHQ and the field. If the decision is to proceed, ARC’s Finance Department is notified of the preliminary budget estimate. Endorsement from the Haitian Red Cross and potential partners, local communities, including, if necessary, Haitian and local Haitian governments and NGO sector is sought. B. Concept Design, Review and Approval - A project concept paper is developed and reviewed. Staffing/consultancy needs for conducting assessments and project design are considered. Once reviewed and revised if necessary; the concept paper is submitted to the decision-maker for approval. C. Proposal/Project Design - Project design team meets regularly and decides on methods of assessment, project design, timelines, budgets, and schedules of stakeholders. Agreement is reached on what (if any) external assistance is needed and who prepares necessary Terms of References (TORs) and handles recruitment. Development happens with ARC’s Programs, Finance, Business Operations staff which may also include subject matter experts such as the legal department. TORs are developed for consultants if necessary. The project design team/consultant will conduct an assessment/ community consultation with the community and other stakeholders, analyze and design the project. Possible staffing needs are discussed and job descriptions are drafted. D. Request for Proposal/Request for Application (RFP/RFA) (Solicitation Phase) - A RFP/RFA team is created, the solicitation timeline is drafted, and the RFP/RFA is submitted to job boards, publications, etc. The RFP/RFA team will respond to questions regarding the RFP/RFA process, scope, budget, etc. both online and in meetings. Proposals are collected and logged in by an official due date and time. Proposals are checked for completion of narrative and financial bids. E. Proposal Review and Evaluation - A proposal review team is created and meeting(s) held to review and rate proposals are scheduled (meeting notes are taken and made part of formal files). Finalists may be asked to present proposal project vision and answer any questions of the proposal review team. Final evaluations of proposals are then conducted and the final partner is chosen. Unsuccessful bidders are notified and the successful bidder is notified via written communication. Unsuccessful bidders sometimes want a meeting for details as to why their bid was unsuccessful. F. Due Diligence – Prior to the final grant agreement signing, potential partners undergo due diligence screening and review to assist ARC decision-makers on whether or not to commit grant funding. Partner analysis typically includes reputation, internal controls, financial health, qualifications/CVs, past performance references, relevant project experience, operational/staff capacity, history, insurance coverage, legal standing, and potential conflicts of interest. The mission, values, core activities, and strategic plan of the proposed partner should align with those of ARC. Briefly, ARC: 1. Requests that the proposed partner provide all available and relevant documentation mentioned above. 6 2. Program and financial assessments are made. Assessments of alternative organizations are considered, and a final recommendation is made. G. Grant Agreement Negotiation and Signing – A grant agreement (GA) that details requirements for scope of work, timelines, budgets, reporting, notifications, publicity and trademarks, indemnity, breaking of agreement, etc. is drafted. 1. GA is submitted to partner for review, comment and negotiation and finalization of language acceptable to both parties. 2. GA is submitted to partner for formal signature, then returned to ARC for countersignature and filing. II. PROJECT SET UP (ALSO REFERRED TO AS INITIATION) During this phase, the project is officially authorized and its overall parameters are defined and communicated to the main project stakeholders. It is also during this phase that the project team establishes the high-level project governance structure. III. PROJECT PLANNING Working from the documents developed in earlier phases of the project, during the planning phase the partner organization (in coordination with ARC) develops a comprehensive and detailed implementation plan that provides a model for all the work of the project. This plan is revisited throughout the life of the project and updated (if necessary) to reflect the changing contexts of the project. Tasks include: A. Project coordination - Plans are made to define how the different stakeholders work together; what the norms are for collaboration; and clarity regarding roles and responsibilities. B. Project communication planning – Plans are developed to identify how the project will update key stakeholders; outline progress report content and schedules; identify communication mechanisms to be used; partner and ARC visibility, and clarity regarding roles and responsibilities for communications is determined. C. Project procurement planning – A determination is made if any ARC procurement support is needed. Processes and systems that exist for acquiring equipment and materials are identified. Procurement benchmarks that need to be met in order for the schedule to succeed are determined. D. Project human resources management planning – ARC and the partner review what type of experience and background is needed for key project staff. E. Project monitoring and evaluation planning – ARC establishes standardized approaches across partners that identify who is responsible for collecting data, processing data, analyzing data, documenting results and communicating messages, and evaluations and surveys. F. Project control planning - ARC details the procedures required to propose changes to the project implementation plan, including, how changes will be authorized, who has the authority to approve changes, how they should be documented, etc. G. Project transition planning - ARC coordinates with partners to determine the end of project procedures, administrative and contract closure; sustainability and transition planning. IV. IMPLEMENTATION ARC ensures that the partner project is implemented according to the agreed plan, but also provides support to the partner, as needed, to troubleshoot issues and make adjustments to the project, if required. Tasks include: A. Compliance - ARC NHQ and field staff monitor partner’s compliance with their grant agreement. Senior Program Officers at HQ are ultimately responsible for tracking partner compliance, while ARC staff in Haiti reinforce the requirements and follow-up with partners where there is a need for support. 7 B. Monitoring and Reviews - ARC staff monitor partner’s progress against their plans through a variety of outlets: reports, site visits, phone calls, meetings, emails, etc. 1. Monitoring is ongoing throughout the life of a project and is led by ARC’s point of contact for the partner in Haiti in coordination with the main point of contact for the partner at ARC’s HQ. 2. Regular site visits are conducted to check quality, monitor progress, understand any challenges raised by the partner, and provide technical, managerial or other support as needed. 3. Depending on the project scope, timeline and budget, ARC requires monthly updates, quarterly program reports, final reports, and evaluations from partners. C. Amendments - ARC programs are responsive to environmental challenges, risks, issues, requests from partners, etc, and thus sometimes changes in project scope, timeline or budget are necessary. The process for amending a project involves ARC program, operations, grants, and finance staff and other subject matter experts as needed. ARC leadership must provide final sign-off of amendments. D. Communications – ARC staff work with the partner to design a communications plan that is relevant and feasible for the project. E. Community engagement / accountability to beneficiaries - ARC partners develop an “accountability to beneficiaries” (AtB) strategy for their projects. This is done in coordination with ARC AtB staff in the field, and the implementation of the strategy is monitored on a regular basis by ARC field staff. The AtB strategy enables the people we help (i.e., the beneficiaries) to provide feedback to ARC and our partners and thereby participate in the process of improving their situation. The strategy enables ARC and our partners to integrate the beneficiary feedback into the decisionmaking process of the project. F. General Partner interaction, coordination, and collaboration - ARC HQ and field staff are responsible for maintaining good working relationships with partners. This is an ongoing task throughout the life of project. V. PROJECT MONITORING, EVALUATION AND CONTROL This phase extends through the entire life of the partner project and continually measures the partner’s progress and identifies appropriate corrective actions in situations where the project’s performance deviates significantly from the plan. Tasks include: A. Design- ARC staff review partner proposals and project log-frames (i.e., a planning and monitoring tool for projects) for relevance, effectiveness and sustainability. B. Pre-implementation - ARC staff review and approve monitoring and evaluation data collection and analysis tools such as a performance monitoring and evaluation plan and an indicator tracking table. C. Implementation- ARC staff review monthly/quarterly/bi-annually narrative and financial reports and relevant project annexes (depending on the established reporting frequency), and ensure payments are disbursed (per the establish disbursement schedule). E. Conducting field monitoring visits - Periodic field visits are conducted to project sites and to discuss implementation issues as necessary, risks and issues are monitored and trouble-shot. F. Surveys and Evaluations – ARC works with partners to develop terms of reference to carry out baseline, endline, and household surveys and evaluations of specific projects. ARC also serves on survey and evaluation teams from reviewing applications, to reviewing drafts and approving final reports. VI. END OF PROJECT TRANSITION/PROJECT CLOSE-OUT ARC ensures completion of all the transition activities that need to occur at the end of a partner’s project, including (but not limited to) confirming the project deliverables, collecting lessons learned, and completing the administrative, financial and contractual closure activities. Tasks include: A. Reviewing agreement/funding instrument - ARC reminds the partner of close-out requirements and deliverables including final program report in both a narrative and financial format, and any other 8 required reports. Also feedback on final reports is collected from other ARC units such as Finance or Business Operations. B. Final inventories - ARC obtains, reviews, and approves final inventory report of all equipment/supplies procured with project funds from the partner. C. Files program documents - ARC files reports in the appropriate electronic and/or hardcopy project file and archive project documents per ARC records management and donor policy. D. Arrange for project audit - If required by the project agreement or if deemed necessary by the ARC program director, a project audit is conducted. 9 Attachment C: Allocation Methodology FASB Guidelines Regarding “Program Services” Per the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), “program services” (FASB ASC 958720-20) are “the activities that result in goods and services being distributed to beneficiaries, customers, or members that fulfill the purposes or mission for which the not-for-profit entity (NFP) exists. Those services are the major purpose for and the major output of the NFP and often relate to several major programs” - in this case, disaster relief and recovery in Haiti. Program service costs are real direct costs and include things like: i) All services provided in Haiti: emergency relief, shelter, water and sanitation, livelihoods, disaster risk reduction, health and cholera prevention; ii) All salaries, wages and benefits for staff working on our Haiti Assistance Program (HAP); iii) Travel and maintenance costs for all staff working in Haiti or traveling related to the program; iv) Oversight of grants awarded to non-governmental organizations or Red Cross member societies to support disaster response; v) Accountability, monitoring and evaluation. Methodology Used For Allocating Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Program Service Costs In terms of how HAP program services costs are allocated to the seven sectors addressed by HAP (relief, shelter, water and sanitation, livelihoods, disaster risk reduction, health and cholera prevention), we advise as follows:  Level 1 allocation - these are costs directly attributable to a particular project. For example, the goods and activities delivered and the staff hired to implement a specific project within each sector in HAP are charged directly to that particular project;  Level 2 allocation - these are costs for activities that impact all seven sectors, or are not attributable to a given sector but still directly support and ensure sound service delivery to beneficiaries in Haiti. For example, the level of effort of the HAP Accountability Officer, the HAP Operations Director, or the HQ-based Haiti support team are bundled with all other cross-sector activities under a management category. Using a weighted average, these costs are spread against the seven sectors based on the weight of spend in each sector relative to all funds spent and committed. HAP program services costs are 100% attributable to the Haiti Recovery operations. Level 2 weighted allocations of program services costs are applied only to active sectors during a fiscal year. For example, as relief activities concluded in fiscal year 2011, no further program service costs were allocated to this sector in future fiscal years. 1 Attachment D: Letter from Gail McGovern American Office of the President and Chief Executive Officer Red Cross National Headquarters 430 17th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006 June 30, 2014 The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson Ranking Member Committee on Homeland Security Ford House Office Building Washington, DC. 20515 Dear Representative Thompson, Thank you for the robust discussion last week. I appreciated having the opportunity to meet in person to discuss a range of issues including Red Cross disaster readiness and response activities in Mississippi, diversity, and areas where ongoing improvements can be made. I have reviewed the diverse partnerships which we discussed and i can assure you that those relationships are current and active in Mississippi. I?d be happy to provide you with more detail about those partnerships and encourage you to connect with those organizations and individuals to get their views on how we work together. As I mentioned, I have my team looking at our supplier diversity data and if the information you and I discussed is available I will share it with you once it has been pulled together, although this may take some time. I do have some additional information on American Red Cross shelter capacity in Mississippi that I?d like to share with you. Pre-Hurricane Katrina, the Red Cross had 183 shelters with more than 38,000 spaces versus 450 shelters with nearly 80,000 spaces available today. My office has reached out to Janet Smith at the Ivy Group to set up a time for the two of us to talk and I?m hopeful that she and I will be able to get together over the summer. I will also be attending the next National Diversity Advisory Council (NDAC) meeting to better align the work of that group with other organizational priorities. As i mentioned at the end of our discussion, I would like to respectfully request that you consider us meeting face-to-face rather than requesting information via letter and end the GAO inquiry that is currently underway. ReSponding to the questions and participating in interviews (particularly because of the broadness of the questions) is using a great deal of staff resources while we are preparing for hurricane season and simultaneously responding to tornadoes, storms, wildfires and floods across multiple states. In addition, I feel that I can better address your concerns when we have a two way dialogue. Congressman Thompson, I hope that our conversation allayed many of your concerns and that our open dialogue can continue. I feel it was productive for us to speak in person about the issues you?ve been raising and hope that we can continue future conversations in the same manner. Please feel free to call me at any time about any issue on my personal cell phone Sincerely, Gail McGovern Attachment E: December 9, 2015 explanation American Red Cross response: The Haiti Assistance Program’s (HAP) level 1 and level 2 allocations represent real expenses in support of the American Red Cross operation in Haiti. At $69MM, these allocations represent 14.27% of the overall HAP program ($488MM). The size of such allocations is not pre-determined. Instead, the process to arrive at their appropriate level will generally depend on the scope and needs of the program and the operating context (e.g. geographical location, security considerations, impact on and capacity of local Red Cross Society to implement, monitor and report, etc.) Based on these considerations, the program team will set up an infrastructure for strategic and day-to-day management of operations. Cost drivers impacting the size of such infrastructure include, but are not limited to:  Program complexity: Disaster relief and recovery operational requirements depend on the size, scope, spectrum of programmatic interventions, technical capacities required, operating environment, and also how much of the program is directly implemented by the American Red Cross or through our partners.  Size of the program: At $488M, HAP can be considered a very large operation.  Timeframe: The duration of the program (at the project and sector levels). The $69MM is not a static number, instead it is very fluid. For example, when the activities related to a sector end, that sector will no longer incur level 1 expenses. Likewise, while costs are budgeted through the life of the program, until all Haiti earthquake-related projects are scheduled to end, there is an incentive to keep these allocations as low as possible so that savings can be reinvested in more projects. Therefore, until the program is fully closed out, these allocations remain fluid. In countries where there is strong infrastructure and a fully-functioning government and local Red Cross Society, these expenses tend to be significantly lower. In Haiti, the local Red Cross and the government were severely impacted by the earthquake, and the overall Haiti Assistance Program has required a higher level of oversight. 1 Attachment F: October 9, 2015 HAP financials Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name ARC Partners Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date Start date End date Description Emergency Relief Contribution to Food Distribution WFP 32,179,672 32,179,672 19-Jan-10 31-Dec-10 Domestic Heater Meals ARC 15,294,523 15,294,523 2010 2010 Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC 7,027,433 7,027,433 2010 2012 Contribution to ICRC Appeal ICRC 3,883,687 3,883,687 2010 2010 Hope for Haiti Now Fund ARC Sub Total MG&F Total - Emergency Relief ARC 1,726,262 1,726,262 60,111,577 60,111,577 5,945,101 5,945,101 66,056,678 66,056,678 2010 2011 The American Red Cross funded food rations for over 1 million people and associated distribution costs, primarily to young mothers and children through a partnership with the UN World Food Programme. Contributions to the IFRC Earthquake Appeal covered the purchase of tarps/tents, hygiene kits, non-food items, shipping, transportation and general infrastructure costs to mount these distributions such as purchase of vehicles and generators. The American Red Cross also donated nearly 3 million packaged meals for distribution in the early days of the response. These funds also contributed to Base Camp set-up which was the main operational hub in Port-au-Prince in the relief and early recovery phases. Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of firstaid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program—like the Haiti program—but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. Nine cents was used for MG&F. Shelter 1 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name LAMIKA - Integrated Neighborhood Rehabilitation and Recovery ARC Partners ARC in partnership with MC and GC Budgeted Amount 31,655,600 Total Spent to date 22,668,447 Start date End date 1-Nov-11 30-Jun-16 Description The primary goal of the LAMIKA program is to enhance community and household resilience through a sustainable and integrated approach that provides healthy, habitable, and improved homes and living conditions. The LAMIKA program, in accordance with the Haitian government's request for organizations to work in urban renewal, is being implemented in Carrefour-Feuilles, a poor residential neighborhood north of downtown Port-au-Prince which sustained extensive damage from the earthquake and is characterized by dense housing, poverty and limited access to safe infrastructure and services. The LAMIKA program conducts activities under three pillars in Social Engagement, Economic Strengthening and Physical Renewal to address needs across multiple sectors. * Pillar I is implemented by the American Red Cross, Pillar II by Mercy Corps and Pillar III by Global Communities. The program targets 48,318 direct beneficiaries residing in 8 neighborhoods of Carrefour Feuilles. To date, the project has achieved the following, among others: Pillar I: Eight Community Intervention teams of 20 persons each have been set up, trained and equipped. Members have been trained in 10 modules associated with first aid, search and rescue, disaster risk reduction, and more. 16 distribution points have been established to distribute condoms or Oral Rehydration Salts (ORS), with more than 795,000 condoms and 22,000 ORS packets distributed so far and with corresponding education, outreach and follow-up. More than 32,000 been reached with health messaging, and moreprogram than 17,000 The American Redpeople Cross have is partnering with USAID to implement an integrated to support DEKOVRI- shelter components (Dynamic Community Development and Urban Reconstruction Program) USAID 17,558,866 16,230,940 19-Aug-13 30-Jun-16 sustainable and responsible urban development in the West Department of Haiti. In accordance with the priorities of the Government of Haiti’s Construction, Housing and Public Works Unit (Unité de Construction de Logements et de Bâtiments Publics-UCLBP) and the National Housing and Habitat Policy, this partnership seeks to leverage, among others, the resources which residents themselves bring to their community. A focus point of these planned investments is Canaan, an emerging city north of the metropolitan area of Port-au-Prince which spontaneously developed following the 2010 earthquake. Over 100,000 people live in Canaan or are currently building in the area. The Government of Haiti estimates that Canaan residents have already invested over $100 million of their own resources in the area. The goal of this component of the program is to provide urban planning assistance, promote safer housing, build capacity of local entities to adopt safer and more sustainable construction, and to build expanded infrastructure services in the zone, including: increased water supply, new community spaces, paved footpaths and key roads, and the establishment of zoning and building regulations. This project with CARE seeks to contribute to the rehabilitation of urban housing and the closure of camps by helping homeowners construct safe rental accommodation, providing camp residents with safer housing, improved access to enhanced sanitation facilities and livelihoods opportunities, and better security to people currently living in damaged structures. Retrofit for Rental CARE 2,656,517 2,234,010 1-Dec-13 31-Mar-16 2 To date, 117 households (585 people) have benefited from a settlement or relocation grant, 239 households (1,195 people) have benefited from a relocation program, 325 people have been trained in shelter activities, 387 people have been trained on income generating activites, 275 households (1,375 people) have received livelihoods grants, and 176 badly damaged homes have been repaired (benefitting 880 people). Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name From Camp Transformation to Urban Revitalization (CATUR) Camp Autonomization Project ARC Partners UN-HABITAT FRC Budgeted Amount 1,881,484 1,918,554 Total Spent to date 1,068,301 1,773,460 Start date End date 1-Apr-14 31-Mar-16 15-Mar-14 30-Jun-15 Community Investment Fund (CIF)Balance ARC 950,887 - 1-May-13 30-Jun-16 CIF - PSST PSST 122,651 28,288 2-Mar-15 2-Mar-16 3 Description This project through UN-HABITAT is assisting the government bodies (UCLBP and relevant ministries) and municipal authorities build consensus regarding all camp exit strategies. The project seeks to formalize 2 or 3 selected camps, with a target of reaching 1,500 households, through urban integration with the surrounding neighborhood and through provision of support which could include housing support, rental subsidies, access to basic services such as road, water and sanitation networks, or a combination of these options. In order to reduce camp residents' dependency on humanitarian assistance and decrease displaced households' density in long term camps, this project through the French Red Cross seeks to improve the resilience of the population in several camps by increasing selfmanagement and access to services as well as expanding livelihood opportunities for internally displaced people and their surrounding neighborhoods. To date, this project has reached more than 7,300 people with hygiene promotion, trained 24 people on violence prevention, and trained 48 people on income generating activities. The Community Investment Fund (CIF) is a $1.5M financial commitment to enhance engagement with and support to smaller, local organizations. It is designed to address small requests for funding and/or the identification of critical activities which could be effectively implemented by local organizations. To date the American Red Cross has awarded a total of eight CIF grants to the following partners: Global Therapy Group, Phase I (for more details see line 39 under the Shelter sector), Maison L’Arc-en-Ciel (for more details see line 51 under the Health sector), St. Boniface Foundation (for more details see line 62 under the Health sector), SOIL (for more details see line 105 under the Water & Sanitation sector), Viva Rio (for more details see line 127 under the Livelihoods sector) and HELP (fore more details see line 135 under the Livelihoods sector). Two additional CIF grants have been recently awarded which are funded from the CIF-Balance line. These two CIFs are the following: 1) Congregation of the “Petites Sœurs de St. Therese de L’Enfant Jesus” for Improved Food Security in Dumas/Fort Liberte in the North of Haiti in the amount of $96,938 (Livelihoods). This project includes activities that address the strengthening of agriculture, food security, environment, training for young people and farmers, education and capacity building of farmers. 2) Global Therapy Group, Phase 2 for WASH Facilities in the amount The PSST project Improved food security and resiliency for people at Dumas/Fort-Liberté will work in Fort Liberte, especially in one communal section called Dumas where the food insecurity is very high. The project includes activities that address the strengthening of agriculture, food security, environment, training for young people and farmers, education and building capacity of farmers.Target Direct Beneficiaries: 100 Households (500 individuals), Target Indirect Beneficiaries: 6,610. Although this is a Livelihoods project, this grant is a draw down from the CIFBalance line under the Shelter Sector, hence the project is listed under Shelter. This is one of eight CIF grants. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name ARC Partners Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date Start date End date CIF - GTG GTG 32,862 22,738 15-Jun-15 14-Jan-16 HRC Institutional Asset Development Program ARC 3,135,512 252,389 1-Nov-14 31-Dec-16 Rubble Removal and Demolition Emergency Shelter Ayiti Initiative on Reconstruction (REPAIR) Miron Relocation (Quick Action Fund) JP/HRO 3,747,351 3,460,101 1-Oct-12 30-Nov-14 HFH 4,846,636 4,480,099 8-Mar-10 31-Mar-11 PADF ARC 13,488,498 63,939 12,468,401 59,104 15-Aug-11 31-Oct-12 1-Jul-11 31-Mar-12 4 Description Global Therapy Group was created in response to the dire need for rehabilitation services in Haiti following the January earthquake in 2010. GTG is dedicated to providing sustainable rehabilitation and training to those in need throughout the world. Phase I of this CIF funded the construction of a small therapy clinic for physical and occupational therapy in PaP. The clinic was inaugurated in June 2014. This Phase II grant will support the installation of sanitation facilities at the clinic and provide training and education in effective WASH interventions for patients and their families. Target Direct Beneficiaries: 400. This is one of eight CIFs. Although this is a Water & Sanitation project, this grant is a draw-down from the CIF-Balance line under the Shelter Sector, hence the project is listed under Shelter. This is one of eight CIF grants After the 2010 earthquake, the Haitian Red Cross suffered significant damage to physical assets that hosted activities of many of its core functions. This project will support Haitian Red Cross physical asset development (of 3 to 4 key buildings) in coordination with ongoing organizational development (OD) programs supporting comprehensive HRC institutional strengthening. JP/HRO provided demolition and rubble removal services targeting homes and other buildings that were classified as “red” or requiring demolition, as per the Haitian Ministry of Public Works, Transport and Communications (MTPTC) standards. Through this project, more than 108,000 cubic meters of rubble were cleared (the equivilent of about 40 olympic-sized swimming pools of rubble).3,204 people received temporary employment through this project. Additionally, 238 households (1,190 people) received rubble removal services from their home, making their homes safer to inhabit. With funding from the American Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity distributed 14,040 kits (benefitting approximately 70,200 people).The kits enabled beneficiaries to either construct a new shelter or make repairs to an existing shelter. Additional kits were pre-positioned for use in future disaster responses. As per Global Shelter Cluster strategy and per humanitarian specifications, each kit contained the following components: two 5-gallon buckets, two tarpaulins, rope, wire, nails, duct tape, a hammer, a pry bar, two chisels, pliers, 10 dust masks, leather work gloves, safety glasses, a hacksaw with two replacement blades, and a folding knife. The Pan-American Development Foundation (PADF) Ayiti Initiative on Reconstruction (REPAIR) project repaired and rehabilitated 4,018 yellow-tagged, earthquake-damaged homes in Port-auPrince benefitting 20,090 people. The REPAIR project worked through small local contractors from the areas where the yellow houses are located and trained more than 900 builders, masons and small contractors to use improved construction techniques and home repair methodologies. Houses repaired under the PADF program are tagged and certified as compliant with the Haitian Government’s yellow house repair guidelines. From a request from the Government of Haiti, the project aimed to relocate IDP families situated in a dangerous ravine through a rental subsidy program. A total of 103 families (515 people) were relocated in December, 2011. This is one of five QAFs. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name ARC Partners Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date Start date End date Relocation and Rental Subsidies Mais Gate IFRC 2,508,409 2,318,706 1-Nov-11 28-Feb-13 Relocation and Rental Subsidies Carrefour-Feuilles IFRC 5,016,819 4,637,411 1-Sep-12 31-Dec-13 Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC 3,013,705 2,782,447 1-Jan-13 31-Mar-14 Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC 13,537,317 12,498,524 2010 2014 Transitional Shelter Project UNOPS 8,268,755 7,643,413 15-Aug-10 30-Nov-11 Transitional Shelter Project HFH 8,030,727 7,423,386 1-Sep-10 31-Dec-11 Transitional Shelter Project ACTED 7,355,602 6,799,319 1-Jul-10 31-Dec-12 Transitional Shelter Project HI 6,368,793 5,887,139 14-Aug-10 31-Dec-11 Transitional Shelter Project HAVEN 3,369,000 3,114,212 1-Jul-10 31-Jul-11 Shelter Paint Kits - Housing Improvements FRC 252,836 233,715 1-Apr-11 30-Sep-11 Progressive Shelters SpRC 3,613,677 3,340,385 1-Jan-11 30-Jun-12 5 Description At a Red Cross Red Crescent Movement level, of the 13,000 families (65,000 beneficiaries) were targeted for relocation assistance, and the American Red Cross funded the relocation of 5,347 of these families (26,735 people). This pledge covered 2049 HHs served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince (10,245 people). This pledge covered 2,067 (10,335 people) households served by relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince. This pledge covered 1,231 households (6,155 people) served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince. The support from the American Red Cross contributed to the transitional shelter component of the IFRC Shelter Program including the purchase and distribution of shelter tool kits, construction materials and supplies which included tarpaulins, plywood sheets, hurricane tarps, paint, sand, gravel, tools, subcontractor labor charges, shelter concrete blocks and latrines and their associated costs to mount the operation. The three projects specifically supported by the American Red Cross contribution include the construction of transitional shelter units in the Annex de la Mairie, La Piste and Saint Marc sites. Also, American Red Cross funding contributed to the cash vouchers project for t-shelter recipients to increase the purchasing power and equip earthquake affected families with critical household items. UNOPS constructed 1,500 transitional homes (benefitting 7,500 people) each with a rainwater catchment system, and 606 latrines. Habitat for Humanity built 1,500 upgradable t-shelters (benefitting 7,500 people) each with a structural foundation and a rain catchment system, plus 1,341 grey water systems, 409 hand washing stations, 375 latrines (designed for four families each), 10 new water points, 8 hand pumps rehabilitated one well. ACTEDand constructed 1,700 transitional homes (benfitting 8,500 people) each with a rainwater catchment system, and 1,032 latrines. ACTED distributed mosquito nets and lifestraw filters to 1,677 households. Disaster Risk Reduction activities included participatory natural disaster vulnerability identification, and assessments and risks mapping at the community level. Hygiene promotion training consisted of training of Community Hygiene Promoters (CHP). Handicap International built 1,000 shelters (971 t-shelters built plus 29 t-shelters for classroom use). 599 latrines were built (567 latrines for shelters plus 32 latrines for classrooms). Among the 971 beneficiary households, 919 households benefited from WASH activities (latrines and hygiene promotion), 1,537 pupils benefited from 16 communitarian buildings (school classrooms) and 32 latrines. In total, 4,855 people benefitted from the t-shelters. Haven constructed 499 homes (benefiting 2,495 people) each with rainwater harvesting units, and 189 latrines. The project also included hygiene promotion activities. The French Red Cross improved the sustainability of transitional homes by giving 1,425 vulnerable displaced families (7,125 people) vouchers valued at 6,000 GDES (roughly US$150) to be used to purchase a paint kit. Painting the homes helps them better withstand inclement weather, thus making them more durable. To meet the longer term housing needs of those displaced by the earthquake, the Spanish Red Cross upgraded 4,427 transitional shelters (benefitting 22,135 people) into permanent homes and constructed 1,500 latrines. Community members in Leogane were involved in the construction process, learning skills they could apply to future jobs. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name Progressive Shelters Permanent Multi-Family Housing Units ARC Partners SRC FULLER Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date 929,944 1-Jul-11 30-Sep-12 60,202 55,649 18-Jun-12 29-Jul-12 GTG 59,999 55,461 Disaster Response Activities ARC 10,757,814 HAP M&E ARC Contribution to ICRC Appeal ICRC Sub Total ARC End date 1,006,026 Construction of Rehabilitation Clinic (Community Investment Fund) Hope for Haiti Now Fund Start date 7-Nov-13 31-Jan-14 9,835,482 2010 2011 182,488 168,687 2010 2011 277,386 274,753 2010 2010 2,008,808 1,856,888 157,747,720 134,601,797 2010 2011 6 Description Through the American Red Cross partnership with the Swiss Red Cross, 599 homes (benefitting 2,995 people) were upgraded. All shelters were provided with a 400 gallon water tank for rain catchment. The American Red Cross contributed funds to support the Fuller Center's effort to help earthquake victims improve their own lives by providing shelter in healthy, holistic communities. Specific objectives included creating permanent multi-family housing units, fostering a sustainable community environment and providing industry and business opportunities for community members. Six housing units were built benefiting a total of 30 people. The goal of this project through Global Therapy Group was to provide disabled individuals access to appropriate rehabilitation services, improving their functional ability and their integration into all aspects of Haitian life. Funding covered the construction of one physical therapy rehabilitation clinic in Port-au-Prince. This is one of eight CIF grants. Directly implemented relief costs associated with the American Red Cross's response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the emergency shelter category. These costs include the purchase, transportation and distribution of relief supplies including tents, tarps, rope and mats. Monitoring & evaluation expenses for some directly implemented projects were tracked separately at the start of the operation. This covered assessment of the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and impact of activities per program objectives. Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of firstaid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name MG&F ARC Partners ARC Total - Shelter Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date 15,589,788 13,312,266 173,337,508 147,914,063 Start date End date Description MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. 9 cents was used for MG&F. Health (Excluding Cholera) St. Michel Hospital Reconstruction in Jacmel Haiti HIV/AIDS Prevention (HHAP) Community Support to Children Affected by HIV (Community Investment Fund) Enhanced Health Service Delivery Program (Community Health Volunteer Network) Gender Based Violence Prevention Project CRC 13,162,512 5,909,775 1-Aug-12 31-Dec-15 The American Red Cross is supporting the Canadian Red Cross to improve access to health services in the South-East Department of Haiti by contributing significant funds required for the reconstruction of St. Michel Hospital in Jacmel. The hospital is the only hospital in the South-East Department. The target population to be reached is 560,000. ARC in partnership with HRC 5,621,859 4,337,859 1-Jan-11 30-Jun-15 This project co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross aims to reduce the incidence of HIV among the most at-risk populations and in settings characterized by high-risk behaviors in 12 locations in Haiti. The project has reached 333,010 people. MAEC ARC in partnership with HRC IRC 197,438 3,343,278 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 159,923 157,943 15-Aug-14 14-Aug-15 1-Nov-14 30-Apr-17 Maison-L'Arc-en-Ciel (MAEC) is an organization dedicated to working with vulnerable children affected by HIV/AIDS. The goal of this project is to be instrumental in the survival and vulnerability reduction of orphan children, youth and young adults affected by or infected with HIV/AIDS through reintegration of young people of age 18 and above, admission of new residents, and psycho-social and medical services. This project serves 80 to 100 people at a time, including atrisk children and youth and their families or foster homes. This is one of eight CIF grants. This program is co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross and seeks to contribute to building resilience in targeted communities in Haiti through improved access to primary health services and availability of trained personnel in 6 geographical departments of Haiti: North, North-East, North-West, West, South and South-East departments. The project, coordinated closely with Government of Haiti's Ministry of Health, will target training and deployment of Polyvalent Community Health Agents (ASCPs) and Haitian Red Cross volunteers – Health (HRCV-H). The project will train and support the deployment of 40 ASCPs in collaboration with MSP, supported by the deployment of 320 (HRCV-Hs) – an average ratio of 1:8 of ASCP to HRCV-H covering a specific geographic area. The total number of people anticipated to be served by the project is 40,000. The goal of this project is to reduce the incidence and mitigate the consequences of genderbased violence (GBV) in Port-au-Prince by addressing the needs of survivors and by empowering women and girls to participate more actively in Haitian society. This partnership with the WRITTEN WRITTEN WRITTEN International Rescue Committee (IRC) is increasing the capacity of local and community-based APPROVAL APPROVAL APPROVAL organizations that already provide valuable services, conducts ongoing needs assessments and REQUIRED PRIOR REQUIRED PRIOR REQUIRED PRIOR trainings with these organizations, and develops an adolescent girls program. The program is TO DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE also helping create financial opportunities for women and to promote women's decision-making ability through empowerment and dialogue both within the home and community. The project has directly reached 8,500 people that participated in the trainings. 7 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name 2015 Caribbean Domestic Violence & Gender Equality Conference Haiti Measles and Rubella Initiative Haiti Measles and Rubella Initiative Social Engagement Blood Supply and Restocking of Blood Testing Kits Operational Support for Bernard Mevs Hospital Mirebalais Teaching Hospital Construction Field Hospital Support in Carrefour Operational Support for Haiti's University Hospital ARC Partners ARC in partnership with HRC Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date Start date End date 143,603 - 8-Oct-14 7-Oct-15 UNF 1,382,064 1,232,861 23-Jun-14 22-Jun-15 HRC 470,387 - 15-Nov-14 31-Dec-15 ARC 362,093 312,822 10-Feb-15 30-Apr-15 Medishare PIH GRC PIH 11,416,731 7,239,382 4,747,622 3,367,479 10,184,220 6,457,843 4,235,085 3,003,937 1-Oct-10 31-Dec-12 11-Nov-11 31-Dec-12 31-Aug-10 12-Jan-10 8 Description The project goal is to contribute to raising awareness and strengthening the systematic response to domestic violence and gender equality in Haiti. Conference date TBD. Support for the forthcoming Haiti Measles & Rubella vaccination campaign to reduce measles mortality and to expand implementation of supplementary immunization activities (SIAs) for measles vaccinations in Haiti, with the goal of reaching 1,050,000 children under the age of 5. Project not previously incluced in Grassley's report. Budget amount reduced from QAF balance. The American Red Cross supported critical operating expenses, payroll and administrative fees for the Bernard Mevs Hospital Project Medishare Critical Care Trauma and Rehabilitation Program in Port-au-Prince. The hospital operates 24/7 for the general public, providing the only critical care and trauma services for all of Haiti. The American Red Cross supported the hospital for 27 months from October 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012, employing over 200 Haitian staff (40 Haitian nurses, 22 Haitian physicians and 150 allied healthcare professionals and Haitian support staff), supported by 10 full-time international mentors and 50 volunteers that provided specialized training. The American Red Cross supported Partners in Health (PIH) in the construction, equipping and opening of a national state of the art teaching hospital in Mirebalais. The direct number of people anticipated to be served by thisproject is 160,000 (catchment area for primary/secondary care) and the indirect number of people anticipated to be served by the project is 3.3 million people (catchment area for tertiary care).The hospital has more than 300 beds. 31-Dec-13 The American Red Cross supported the German Red Cross Society for the operation of a field hospital located in Carrefour, just outside of Port-au-Prince. The field hospital opened immediately after the earthquake and continued to provide free medical services through the end of December 2010, treating over 70,000 patients. The hospital provided both fixed and mobile health services, as well as training for volunteers to provide psychosocial support and community health and hygiene promotion. In addition to supporting the operation of the hospital and the salaries of the staff, the American Red Cross also provided support to rehabilitate the soccer field that housed the hospital once the field hospital was closed. 28-Feb-11 In the aftermath of the earthquake, the American Red Cross, through Partners in Health, provided operational support for Haiti's University Hospital (HUEH), the largest public hospital in Haiti. For the months between July 2010 and February 2011, PIH disbursed $3,284,914 to HUEH to pay supplementary compensation to its 1,440 Haitian staff. The American Red Cross reimbursed $2,077,266 of these costs (for the months July 2010 and November 2010 – February 2011), and provided nearly $500,000 for equipment and supply expenses, and support for other services for the hospital. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name ARC Partners Budgeted Amount 1,604,293 Start date End date 1-May-10 31-Dec-12 Description Injuries from the earthquake resulted in the loss of limbs for more than 5,000 survivors. With support from the American Red Cross, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) rebuilt a prosthetic and physical rehabilitation center, Klinik Kay Kapab, run by the Haitian NGO Healing Hands for Haiti. The ICRC also provided technical assistance for the center to be able to create prosthetic devices for 1,000 people and provide rehabilitation services for 3,000 people. Prosthetics Clinic Construction ICRC Villa Clinic Support (Community Investment Fund) St. Boniface Foundation 131,625 116,883 31-Jan-14 31-Jul-14 Post-Earthquake Health and Hygiene Promotion in Camps Program (Part 1) ARC 69,798 62,263 1-May-10 30-Nov-12 Post-Earthquake Health and Hygiene Promotion in Camps Program (Part 2) ARC 3,669,703 3,273,535 1-May-10 30-Nov-12 Strengthening Immunizations Services through Measles Control UNF 2,632,502 2,348,307 2-Mar-12 31-Dec-12 Operational Support for Measles Campaign UNF 492,936 439,720 2-Feb-10 31-Dec-10 Measles vaccinations 2nd round HRC 108,966 97,202 15-Oct-12 14-Feb-13 The American Red Cross supported a rapid vaccination in camps post-earthquake in Haiti in 2010 and the multi-agency coordinated measles vaccination campaign in April 2012 led by the United Nation's Foundation as well as associated social mobilization activities carried out by the Haitian Red Cross. The national coverage reached through the 2012 campaign was 92.4% (n=2,963,911 children vaccinated) for OPV and 94.6% (n= 3,069,396 children vaccinated) for MR vaccine. Additionally, 1.2 million units of vitamin A and 1.3 million units of albendozale (antiparasitic drug) were administered. Rapid Monitoring Coverage following the campaign conducted in all departments indicated that national coverage reached was more than 95%. ARC in partnership with HOPE 11,900 10,616 2-Jun-12 31-Dec-12 Through funding provided by the Belizean Grove Foundation, the American Red Cross in partnership with HOPE, helped provide mobile medical services to 3,200 individuals. Mobile Medical Services 1,798,447 Total Spent to date Response to Chikungunya Outbreak (Quick Action Fund) HRC 120,434 107,433 9-Jul-14 8-Jan-15 Blood Services Augmentation ARC 976,323 870,922 15-Jan-10 31-Mar-11 9 Via the St. Boniface Foundation, this project provided improved health care to a large population center whose clinic was destroyed in the earthquake. The construction of the clinic was funded by the Spanish Red Cross while funding from the American Red Cross was utilized to outfit the clinic with essential medical equipment. This is one of eight CIF grants. The American Red Cross Post-Earthquake Health and Hygiene Promotion Program followed a community-based approach to providing first aid and promoting hygiene, health, disease prevention, and safety in the camps. Program activities included hygiene promotion, condom distribution, and education on preventing cholera, malaria, HIV, and sexual and gender-based violence. The program also conducted disease mitigation activities in the camps. In most cases, this program worked in the same locations as the Haiti Emergency Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Program, complementing disaster risk reduction work with health and hygiene promotion services to camp communities. 337,392 people were reached (counting first visits only), 1,616,361 condoms were distributed, 229,151 benefited from hand-washing activities, 35,251 ORS sachets were distributed, 2,268,941 bars of soap and 9,550,085 Aquatabs were distributed. In December 2013, the first case of Chikungunya was reported in the Caribbean and reached Haiti in early 2014. The objective of this Quick Action Fund was to contribute towards eliminating the spread of this disease. Project objectives and activities included enhancing the capacity of the Haitian Ministry of Health to combat Chikungunya, and distributing insecticide mosquito nets, insecticide sprayers, foggers, protective wear and larva killing substances. This is one of five QAFs. In the immediate aftermath of the earthquake, the American Red Cross Biomedical Services Department purchased and transported 4,265 units of blood to supplement the Haitian Red Cross's diminished capacity to collect and process blood. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name Contribution to ICRC Appeal ARC Partners ICRC Budgeted Amount 486,885 Total Spent to date 434,323 Start date End date 2010 2010 Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC 2,572,375 2,294,670 2010 2012 Disaster Response Activities ARC 237,449 211,815 2010 2011 Hope for Haiti Now Fund ARC 402,819 359,332 2010 2011 67,625,589 50,417,008 Sub Total MG&F Total - Health (Excluding Cholera) ARC 6,652,434 4,986,297 74,278,023 55,403,305 Description Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of firstaid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported provision of preventive, community-level and curative basic health services, hygiene promotion, HIV awareness-raising and psychosocial support to the affected communities as follows: health assessments (access and availability of health services, prevention, health needs and risk of communicable diseases and epidemics), provision of reproductive health kits, medical and surgical supplies, health information, education and support, training of volunteers and staff, reinforcement of HRC capacity to deliver planned HIV program activities with a special emphasis on reaching most vulnerable populations, and vector control. Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the emergency health category. These costs include purchase, transportation and distribution of first-aid supplies. Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. 9 cents was used for MG&F. Cholera 10 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name ARC Partners Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date Start date End date Cholera Prevention and Response Program FRC 1,226,423 680,793 23-Jun-14 31-Dec-15 Cholera Prevention and Response Program NoRC 613,210 576,040 23-Jun-14 31-Dec-15 Cholera Prevention and Response Program Cholera Prevention and Response Program Cholera Prevention and Response Program Health Service Delivery Project Oxfam GB SRC HRC HOPE 645,485 367,513 618,064 1,590,853 606,113 241,665 276,575 1,465,596 23-Jun-14 23-Jun-14 1-Oct-14 23-Jun-15 22-Dec-15 The American Red Cross' contribution is part of a larger US$2.7M program being implemented by the Swiss Red Cross in Cormier communal section in the West Department. Activities include setting up and operating a WASH training center in Cormier, constructing a community solar water kiosk in the WASH training center, establishing and training community WASH trainers and the training center management committee, providing training and technical support for household representatives on management and maintenance of community and individual water/sanitation and water treatment and hygiene. 30-Jun-16 11 This project through the French Red Cross targets 18 communal sections total, with 14 in the West and 4 in Lower Artibonite departments. The project is strengthening the capacities of HRC in support of the efforts of MSPP in prevention, response and communication related to the cholera epidemic. The activities include conducting hygiene promotion activities through HRC volunteers in cholera persistence areas, enhancing the capacities of HRC volunteers at local and regional level by providing materials and adapted trainings, rehabilitation, repairs and installation of water systems and hand washing stations and coordination and epidemiological information sharing between MSPP, DINEPA and HRC. To date, this project has reached 7,290 people with hygiene promotion activities. The goal of this project through the Norwegian Red Cross is to contribute to the elimination of cholera in Grande Goave and Petit Goave in the West department. The activities include repairs and rehabilitation of water systems and sanitation facilities, hygiene and health promotion activities; community-based disease surveillance and response to acute watery diarrhea spikes in communities. To date, this project has reached 13,878 people with hygiene promotion activities. As the lead organization in the North and Northeast departments for coordinating cholera prevention and response, Oxfam (GB) is targeting 6 localities in 3 communes in the North and 4 localities in 4 communes in the Northeast. The activities include facilitating the inclusion of HRC in cholera response activities through coordination and cluster meetings with key WASH/Health actors, training of 210 HRC team members including volunteers in cholera prevention and response, constructing and rehabilitating 5 WASH facilities in health centers with cholera treatment center, rehabilitating 7 water systems and implementing mass media activities to promote safe sanitation, appropriate domestic water management, food handling and hygiene practices. To date, 3 water systems have been rehabilitated, benefitting 20,786 people. 30-Sep-15 1-Apr-11 Description The Haitian Red Cross is contributing to the elimination of cholera in the Greater North through sensitization campaigns and distribution of hygiene products. In addition, HRC is carrying out key coordination responsibilities with MSPP on behalf of all Red Cross Movement partners. The project was initially designed to address the cholera outbreak in the North department. As cholera transitioned to an endemic phase, the American Red Cross has supported HOPE to integrate cholera treatment and prevention programs into their innovative community health model known as “Sante Nan Lokou”. The activities include treatment and prevention activities at the hospital, Cholera Treatment Center (CTC) and community level, including extensive hygiene education and WASH infrastructure improvement. To date, this project has reached 20,994 people with hygiene promotion and 8,544 with cholera support. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name Cholera Project Cholera Prevention and Treatment Efforts Cholera Response and Treatment Efforts Cholera Prevention and Treatment Efforts Cholera Handover Project ARC Partners ARC IMC CARE FRC HRC Budgeted Amount 3,940,932 2,403,132 1,531,967 1,213,961 117,655 Total Spent to date 3,702,052 2,257,466 1,439,106 1,140,377 110,524 Start date End date 1-Jan-11 30-Nov-12 15-Jan-11 14-Jan-12 1-Feb-11 31-Oct-11 21-Oct-10 21-Jul-11 30-Sep-13 30-Apr-14 12 Description Cholera response and prevention activities were directly implemented by the American Red Cross, focusing on improving awareness about proper hand-washing and household water treatment, as well as distributing oral rehydration salts (ORS), soap, water purification tablets, and other hygiene commodities. The American Red Cross shipped supplies to affected communities, mobilized health teams and volunteers, helped establish treatment facilities, distributed clean water to thousands of people, and launched nationwide public education campaigns using cellphones and weekly radio shows to reach millions of people with prevention messages. 1,194,940 people were reached. The project training, deployed and maintained four cholera response teams: one in 50 camps of Port-au-Prince and surroundings, one in Arcahaie and Cabaret, and two in 10 communes in the Nord and 13 communes in the Nord-Est. Installation and maintenance was completed of Oral Rehydration Posts/Points (ORPs), including 50 ORPs in Portau-Prince camps, 50 ORPs in Arcahaie and Cabaret (Ouest), 75 ORPs in the Nord and 51 ORPs in the Nord-Est. International Medical Corps established Oral Rehydration Posts and Mobile Medical Units, provided needed staff and supplies, trained volunteers to conduct health and hygiene promotion, constructed and rehabilitated latrines and bathing facilities, provided chlorinated water supplies and trained community members on the proper preparation of chlorine solution, established water kiosks, and provided small grants to local organizations to assist them with community-based cholera response projects. 1,189,784 beneficiaries were reached through this project. CARE established Oral Rehydration Points, supported schools with cholera prevention activities, facilitated cholera case management training, ensured water and sanitation support to eight health facilities and prevented the spread of cholera through education and the distribution of critical relief supplies. The project reached 517,326 people. French Red Cross supported hygiene promotion programs, an ambulance service, the creation of camp hygiene and sanitation committees, disinfection of latrines and public places, cleaning drainage systems, installing and managing Oral Rehydration Posts, chlorinating local water supplies, and distributing soap, chlorine, waste bins and water drums. The French Red Cross also set up a number of Cholera Treatment Units in Port-au-Prince and rehabilitated three primary healthcare centers in Petit Goave. This project reached 403,661 people. This project was part of the closeout plan for the American Red Cross directly implemented Cholera Project. The Haitian Red Cross continued the work in the two project areas by providing surveillance, training and referral services to communities. As part of this project, HRC implemented the following activities: Hygiene and sanitation education and promotion, community engagement and capacity building to address cholera, disease control, and surveillance in collaboration with local health system. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name Contribution to IFRC Appeal Medishare Cholera Outbreak Response PAHO Supplies Cholera Response Supply Shipment Oral Cholera Vaccination Cholera Programming in Port-au-Prince Cholera Programming in Leogane Sub Total ARC Partners IFRC Medishare PAHO PIH PIH SAVE SAVE Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date Start date End date Description 2,694,159 2,530,852 8-Nov-10 30-Nov-11 30-Sep-11 28-Feb-12 Contributions to the 2010 IFRC Hispaniola Cholera Appeal were specifically earmarked to support immediate needs related to the cholera outbreak in Haiti including the following: Procurement and distribution of soap, oral rehydration salts (ORS), chlorine, cots, protective equipment, cholera kits and other specialized equipment, family hygiene kits and kitchen parcels, training of volunteers in epidemic surveillance and control and hygiene promotion messaging, production and dissemination of communication materials, radio and SMS cholera messaging campaigns, prepositioning of medical supplies, establishment and maintenance of handwashing points and oral rehydration points, construction of latrines and showers, set-up of Cholera Treatment Centers (CTUs), case management, provision of clean water, periodic microbiological water testing, excreta disposal, solid waste disposal, associated costs to second a Delegate to a Cholera Emergency Response Team as well as a seconded Delegate to mount an Information Management database. 55,288 51,937 28-Oct-10 28-Oct-10 The American Red Cross funded the shipment of 53,310 lbs. of relief items by air through Medishare at the request of the Haitian Ministry of Health to respond to the cholera outbreak. WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 167,284 1,257,081 386,325 Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) purchased, shipped and stored 1.4 million solutions of Oral Rehydration Salts, 480,000 bags of Ringer Lactate and a variety of other life-saving WRITTEN WRITTEN WRITTEN medicines and medical supplies during the critical early stages of the response. This partnership APPROVAL APPROVAL APPROVAL also enabled PAHO to purchase logistical equipment for their warehouse, implement an online REQUIRED PRIOR REQUIRED PRIOR REQUIRED PRIOR information management system to track stock and medicines available in their warehouse, TO DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE produce cholera beds and train Ministry of Health personnel for the transition of the cholera Alert and Response System to the Haitian government. 157,144 1,180,883 362,908 1,839,629 1,728,120 22,508,836 20,236,502 2-Nov-10 2-Nov-10 6-Feb-12 15-Jan-13 15-Mar-11 15-Jan-11 13 Associated costs with shipment of cholera response supplies through Partners in Health. The American Red Cross supported a campaign conducted by Partners in Health and the Haitian organization, GHESKIO, with support from the Haitian Ministry of Health, to reduce cholera deaths in Haiti by introducing the oral cholera vaccination to the country. This pilot project vaccinated 90,000 Haitians against cholera. The pilot was conducted in both an urban area—the Cite de Dieu slum in Port-au-Prince—and a rural area—Bocozel—in the Artibonite river valley. 31-May-11 Save the Children managed Cholera Treatment Units (CTUs), transitioned the CTUs to Oral Rehydration Points (ORPs) with a referral system to CTUs, and conducted cholera preventionfocused hygiene promotion activities in Port-au-Prince. The American Red Cross worked together with the US Agency for International Development's Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) to fund this program. This project reached 117,393 with hygiene promotion and cholera support. 14-Sep-11 Save the Children set up two Cholera Treatment Units and eleven Oral Rehydration Points in rural areas of Leogane, and reached people with health and hygiene promotion activities. The project also distributed relief supplies such as soap and aquatabs.This project reached 37,893 with hygiene promotion and cholera support. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name MG&F ARC Partners ARC Total - Cholera Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date 2,226,149 2,001,412 24,734,985 22,237,914 Start date End date Description MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. 9 cents was used for MG&F. Water & Sanitation EkoLakay Social Business Pilot in Port-auPrince Construction of Septic Tanks in Support of 16/6 Program Provision of Sanitation Services (Community Investment Fund) SOIL UNOPS SOIL 710,506 444,880 120,220 238,689 439,478 119,069 10-Nov-14 9-Nov-16 4-Apr-14 3-Jan-15 20-Feb-14 17-Nov-14 14 The American Red Cross initially partnered with SOIL as a Community Investment Fund (CIF) grantee supporting the scale up of SOIL’s social business model pilot for sustainably providing household sanitation services in northern Haiti (see line 103 for more details). Following successful completion of the project, the partnership was expanded to Port-au-Prince. This current project aims to design and implement a sustainable sanitation service providing dignified sanitation access in impoverished communities in Port-au-Prince that can be scaled-up at minimal expense and has the potential to be sustained long term without external grant funding. Activities include: Latrine construction, upgrading composting waste treatment facility in Truitier Solid Waste Treatment Center, evaluate and improve the potential for independent entrepreneurs to profitably provide sustained service to EkoLakay toilets, and conduct a robust test of a potential private sector solution to Haiti’s sanitation crisis. The project aims to reach 2,200 people as entrepreneurs or beneficiaries of improved sanitation services. Following a request from UCLBP, the American Red Cross supported the UNOPS’s 16/6 initiative. The 16 Neighbourhoods/6 Camps project (16/6) was a government-prioritized initiative to provide an integrated response to the closing of six camps and the resettlement of displaced people.The project aimed to improve the options and quality of life of people returning to their neighborhoods of origin by addressing urgent physical infrastructure and social problems, as identified by the affected communities. Financed by the Haiti Reconstruction Fund, the 16/6 project it was implemented jointly by the Government of Haiti, the International Organization for Migration (IOM), UNDP, the International Labour Organization (ILO) and UNOPS. The ARCfunded portion of the project constructed 350 septic tanks connected to each house constructed under the 16/6 Program, benefitting 1,750 people. This project focused on the scale-up of SOIL’s pilot model for sustainably providing household sanitation services in Northern Haiti. Activities included expanding the capacity of a composting waste treatment facility and improving facility operations and efficiency, constructing and installing more than 200 household or communal toilets, and converting an existing structure on the SOIL farm into a small Training Center to host workshops and trainings for project beneficiaries on topics such as the use of maintenance of ecological sanitation toilets and hygiene. This project reached a total of 2,078 toilet users exceeding the initial target of 1480 by 598 people. A total of 3,484 people participated in SOIL trainings and educational events in Cap-Haitien and expansions and improvements to SOIL’s waste treatment facility will now enable SOIL to serve a minimum of 1,000 EkoLakay toilets by the end of 2015. This is one of eight CIF grants. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name Latrine Desludging Project Improving Drainage in Place-de-la-Paix ARC Partners Budgeted Amount IRC WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE CONCERN Total Spent to date Start date End date This project protected camp residents from cholera and other water-borne diseases. International Rescue Committee (IRC) worked in conjunction with DINEPA and UNICEF to remove waste from WRITTEN WRITTEN WRITTEN latrines in the most vulnerable IDP camps to extend their viability, directly supporting the DINEPA APPROVAL APPROVAL APPROVAL Strategy for Cholera Prevention Action in the camps. The number of camps this project worked in REQUIRED PRIOR REQUIRED PRIOR REQUIRED PRIOR fluctuated as the Government of Haiti's plans for each area shifted. Overall this project directly TO DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE served displaced populations of about 42,000 when they were in the highest number of camps, to about 25,000 at the lowest number of camps. 131,341 130,082 1-Jun-10 30-May-11 Improving Water Sanitation Services IMC 1,860,312 1,842,490 15-Dec-10 15-Jan-12 Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Management CRS 3,765,614 3,729,539 31-Oct-11 30-Apr-14 Improving Water Sanitation Services Improving Water and Sanitation Services IRC American Refugee Committee Description The camps that housed many Haitians were often located on marginal land that is prone to flooding. The American Red Cross partnered with Concern Worldwide to address this problem by improving drainage at Place-de-la-Paix camp. Project activities included clearing canals and drainage ditches, relocating shelters, and constructing and backfilling drains with gravel. An estimated 16,000 people benefited from this project. The earthquake damaged much of Port-au-Prince's already limited water and sanitation infrastructure, increasing health concerns for residents living in crowded camps where disease can travel quickly. The American Red Cross partnered with the International Medical Corps to address these concerns by improving access to safe water, clean latrines and bathing facilities. Additional activities included hygiene promotion, trash collection and drainage projects such as canal clearing. This project reached 35,656 people directly in the Port-au-Prince metropolitan area. When the earthquake struck, it all but halted already limited sanitation services such as trash pickup and sewage disposal, leaving waste piled up in market areas and camps. The aim of this program through Catholic Relief Services was to improve hygiene and solid waste disposal in Metropolitan Port-au-Prince. This project served 248,745 people over a period of 34 months. The earthquake damaged much of Port-au-Prince’s already limited water and sanitation infrastructure, increasing health concerns for residents living in crowded camps where disease WRITTEN WRITTEN WRITTEN can travel quickly. In partnership with the International Rescue Committee, the American Red APPROVAL APPROVAL APPROVAL Cross helped to address these concerns by providing safe water, clean latrines, hygiene REQUIRED PRIOR REQUIRED PRIOR REQUIRED PRIOR promotion, trash collection and drainage interventions such as ditch digging and canal clearing. TO DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE This project reached 58,850 beneficiaries in camps and neighboring communities of Port-auPrince. American Refugee Committee provided safe water, clean latrines, bathing facilities and hand washing stations in addition to hygiene promotion and drainage activities such as ditch digging and canal clearing. This project aimed to reduce risk of waterborne and vector-borne disease in spontaneous settlements and their peripheries in Port-au-Prince (PAP), and in areas where 3,265,197 3,233,916 1-Nov-10 31-Jan-12 American Red Cross partners constructed transitional shelters. Services included hygiene promotion and improvements to basic water supply, increased access to safe water and latrines, excreta disposal, drainage, and trash collection.113,138 people were reached with hygiene promotion, and 11,280 people are benefitting from new or rehabilitated water systems or sanitation facilities. WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 15 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name ARC Partners Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date Start date End date WatSan Project ARC 1,724,827 1,708,303 1-Jan-11 30-Sep-12 Disaster Response Activities ARC 1,197,835 1,186,360 2010 2011 Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC 20,834,386 19,932,321 2010 2014 16 Description This project reduced risk of waterborne and vector-borne disease in spontaneous settlements and their peripheries in Port-au-Prince (PAP), and in areas in which t-shelters were constructed by ARC partners, through hygiene promotion and improvements to basic water supply, excreta disposal, drainage, and trash collection. Achievements included improved access to safe water and sanitation in camps for 41,031 direct beneficiaries, of which 8,000 people had access to safe latrines and 15,050 who had access to showers in camps. Ten temporary water systems were installed in eight different localities, 1,609 cubic meter of safe water was distributed in 5 camps. A total of 301 individual cabins and shower were constructed in 20 sites and another 14 were rehabilitated in two other sites, distribution of 20 solid waste containers in one site, construction and rehabilitation of four communal hand wash stations, construction of 92 meter of drainage, construction and rehabilitation of 29 urinals, four water systems, 20 rainwater harvesting systems, 10 camps received cleaning materials for latrine maintenance, a total of 75 Camp Management Committee and WASH Committee members were trained in construction, operation and maintenance of WASH facilities. Out of those, 36 were also trained in leadership, organizational skills and conflict management. Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the emergency water & sanitation category. These costs include purchase, transportation and distribution of hygiene kits, buckets and jerry cans. To stem the risk of waterborne and water related diseases American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported the following: provision of safe water, adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion, coordination of Movement water and sanitation activities, deployment of Water and Sanitation Emergency Relief Unit (ERU), provision of water through the ERU Water and Sanitation deployment, rapid emergency needs and capacity assessments, periodic microbiological water testing, distribution of water and sanitation relief supplies (household water, treatment, jerry cans, buckets, etc.) and training on use of items, mobilization of HRC volunteers to carry out hygiene promotion activities during distributions, contribution toward the construction of first liquid waste treatment center in the country (Mont-a-Cabrit), re-establishment of water supply where possible through rehabilitation of water supply infrastructure, construction and rehabilitation of sanitation infrastructure, vector control and prevention measures, waste disposal measures, drainage measures, training of community-based HRC volunteers on participatory hygiene, provision of printed communication materials (posters, flyers, manuals, educational materials, etc.) and other supplies to be used in the hygiene promotion activities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name Contribution to ICRC Appeal Hope for Haiti Now Fund ARC Partners ICRC ARC Sub Total MG&F ARC Total - Water & Sanitation Budgeted Amount 33,846 Total Spent to date 33,522 2,318,623 2,296,411 42,335,345 40,762,430 4,187,012 4,031,449 46,522,357 44,793,879 Start date End date 2010 2010 2010 2011 Description Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of firstaid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. 9 cents was used for MG&F. Livelihoods Economic Strengthening and Livelihoods Improvement CECI 3,769,984 555,230 1-Dec-14 30-Nov-17 DEKOVRI- livelihood component (Dynamic Community Development and Urban Reconstruction Program) USAID 3,141,824 3,009,492 19-Aug-13 30-Jun-16 Creating Opportunities for Youth in Cite Soleil and Martissant ARC 2,513,459 3,485 1-Dec-14 31-May-17 17 The American Red Cross is funding the Centre for International Studies and Cooperation (CECI) to carry out a project that seeks to develop and strengthen livelihoods opportunities of 1000 women and men, primarily youth in Carrefour-Feuilles through vocational training and microenterprise development. This component of the American Red Cross / USAID partnership seeks to enhance employable skills and income generation, increase the number of women and men in Canaan able to secure stable employment and increase income generation viability of Canaan-based small and medium enterprises. This program will target people living in Canaan, an area of over 100,000 residents. The aim of this program is to increase opportunities for growth and skills development for young women and men in Cite Soleil and Martissant, two densely populated and highly vulnerable communities, to enhance their physical, mental and economic well-being and prepare them to be agents of change in their communities. The program aims to reach 5,000 to 8,000 youth over a period of 2.5 years. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name Economic Strengthening and Livelihoods Improvement in the Northwest ARC Partners PADF Gigando Pela Paz (Community Investment Fund) VIVA RIO Livelihoods and Host Family Support FONKOZE Host Family Support Host Family Voucher Support IOM MC Budgeted Amount 2,513,459 Total Spent to date 787,190 Start date End date 1-Nov-14 30-Jun-17 Description This partnership with the Pan American Development Fund (PADF) seeks to enhance food security and contribute to more sustainable and resilient livelihoods for rural women and men in the Northwest Department of Haiti. The project seeks to train 880 farmers in various agricultural practices and productions, establish 1200 bio-intensive gardens, train 100 farmers on disaster resilient agriculture techniques, distribute 500 livestock packages to farmers, train 500 breeders/farmers in livestock methods, and establish 4 agricultural processing centers. Viva Rio is a Brazilian community-based non-profit organization, which began work in Haiti in 2004 following an invitation from the United Nations. What began as a simple consultancy in Haiti has become today an efficient operation working with youth in some of the toughest 126,996 121,647 24-Jun-14 15-Jun-15 neighborhoods in the Haitian capital. With support from the American Red Cross, Viva Rio is seeking to strengthen youth leadership and decrease violence through sports (capoeira) in the Carrefour-Feuilles Neighborhood. This is one of eight CIF grants. The American Red Cross partnered with Fonkoze, Haiti's largest microfinance institute, to provide 10,339,292 9,903,807 1-Mar-10 31-Dec-11 microfinance grants and loans to reach 255,460 people, including female heads-of-households, business owners and families hosting displaced Haitians. Following the January 2010 earthquake, many displaced survivors left Port-au-Prince for other areas of Haiti, often overwhelming local services in these regions and depleting the already overstretched resources of their host families. To help reduce the burden faced by areas hosting displaced Haitians, the American Red Cross partnered with the International Organization for WRITTEN WRITTEN WRITTEN WRITTEN Migration (IOM) to help 20,719 people through a work program which, by supporting livelihoods, APPROVAL APPROVAL APPROVAL APPROVAL reduced pressure on host community resources. Activities included building or rehabilitating small REQUIRED REQUIRED PRIOR REQUIRED PRIOR REQUIRED PRIOR water canals, conducting soil stabilization and expanding access to water in general. The project PRIOR TO TO DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE also distributed basic household goods and/or shelter kits to 7,500 host families and provided DISCLOSURE additional indirect community benefits from disaster risk reduction and mitigation projects. IOM trained health promoters to educate people in host family communities about cholera prevention. 6,042,478 5,838,602 1-Jul-10 30-Jun-11 Mercy Corps provided support to host families and reached a total of 82,963 beneficiaries by providing vouchers to purchase basic household goods from local vendors. Some of these people also benefitted from income generating activities, and the program also included hygiene promotion and disaster preparedness education. School Voucher Project ARC 1,461,129 1,399,587 1-Dec-10 1-Dec-11 After the earthquake, many Haitians lost their primary source of income and were left without the means to meet basic needs, including sending their children to school. The American Red Cross helped displaced families in three camps in the Croix Deprez neighborhood by directly paying second and third trimester school fees as well as providing grants for displaced families to cover education-related expenses like uniforms, transportation and lunch money. This project reached 2,727 children. School Voucher Project DRC 1,886,261 1,806,812 1-Nov-10 31-Aug-11 The Danish Red Cross helped displaced families in Les Cayes arrondissement by providing vouchers to cover school fees for 1,850 children as well as livelihoods grants for 2,000 families who host displaced children. 18 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name ARC Partners Cash for Work MC Cash Transfer Pilot Project Youth Education and Leadership (Community Investment Fund) ARC HELP Budgeted Amount 1,509,292 739,015 147,359 Total Spent to date 1,445,649 707,888 141,152 Start date End date 1-Jul-10 30-Jun-11 2010 20-Feb-14 2011 19-Feb-15 HELP is the largest university scholarship program in Haiti. Through American Red Cross funding, HELP supported 167 straight-A students from all over Haiti to access university and also connect students with employment opportunities. This is one of eight CIF grants. IFRC 124,554 119,308 2010 2012 Disaster Response Activities ARC 16,346 15,658 2010 2011 43,648,971 34,780,584 MG&F ARC Total - Livelihoods 4,316,931 3,439,838 47,965,902 38,220,422 Mercy Corps employed 8,700 people to complete small cash-for-work projects that removed rubble, dug drainage canals, recycled rubble to make building materials, cleaned up debris and renovated roads. Because the needs of families differ, the American Red Cross committed to providing some families with the financial assistance necessary to choose what local goods and services they needed most. The American Red Cross piloted an innovative cash transfer program to give small cash grants to more than 1,800 families in camps through text messaging to cell phones. Efforts focused on helping families relocate from areas at high risk of flooding. Contribution to IFRC Appeal Sub Total Description American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported delivery of livelihood substitution activities such as cash-for-work for debris clearing, delivery of livelihoods / income substitution activities such as unconditional cash grants, support for community-led livelihood restoration activities through the provision of productive assets, tools, waste removal, and quick impact projects providing short-term livelihoods opportunities. Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the livelihoods category. MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. 9 cents was used for MG&F. Disaster Preparedness Gran No Pi Djanm Program LAMIKA - Integrated Neighborhood Rehabilitation and Recovery ARC in partnership with HRC and PADF ARC 19,819,100 11,074,174 61,576 53,670 41,244 1-Nov-11 The overall goal of “Gran No Pi Djamn” Program is for targeted communities in the North of Haiti to have increased resilience, stronger capacity, and reduced exposure to external shocks. A key component of this integrated program is to build the capacity of the Haitian Red Cross in three departments (Northeast, North and Northwest) through a multi-sectoral approach. The program 42,521 targets 10 communal sections in the Greater North. This program is co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross in partnership with the Pan American Development Fund (PADF), the latter is responsible for upgrading up to 19 evacuation shelters. 30-Jun-16 19 See detailed description of the LAMIKA Program under the "Shelter" category. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name Canaan Social Engagement Program ARC Partners ARC HRC Institutional Change & Development ARC in partnership Program with HRC Quick Action Fund (QAF)- Balance Earthquake Recovery Learning Conference Haiti Emergency Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Project Budgeted Amount 4,257,436 Total Spent to date 88,855 13,212,733 2,009,293 ARC 764,990 ARC in partnership with HRC 220,212 ARC 4,303,558 Start date End date 1-Dec-14 31-May-16 2010 30-Jun-19 - 1-Dec-14 30-Jun-16 - 1-Dec-14 31-May-16 3,746,005 15-Mar-10 28-Feb-13 20 Description Canaan is an emerging city north of the metropolitan area of Port-au-Prince, Haiti, which spontaneously developed following the 2010 earthquake. Over 100,000 people live in Canaan or are currently building in the area. The Government of Haiti estimates that Canaan residents have already invested over $100 million of their own resources in the area. The overall program goal is to mobilize and organize the communities within Canaan to improve their resilience. This will be accomplished through three programmatic pillars: Social engagement, disaster risk reduction, and environmental engagement. This directly implemented program will complement the American Red Cross's partnership with USAID. The aftermath of the devastating January 2010 earthquake significantly impacted the Haitian Red Cross' infrastructure and operations. As part of the American Red Cross strategy and as the earthquake recovery efforts scale down and partners begin to exit, the goal of this program is to help the Haitian Red Cross in its organizational development as auxiliary to GoH for disaster response, to facilitate Haitian Red Cross's proper planning and institutional development and to strengthen the Haitian Red Cross' central/HQ and Regional Branch capacity development planning for future years. The Quick Action Fund (QAF) represents a $1M financial commitment made by the American Red Cross, specifically to quickly respond to sudden humanitarian emergency needs in Haiti. To date five QAFs have been funded from the commitment as detailed below: Miron Relocation (for more details see line 26 under the Shelter sector), Response to Chinkungunya Outbreak (for more details see line 69 under the Health sector), Returnee Support Haiti-DR Border (for more details see line 152 under the Disaster Preparedness sector). In addition, two additional QAFs have been awarded which were funded from the QAF-Balance line. These two QAFs are the following: Sandy Restocking of Relief Supplies in the amount of $50,000 (Disaster Preparedness/closed) and Blood Supply (1000 units) and Restocking of Blood Testing Kits in the amount of $275K (Health- in close out process). As learning organizations, the goal of the HRC/ARC Earthquake Recovery Learning Conference (date TBD) is to collectively reflect on the Haiti earthquake recovery efforts with key stakeholders and define how lessons learned from the Haiti operation can contribute to humanitarian and organizational learning and programmatic and operational improvements for future responses. This project reduced the risks faced by camp residents through a community-based approach. Disaster preparedness activities included establishing and training resident disaster response committees, developing preparedness plans and installing early warning systems in camps, while mitigation activities included digging ditches, installing drainage systems and reinforcing embankments. In most cases, this program worked in the same camps as the American Red Cross implemented Post-Earthquake Health Promotion Program (PEHP), thus providing comprehensive services to camp communities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name ARC Partners Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date Start date End date Description Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC 6,397,564 5,622,462 2010 2014 American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported: establishment of early warning systems, community emergency evacuation and contingency plans, community emergency response teams, pre-positioning of emergency stocks, procurement and distribution of emergency equipment kits, training of volunteers and regional and local Red Cross committees in disaster preparedness. Also, the American Red Cross contributed to the purchase of relief supplies for Sandy affected individuals. In addition, as a learning organization, ARC contributed to two Movement-wide learning events. Disaster Response Activities ARC 131,788 114,714 2010 2011 Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the disaster preparedness sector. Kouri Di Vwazan'w ("KDV" - Tell your Neighbor) HRC 220,507 191,938 1-Jun-13 31-Dec-13 Returnee Support at the Haitian / Dominican Border (Quick Action Fund) HRC 37,413 32,566 6-Jan-14 15-May-14 Haiti Green Recovery Partnership WWF 307,095 198,667 10-Oct-12 30-Sep-14 Haiti Environmental Scoping Analysis WWF 51,452 43,775 10-Oct-12 30-Sep-14 49,785,424 23,176,118 Sub Total MG&F ARC 4,959,644 2,292,144 Total - Disaster Preparedness 54,745,068 25,468,262 Total MG&F 43,877,059 36,008,507 The KDV project contributed to disaster-risk reduction of the Haitian population through the strengthening of the Haitian Red Cross' chapter capacities. More specifically the project sought to strengthen chapter capacities through continued training of DRR regional focal points, KDV instructors and volunteers and conducting awareness and education campaigns at community level. In September 2013, the Constitutional Court of the Dominican Republic ruled that many Dominicans of Haitian descent and officially registered as Dominican citizens at birth no longer met the criteria for Dominican nationality. As a result, a great number of people were repatriated into Haiti at the Haitian/Dominican border. This Quick Action Fund assisted the Haitian Red Cross to scale-up operations at the border to provide timely assistance to the influx of returnees and/or the displaced by supporting the Haitian government in the provision of medical care, psychosocial support, provision of clean water and essential non-food items. This is one of five QAFs. The goal of the Haiti Green Recovery Partnership was to mainstream environmental sustainability in American Red Cross implemented projects and to reduce risk and vulnerability for project beneficiaries by minimizing, mitigating or eliminating environmental degradation. The technical assistance from World Wildlife Fund supported and enhanced consideration and inclusion of environmental components in the American Red Cross' integrated programming approach for both LAMIKA and Gran No Pi Djamn. The goal of the Haiti Green Recovery Partnership was to mainstream environmental sustainability in American Red Cross implemented projects and to reduce risk and vulnerability for project beneficiaries by minimizing, mitigating or eliminating environmental degradation. The technical assistance from World Wildlife Fund supported and enhanced consideration and inclusion of environmental components in the American Red Cross' integrated programming approach for both LAMIKA and Gran No Pi Djamn. MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. Nine cents was used for MG&F. 21 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Project Name Grand Total - All Projects ARC Partners Budgeted Total Spent to date Amount 487,640,522 400,094,522 Start date End date Notes: 1. The "cut-off" date for the financial information for "Total Spent To Date" by Partners is FY15Q4- June 2015. 2. Costs include the grant amount as well as an allocation of costs for Red Cross program services needed to implement the project. These are estimated costs because program services are not separately tracked on a project-by-project basis, but at the program level, according to Not-for-Profit accounting standards. 22 Description Attachment G: October 9, 2015 HAP financials Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners Partnership Amount Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date Start date End date Partners MG&F Rate Description 19-Jan-10 31-Dec-10 6.5 The American Red Cross funded food rations for over 1 million people and associated distribution costs, primarily to young mothers and children through a partnership with the UN World Food Programme. Emergency Relief WFP IFRC ICRC Total - Emergency Relief 29,929,039 6,535,937 29,929,039 6,535,937 29,929,039 6,535,937 3,612,064 3,612,064 3,612,064 40,077,040 40,077,040 40,077,040 2010 2010 2012 2010 1 6.5 6.5 Contributions to the IFRC Earthquake Appeal covered the purchase of tarps/tents, hygiene kits, nonfood items, shipping, transportation and general infrastructure costs to mount these distributions such as purchase of vehicles and generators. These funds also contributed to Base Camp set-up which was the main operational hub in Port-au-Prince in the relief and early recovery phases. Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners Partnership Amount Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date Start date End date Partners MG&F Rate Description Shelter Mercy Corps 2,397,819 1,840,289 1,290,288 8-Nov-13 31-Dec-15 10.0 The primary goal of the LAMIKA program is to enhance community and household resilience through a sustainable and integrated approach that provides healthy, habitable, and improved homes and living conditions. The LAMIKA program, in accordance with the Haitian government's request for organizations to work in urban renewal, is being implemented in Carrefour-Feuilles, a poor residential neighborhood north of downtown Port-au-Prince which sustained extensive damage from the earthquake and is characterized by dense housing, poverty and limited access to safe infrastructure and services. The LAMIKA program conducts activities under three pillars in Social Engagement, Economic Strengthening and Physical Renewal to address needs across multiple sectors. Pillar I is implemented by the American Red Cross, Pillar II by Mercy Corps and Pillar III by Global Communities. The program targets 48,318 direct beneficiaries residing in 8 neighborhoods of Carrefour Feuilles. To date, the project has achieved the following, among others: Global Communities 14,800,000 9,500,000 6,113,631 3-Feb-14 31-Mar-16 7.1 Pillar I: Eight Community Intervention teams of 20 persons each have been set up, trained and equipped. Members have been trained in 10 modules associated with first-aid, search and rescue, disaster risk reduction, and more. Sixteen distribution points have been established to distribute condoms or Oral Rehydration Salts (ORS), with more than 670,000 condoms and 19,000 ORS packets distributed so far and with corresponding education, outreach and follow-up. More than 32,000 people have been reached with health messaging, and more than 17,000 mosquito nets have been distributed. More than 1,100 people have been trained in first-aid, and more than 11,000 people are benefitting from community action plan activities to better respond to future disasters. Pillar II: 234 enterprises have been selected for support through small loans, 70 VSLA groups with a total of 1,523 members have been created (and they have saved over $48,000), 271 youth have been selected and are undergoing training for job preparation. IOM - LAMIKA WRITTEN WRITTEN APPROVAL APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO REQUIRED PRIOR DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 2 Pillar III: Housing rehabilitation and expansion works are currently in progress to benefit 500+ families. Approximately 1,500 people will be living within a 100 meter radius of potable water, 10 As part of the initial LAMIKA assessment phase, this project with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) aimed to complement ongoing return and reconstruction efforts by expanding existing enumeration initiatives. Specifically, this project increased the coverage of IOM’s existing Overcoming Land Tenure-Related Barriers (OLTB) program, in order to clarify issues related to WRITTEN land ownership and tenancy to facilitate (re)construction in target communities. This project APPROVAL completed enumeration activities in the 7th communal section of the Port-Au-Prince commune REQUIRED where enumeration partners such as the American Red Cross had planned housing interventions. PRIOR TO This effort included processing and encoding data into IOM’s existing OLTB database, and the DISCLOSURE production of maps that best presented this data for reconstruction partners, particularly ARC. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners USAID CARE UN-HABITAT Partnership Amount 14,000,000 2,118,089 1,500,141 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 14,000,000 1,926,946 921,463 11,200,000 (Obligated) 1,926,946 611,388 Start date 19-Aug-13 1-Dec-13 1-Apr-14 End date 30-Jun-16 31-Mar-16 31-Mar-16 3 Partners MG&F Rate 0.0 10.0 9.0 Description The American Red Cross is partnering with USAID to implement an integrated program to support sustainable and responsible urban development in the West Department of Haiti. In accordance with the priorities of the Government of Haiti’s Construction, Housing and Public Works Unit (Unité de Construction de Logements et de Bâtiments Publics-UCLBP) and the National Housing and Habitat Policy, this partnership seeks to leverage, among others, the resources which residents themselves bring to their community. A focus point of these planned investments is Canaan, an emerging city north of the metropolitan area of Port-au-Prince which spontaneously developed following the 2010 earthquake. Over 100,000 people live in Canaan or are currently building in the area. The Government of Haiti estimates that Canaan residents have already invested over $100 million of their own resources in the area. This project with CARE seeks to contribute to the rehabilitation of urban housing and the closure of camps by helping homeowners construct safe rental accommodation, providing camp residents with safer housing, improved access to enhanced sanitation facilities and livelihoods opportunities, and better security to people currently living in damaged structures. To date, 117 households (approximately 585 people) have benefited from a settlement or relocation grant, 272 households (approximately 1,360 people) have benefited from a relocation program, 325 people have been trained in shelter activities, 387 people have been trained on income generating activites, 275 households (approximately 1,375 people) have received livelihoods grants, and 176 badly damaged homes have been repaired (benefitting approximately 880 people). This project through UN-HABITAT is assisting the government bodies (UCLBP and relevant ministries) and municipal authorities build consensus regarding all camp exit strategies. The project seeks to formalize 2 or 3 selected camps, with a target of reaching 1,500 households, through urban integration with the surrounding neighborhood and through provision of support which could include housing support, rental subsidies, access to basic services such as road, water and sanitation networks, or a combination of these options. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners GTG Phase II PSST Partnership Amount 26,150 97,600 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 19,613 24,400 - - Start date 15-Jun-15 2-Mar-15 End date 14-Jan-16 2-Mar-16 4 Partners MG&F Rate 0.0 0.0 Description Global Therapy Group was created in response to the dire need for rehabilitation services in Haiti following the January earthquake in 2010. GTG is dedicated to providing sustainable rehabilitation and training to those in need throughout the world. Phase I of this CIF funded the construction of a small therapy clinic for physical and occupational therapy in Port-au-Prince. The clinic was inaugurated in June 2014. This Phase II grant will support the installation of sanitation facilities at the clinic and provide training and education in effective WASH interventions for patients and their families. Target Direct Beneficiaries: 400. This is one of eight CIFs. Although this is a Water & Sanitation project, this grant is a draw-down from the CIF-Balance line under the Shelter Sector, hence the project is listed under Shelter. Congregation of the "Petites Soeurs de St. Therese de L'Enfant Jesus" (PSST) is an indigenous congregation of pontifical right, founded in Marbial Diocese of Jacmel December 14, 1948 by the Reverend Louis LOUIS CHARLES Farnese and Sister Marie Françoise Camellia LOHIER. The PSST is a large official religious congregation of 200 Sisters and is managed by a Board of Directors. It is dedicated to serving the poor farmers through the mission of the Church in different activities as education, health, agriculture in urban and rural areas. Currently, it is present in all ten departments in Haiti. The PSST project: Improved food security and resiliency for people at Dumas/Fort-Liberté will work in Fort Liberte, especially in one communal section called Dumas where the food insecurity is very high. The project includes activities that address the strengthening of agriculture, food security, environment, training for young people and farmers, education and building capacity of farmers.Target Direct Beneficiaries: 100 Households (500 individuals), Target Indirect Beneficiaries: 6,610. Although this is a Livelihoods project, this grant is a draw down from the CIF-Balance line under the Shelter Sector, hence the project is listed under Shelter. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners FRC JP/HRO HFH PADF Partnership Amount 1,529,698 2,987,830 3,864,310 10,754,622 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 1,529,698 2,984,511 3,864,310 10,754,622 1,529,698 2,984,511 3,864,310 10,754,622 Start date 15-Mar-14 1-Oct-12 8-Mar-10 15-Aug-11 End date 30-Jun-15 30-Nov-14 31-Mar-11 31-Oct-12 5 Partners MG&F Rate 7.0 11.1 10.0 11.0 Description In order to reduce camp residents' dependency on humanitarian assistance and decrease displaced households' density in long term camps, this project through the French Red Cross seeks to improve the resilience of the population in several camps by increasing self-management and access to services as well as expanding livelihood opportunities for internally displaced people and their surrounding neighborhoods. To date, this project has reached more than 10,300 people with hygiene promotion, trained 486 people on violence prevention, and trained 147 people on income generating activities. JP/HRO provided demolition and rubble removal services targeting homes and other buildings that were classified as “red” or requiring demolition, as per the Haitian Ministry of Public Works, Transport and Communications (MTPTC) standards. Through this project, more than 108,000 cubic meters of rubble were cleared (the equivilent of about 40 olympic-sized swimming pools of rubble). 3,204 people received temporary employment through this project. Additionally, 238 households (1,190 people) received rubble removal services from their home, making their homes safer to inhabit. With funding from the American Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity distributed 14,040 kits (benefitting approximately 70,200 people). The kits enabled beneficiaries to either construct a new shelter or make repairs to an existing shelter. Additional kits were pre-positioned for use in future disaster responses. As per Global Shelter Cluster strategy and per humanitarian specifications, each kit contained the following components: two 5-gallon buckets, two tarpaulins, rope, wire, nails, duct tape, a hammer, a pry bar, two chisels, pliers, 10 dust masks, leather work gloves, safety glasses, a hacksaw with two replacement blades, and a folding knife. The Pan-American Development Foundation (PADF) Ayiti Initiative on Reconstruction (REPAIR) project repaired and rehabilitated 4,018 yellow-tagged, earthquake-damaged homes in Port-auPrince benefitting 20,090 people. The REPAIR project worked through small local contractors from the areas where the yellow houses are located and trained more than 900 builders, masons and small contractors to use improved construction techniques and home repair methodologies. Houses repaired under the PADF program are tagged and certified as compliant with the Haitian Government’s yellow house repair guidelines. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners Partnership Amount Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date Start date End date Partners MG&F Rate Description At a Red Cross Red Crescent Movement level, 13,000 families (65,000 beneficiaries) were targeted for relocation assistance of which the American Red Cross funded the relocation of 5,347 of these families (26,735 people). This pledge covered 2049 HHs served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince (10,245 people). IFRC 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 1-Nov-11 28-Feb-13 6.5 IFRC 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 1-Sep-12 31-Dec-13 6.5 This pledge covered 2,067 (10,335 people) households served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince. IFRC 2,400,000 2,400,000 2,400,000 1-Jan-13 31-Mar-14 6.5 This pledge covered 1,231 households (6,155 people) served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince. IFRC 10,780,604 10,780,604 10,780,604 2010 2014 6.5 UNOPS 6,592,827 6,592,827 6,592,827 15-Aug-10 30-Nov-11 8.0 HFH 6,403,043 6,403,043 6,403,043 1-Sep-10 31-Dec-11 10.0 ACTED HI 5,864,754 5,077,953 5,864,754 5,077,953 5,864,754 5,077,953 1-Jul-10 14-Aug-10 31-Dec-12 31-Dec-11 6 8.3 7.0 The support from the American Red Cross contributed to the transitional shelter component of the IFRC Shelter Program including the purchase and distribution of shelter tool kits, construction materials and supplies which included tarpaulins, plywood sheets, hurricane tarps, paint, sand, gravel, tools, subcontractor labor charges, shelter concrete blocks and latrines and their associated costs to mount the operation. The three projects specifically supported by the American Red Cross contribution include the construction of transitional shelter units in the Annex de la Mairie, La Piste and Saint Marc sites. Also, American Red Cross funding contributed to the cash vouchers project for t-shelter recipients to increase the purchasing power and equip earthquake affected families with critical household items. UNOPS constructed 1,500 transitional homes (benefitting 7,500 people) each with a rainwater catchment system, and 606 latrines. Habitat for Humanity built 1,500 upgradable t-shelters (benefitting 7,500 people) each with a structural foundation and a rain catchment system, plus 1,341 grey water systems, 409 hand washing stations, 375 latrines (designed for four families each), 10 new water points, 8 hand pumps and rehabilitated one well. ACTED constructed 1,700 transitional homes (benfitting 8,500 people) each with a rainwater catchment system, and 1,032 latrines. ACTED distributed mosquito nets and lifestraw filters to 1,677 households. Disaster Risk Reduction activities included participatory natural disaster vulnerability identification, and assessments and risks mapping at the community level. Hygiene promotion training consisted of training of Community Hygiene Promoters (CHP). Handicap International built 1,000 shelters (971 t-shelters built plus 29 t-shelters for classroom use). 599 latrines were built (567 latrines for shelters plus 32 latrines for classrooms). Among the 971 beneficiary households, 919 households benefited from WASH activities (latrines and hygiene promotion), 1,537 pupils benefited from 16 communitarian buildings (school classrooms) and 32 latrines. In total, 4,855 people benefitted from the t-shelters. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners HAVEN Partnership Amount 2,686,164 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 2,686,164 2,686,164 Start date End date Partners MG&F Rate 1-Jul-10 31-Jul-11 0.0 7 Description Haven constructed 499 homes (benefiting 2,495 people) each with rainwater harvesting units, and 189 latrines. The project also included hygiene promotion activities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners FRC SpRC SRC FULLER GTG Phase I ICRC Total - Shelter Partnership Amount 201,591 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 201,591 201,591 Start date 1-Apr-11 End date 30-Sep-11 Partners MG&F Rate 7.0 2,881,250 2,881,250 2,881,250 1-Jan-11 30-Jun-12 0.0 802,697 802,123 802,123 1-Jul-11 30-Sep-12 5.0 48,000 47,838 48,000 47,838 48,000 47,838 236,988 236,988 236,988 104,099,968 97,388,987 90,298,529 18-Jun-12 7-Nov-13 2010 29-Jul-12 31-Jan-14 2010 8 7.0 0.0 6.5 Description The French Red Cross improved the sustainability of transitional homes by giving 1,425 vulnerable displaced families (7,125 people) vouchers valued at 6,000 GDES (roughly US$150) to be used to purchase a paint kit. Painting the homes helped them better withstand inclement weather, thus making them more durable. To meet the longer term housing needs of those displaced by the earthquake, the Spanish Red Cross upgraded 4,427 transitional shelters (benefitting 22,135 people) into permanent homes and constructed 1,500 latrines. Community members in Leogane were involved in the construction process, learning skills they could apply to future jobs. Through the American Red Cross partnership with the Swiss Red Cross, 599 homes (benefitting 2,995 people) were upgraded. All shelters were provided with a 400 gallon water tank for rain catchment. The American Red Cross contributed funds to support the Fuller Center's effort to help earthquake victims improve their own lives by providing shelter in healthy, holistic communities. Specific objectives included creating permanent multi-family housing units, fostering a sustainable community environment and providing industry and business opportunities for community members. Six housing units were built benefiting a total of 30 people. The goal of this project through Global Therapy Group was to provide disabled individuals access to appropriate rehabilitation services, improving their functional ability and their integration into all aspects of Haitian life. Funding covered the construction of one physical therapy rehabilitation clinic in Port-au-Prince. This is one of eight CIF grants. Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships Partnership Amount ARC Partners Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date Start date End date Partners MG&F Rate Description Health (Excluding Cholera) CRC HRC MAEC IRC 10,000,000 2,343,091 150,000 5,033,223 2,296,000 136,203 WRITTEN WRITTEN APPROVAL APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO REQUIRED PRIOR DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE 5,204,601 2,022,042 122,725 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 1-Aug-12 1-Jan-11 15-Aug-14 31-Dec-15 30-Jun-15 14-Aug-15 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 10.0 5.0 5.0 This project co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross aimed to reduce the incidence of HIV among the most at-risk populations and in settings characterized by high-risk behaviors in 12 locations in Haiti. The project reached 333,010 people. Maison-L'Arc-en-Ciel (MAEC) is an organization dedicated to working with vulnerable children affected by HIV/AIDS. The goal of this project is to be instrumental in the survival and vulnerability reduction of orphan children, youth and young adults affected by or infected with HIV/AIDS through reintegration of young people of age 18 and above, admission of new residents, and psycho-social and medical services. This project serves 80 to 100 people at a time, including at-risk children and youth and their families or foster homes. This is one of eight CIF grants. The goal of this project is to reduce the incidence and mitigate the consequences of gender-based violence (GBV) in Port-au-Prince by addressing the needs of survivors and by empowering women and girls to participate more actively in Haitian society. This partnership with the International Rescue Committee (IRC) is increasing the capacity of local and community-based organizations WRITTEN that already provide valuable services, conducts ongoing needs assessments and trainings with APPROVAL these organizations, and develops an adolescent girls program. The program is also helping create REQUIRED financial opportunities for women and to promote women's decision-making ability through PRIOR TO empowerment and dialogue both within the home and community. The project has directly reached DISCLOSURE 8,500 people that participated in the trainings. UNF 1,050,000 1,050,000 1,050,000 23-Jun-14 22-Jun-15 0.0 HRC 357,369 - - 15-Nov-14 30-Jun-16 5.0 9 The American Red Cross is supporting the Canadian Red Cross to improve access to health services in the South-East Department of Haiti by contributing significant funds required for the reconstruction of St. Michel Hospital in Jacmel. The hospital is the only hospital in the South-East Department. The target population to be reached is 560,000. The American Red Cross is partnering with the United Nations Foundation (UNF) and the Haitian Red Cross (HRC) to support for the forthcoming Haiti Measles & Rubella vaccination campaign to reduce measles mortality and to expand implementation of supplementary immunization activities (SIAs) for measles vaccinations in Haiti, with the goal of reaching 1,050,000 children under the age of 5. Vaccinations have been procured by UNF while the HRC will carry out the social mobilization component of the program. The campaign was initially scheduled to take place in May 2015, but has now been postponed to 2016. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners Medishare PIH Partnership Amount 8,673,672 5,500,000 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 8,673,672 5,500,000 8,673,672 5,500,000 Start date 1-Oct-10 11-Nov-11 End date 31-Dec-12 31-Dec-12 10 Partners MG&F Rate 0.0 10.0 Description The American Red Cross supported critical operating expenses, payroll and administrative fees for the Bernard Mevs Hospital Project Medishare Critical Care Trauma and Rehabilitation Program in Port-au-Prince. The hospital operates 24/7 for the general public, providing the only critical care and trauma services for all of Haiti. The American Red Cross supported the hospital for 27 months from October 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012, employing over 200 Haitian staff (40 Haitian nurses, 22 Haitian physicians and 150 allied healthcare professionals and Haitian support staff), supported by 10 full-time international mentors and 50 volunteers that provided specialized training. The American Red Cross supported Partners in Health (PIH) in the construction, equipping and opening of a national state of the art teaching hospital in Mirebalais. The direct number of people anticipated to be served by this project is 160,000 (catchment area for primary/secondary care) and the indirect number of people anticipated to be served by the project is 3.3 million people (catchment area for tertiary care).The hospital has more than 300 beds. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners GRC PIH ICRC St. Boniface Foundation Partnership Amount 3,606,927 2,558,386 1,366,340 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 3,606,927 2,558,386 1,366,340 3,606,927 2,558,386 1,366,340 Start date 31-Aug-10 12-Jan-10 1-May-10 End date 31-Dec-13 28-Feb-11 31-Dec-12 Partners MG&F Rate 7.0 10.0 0.0 100,000 99,547 99,547 31-Jan-14 31-Jul-14 5.0 UNF UNF 2,000,000 374,500 2,000,000 374,500 2,000,000 374,500 2-Mar-12 2-Feb-10 31-Dec-12 31-Dec-10 7.0 0.0 HRC 82,785 82,785 82,785 15-Oct-12 14-Feb-13 0.0 11 Description The American Red Cross supported the German Red Cross for the operation of a field hospital located in Carrefour, just outside of Port-au-Prince. The field hospital opened immediately after the earthquake and continued to provide free medical services through the end of December 2010, treating over 70,000 patients. The hospital provided both fixed and mobile health services, as well as training for volunteers to provide psychosocial support and community health and hygiene promotion. In addition to supporting the operation of the hospital and the salaries of the staff, the American Red Cross also provided support to rehabilitate the soccer field that housed the hospital once the field hospital was closed. In the aftermath of the earthquake, the American Red Cross, through Partners in Health, provided operational support for Haiti's University Hospital (HUEH), the largest public hospital in Haiti. For the months between July 2010 and February 2011, PIH disbursed $3,284,914 to HUEH to pay supplementary compensation to its 1,440 Haitian staff. The American Red Cross reimbursed $2,077,266 of these costs (for the months July 2010 and November 2010 – February 2011), and provided nearly $500,000 for equipment and supply expenses, and support for other services for the hospital. Injuries from the earthquake resulted in the loss of limbs for more than 5,000 survivors. With support from the American Red Cross, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) rebuilt a prosthetic and physical rehabilitation center, Klinik Kay Kapab, run by the Haitian NGO Healing Hands for Haiti. The ICRC also provided technical assistance for the center to be able to create prosthetic devices for 1,000 people and provide rehabilitation services for 3,000 people. Via the St. Boniface Foundation, this project provided improved health care to a large population center whose clinic was destroyed in the earthquake. The construction of the clinic was funded by the Spanish Red Cross while funding from the American Red Cross was utilized to outfit the clinic with essential medical equipment. This is one of eight CIF grants. The American Red Cross supported a rapid vaccination in camps post-earthquake in Haiti in 2010 and the multi-agency coordinated measles vaccination campaign in April 2012 led by the United Nation's Foundation as well as associated social mobilization activities carried out by the Haitian Red Cross. The national coverage reached through the 2012 campaign was 92.4% (n=2,963,911 children vaccinated) for OPV and 94.6% (n= 3,069,396 children vaccinated) for MR vaccine. Additionally, 1.2 million units of vitamin A and 1.3 million units of albendozale (antiparasitic drug) were administered. Rapid Monitoring Coverage following the campaign conducted in all departments indicated that national coverage reached was more than 95%. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners HOPE HRC ICRC IFRC Total - Health (Excluding Cholera) Partnership Amount 9,041 91,498 369,903 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date Start date End date Partners MG&F Rate 9,041 2-Jun-12 31-Dec-12 0.0 91,498 369,903 9,041 91,498 369,903 1,954,319 1,954,319 1,954,319 40,587,831 35,202,344 35,086,286 9-Jul-14 2010 2010 8-Jan-15 2010 2012 12 0.0 6.5 6.5 Description Through funding provided by the Belizean Grove Foundation, the American Red Cross in partnership with HOPE, helped provide mobile medical services to 3,200 individuals. In December 2013, the first case of Chikungunya was reported in the Caribbean and reached Haiti in early 2014. The objective of this Quick Action Fund (QAF) was to contribute towards eliminating the spread of this disease. Project objectives and activities included enhancing the capacity of the Haitian Ministry of Health to combat Chikungunya, and distributing insecticide mosquito nets, insecticide sprayers, foggers, protective wear and larva killing substances. This is one of five QAFs. Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported provision of preventive, community-level and curative basic health services, hygiene promotion, HIV awareness-raising and psychosocial support to the affected communities as follows: health assessments (access and availability of health services, prevention, health needs and risk of communicable diseases and epidemics), provision of reproductive health kits, medical and surgical supplies, health information, education and support, training of volunteers and staff, reinforcement of HRC capacity to deliver planned HIV program activities with a special emphasis on reaching most vulnerable populations, and vector control. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners Partnership Amount Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date Start date End date Partners MG&F Rate Description Cholera FRC NoRC SRC HRC 1,000,002 500,000 299,663 503,958 590,925 500,000 209,764 240,066 475,213 235,851 66,699 121,293 23-Jun-14 23-Jun-14 23-Jun-14 1-Oct-14 31-Dec-15 31-Dec-15 22-Dec-15 30-Sep-15 13 6.0 6.0 5.0 3.6 This project through the French Red Cross targets 18 communal sections total, with 14 in the West and 4 in Lower Artibonite departments. The project is strengthening the capacities of HRC in support of the efforts of MSPP in prevention, response and communication related to the cholera epidemic. The activities include conducting hygiene promotion activities through HRC volunteers in cholera persistence areas, enhancing the capacities of HRC volunteers at local and regional level by providing materials and adapted trainings, rehabilitation, repairs and installation of water systems and hand washing stations and coordination and epidemiological information sharing between MSPP, DINEPA and HRC. To date, this project has reached 23,690 students and teachers with hygiene promotion activities and sensitized more than 50,000 people to cholera prevention and response. The goal of this project through the Norwegian Red Cross is to contribute to the elimination of cholera in Grande Goave and Petit Goave in the West department. The activities include repairs and rehabilitation of water systems and sanitation facilities, hygiene and health promotion activities; community-based disease surveillance and response to acute watery diarrhea spikes in communities.To date, this project has reached 24,237 people with hygiene promotion activities. The American Red Cross' contribution is part of a larger US$2.7M program being implemented by the Swiss Red Cross in Cormier communal section in the West Department. Activities include setting up and operating a WASH training center in Cormier, constructing a community solar water kiosk in the WASH training center, establishing and training community WASH trainers and the training center management committee, providing training and technical support for household representatives on management and maintenance of community and individual water/sanitation and water treatment and hygiene. The Haitian Red Cross is contributing to the elimination of cholera in the Greater North through sensitization campaigns and distribution of hygiene products. In addition, HRC is carrying out key coordination responsibilities with MSPP on behalf of all Red Cross Movement partners. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners HOPE Oxfam GB IMC CARE FRC Partnership Amount 1,297,152 526,316 1,959,469 1,249,137 989,841 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 1,272,130 526,103 1,959,469 1,249,137 989,841 1,151,317 521,068 1,959,469 1,249,137 989,841 Start date 1-Apr-11 23-Jun-14 15-Jan-11 1-Feb-11 21-Oct-10 End date 30-Jun-16 23-Jun-15 14-Jan-12 31-Oct-11 21-Jul-11 14 Partners MG&F Rate 4.0 5.0 10.0 9.8 10.0 Description The project was initially designed to address the cholera outbreak in the North department. As cholera transitioned to an endemic phase, the American Red Cross has supported HOPE to integrate cholera treatment and prevention programs into their innovative community health model known as “Sante Nan Lokou”. The activities include treatment and prevention activities at the hospital, Cholera Treatment Center (CTC) and community level, including extensive hygiene education and WASH infrastructure improvement. To date, this project has reached 20,994 people with hygiene promotion and 8,544 with cholera support. As the lead organization in the North and Northeast departments for coordinating cholera prevention and response, Oxfam (GB) is targeting 6 localities in 3 communes in the North and 4 localities in 4 communes in the Northeast. The activities include facilitating the inclusion of HRC in cholera response activities through coordination and cluster meetings with key WASH/Health actors, training of 210 HRC team members including volunteers in cholera prevention and response, constructing and rehabilitating 5 WASH facilities in health centers with cholera treatment center, rehabilitating 7 water systems and implementing mass media activities to promote safe sanitation, appropriate domestic water management, food handling and hygiene practices. To date, 6 water systems have been rehabilitated, benefitting 46,936 people. International Medical Corps established Oral Rehydration Posts and Mobile Medical Units, provided needed staff and supplies, trained volunteers to conduct health and hygiene promotion, constructed and rehabilitated latrines and bathing facilities, provided chlorinated water supplies and trained community members on the proper preparation of chlorine solution, established water kiosks, and provided small grants to local organizations to assist them with community-based cholera response projects. 1,189,784 beneficiaries were reached through this project. CARE established Oral Rehydration Points, supported schools with cholera prevention activities, facilitated cholera case management training, ensured water and sanitation support to eight health facilities and prevented the spread of cholera through education and the distribution of critical relief supplies. The project reached 517,326 people. The French Red Cross supported hygiene promotion programs, an ambulance service, the creation of camp hygiene and sanitation committees, disinfection of latrines and public places, cleaning drainage systems, installing and managing Oral Rehydration Posts, chlorinating local water supplies, and distributing soap, chlorine, waste bins and water drums. The French Red Cross also set up a number of Cholera Treatment Units in Port-au-Prince and rehabilitated three primary healthcare centers in Petit Goave. This project reached 403,661 people. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners HRC Partnership Amount 95,934 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 95,934 95,934 Start date 30-Sep-13 End date 30-Apr-14 15 Partners MG&F Rate 0.0 Description This project was part of the closeout plan for the American Red Cross directly implemented Cholera Project. The Haitian Red Cross continued the work in the two project areas by providing surveillance, training and referral services to communities. As part of this project, HRC implemented the following activities: Hygiene and sanitation education and promotion, community engagement and capacity building to address cholera, disease control, and surveillance in collaboration with local health system. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners IFRC Partnership Amount 2,196,767 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 2,196,767 2,196,767 Start date 8-Nov-10 30-Nov-11 End date 30-Sep-11 28-Feb-12 Partners MG&F Rate 7.5 HRC 48,450 48,405 48,405 10-Feb-15 30-Apr-15 0.0 Medishare 45,081 45,081 45,081 28-Oct-10 28-Oct-10 0.0 PAHO PIH PIH WRITTEN WRITTEN APPROVAL APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO REQUIRED PRIOR DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE 136,400 1,025,000 136,400 1,025,000 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 136,400 1,025,000 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 2-Nov-10 2-Nov-10 6-Feb-12 15-Jan-13 16 Description Contributions to the 2010 IFRC Hispaniola Cholera Appeal were specifically earmarked to support immediate needs related to the cholera outbreak in Haiti including the following: Procurement and distribution of soap, oral rehydration salts (ORS), chlorine, cots, protective equipment, cholera kits and other specialized equipment, family hygiene kits and kitchen parcels, training of volunteers in epidemic surveillance and control and hygiene promotion messaging, production and dissemination of communication materials, radio and SMS cholera messaging campaigns, pre-positioning of medical supplies, establishment and maintenance of handwashing points and oral rehydration points, construction of latrines and showers, set-up of Cholera Treatment Centers (CTUs), case management, provision of clean water, periodic microbiological water testing, excreta disposal, solid waste disposal, associated costs to second a Delegate to a Cholera Emergency Response Team as well as a seconded Delegate to mount an Information Management database. On February 5, 2015 when Haiti’s automated blood testing equipment at the National Blood Transfusion Center stopped working, the Haitian Red Cross contacted the American Red Cross to request support to fill the gap in its nation’s blood supply while repairs of the equipment were completed. This component of the project included the purchase of manual blood testing kits. The American Red Cross funded the shipment of 53,310 lbs. of relief items by air through Medishare at the request of the Haitian Ministry of Health to respond to the cholera outbreak. Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) purchased, shipped and stored 1.4 million solutions of Oral Rehydration Salts, 480,000 bags of Ringer Lactate and a variety of other life-saving medicines WRITTEN and medical supplies during the critical early stages of the response. This partnership also enabled APPROVAL PAHO to purchase logistical equipment for their warehouse, implement an online information REQUIRED management system to track stock and medicines available in their warehouse, produce cholera PRIOR TO beds and train Ministry of Health personnel for the transition of the cholera Alert and Response DISCLOSURE System to the Haitian government. 10.0 10.0 Associated costs with shipment of cholera response supplies through Partners in Health. The American Red Cross supported a campaign conducted by Partners in Health and the Haitian organization, GHESKIO, with support from the Haitian Ministry of Health, to reduce cholera deaths in Haiti by introducing the oral cholera vaccination to the country. This pilot project vaccinated 90,000 Haitians against cholera. The pilot was conducted in both an urban area—the Cite de Dieu slum in Port-au-Prince—and a rural area—Bocozel—in the Artibonite river valley. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners SAVE SAVE Total - Cholera Partnership Amount 315,002 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 315,002 315,002 1,499,999 1,499,999 1,499,999 13,688,171 12,900,023 12,132,476 Start date 15-Mar-11 15-Jan-11 End date 31-May-11 14-Sep-11 Partners MG&F Rate 10.0 0.0 Description Save the Children managed Cholera Treatment Units (CTUs), transitioned the CTUs to Oral Rehydration Points (ORPs) with a referral system to CTUs, and conducted cholera preventionfocused hygiene promotion activities in Port-au-Prince. The American Red Cross worked together with the US Agency for International Development's Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) to fund this program. This project reached 117,393 with hygiene promotion and cholera support. Save the Children set up two Cholera Treatment Units and eleven Oral Rehydration Points in rural areas of Leogane, and reached people with health and hygiene promotion activities. The project also distributed relief supplies such as soap and aquatabs.This project reached 37,893 with hygiene promotion and cholera support. Water & Sanitation SOIL UNOPS 600,000 376,344 203,871 375,370 202,855 375,370 10-Nov-14 4-Apr-14 9-Nov-16 3-Jan-15 17 6.0 7.0 The American Red Cross initially partnered with SOIL as a Community Investment Fund (CIF) grantee supporting the scale up of SOIL’s social business model pilot for sustainably providing household sanitation services in northern Haiti (see line 88 for more details). Following successful completion of the project, the partnership was expanded to Port-au-Prince. This current project aims to design and implement a sustainable sanitation service providing dignified sanitation access in impoverished communities in Port-au-Prince that can be scaled-up at minimal expense and has the potential to be sustained long term without external grant funding. Activities include: Latrine construction, upgrading composting waste treatment facility in Truitier Solid Waste Treatment Center, evaluate and improve the potential for independent entrepreneurs to profitably provide sustained service to EkoLakay toilets, and conduct a robust test of a potential private sector solution to Haiti’s sanitation crisis. The project aims to reach 2,200 people as entrepreneurs or beneficiaries of improved sanitation services. Following a request from UCLBP, the American Red Cross supported the UNOPS’s 16/6 initiative. The 16 Neighbourhoods/6 Camps project (16/6) was a government-prioritized initiative to provide an integrated response to the closing of six camps and the resettlement of displaced people.The project aimed to improve the options and quality of life of people returning to their neighborhoods of origin by addressing urgent physical infrastructure and social problems, as identified by the affected communities. Financed by the Haiti Reconstruction Fund, the 16/6 project it was implemented jointly by the Government of Haiti, the International Organization for Migration (IOM), UNDP, the International Labour Organization (ILO) and UNOPS. The ARC-funded portion of the project constructed 350 septic tanks connected to each house constructed under the 16/6 Program, benefitting 1,750 people. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners SOIL IRC CONCERN IMC CRS Partnership Amount 101,700 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 101,700 WRITTEN WRITTEN APPROVAL APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO REQUIRED PRIOR DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE 111,107 1,573,723 3,185,506 111,107 1,573,723 3,185,506 101,700 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 111,107 1,573,723 3,185,506 Start date 20-Feb-14 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 1-Jun-10 15-Dec-10 31-Oct-11 End date 17-Nov-14 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 30-May-11 15-Jan-12 30-Apr-14 18 Partners MG&F Rate 0.0 Description This project focused on the scale-up of SOIL’s pilot model for sustainably providing household sanitation services in Northern Haiti. Activities included expanding the capacity of a composting waste treatment facility and improving facility operations and efficiency, constructing and installing more than 200 household or communal toilets, and converting an existing structure on the SOIL farm into a small Training Center to host workshops and trainings for project beneficiaries on topics such as the use of maintenance of ecological sanitation toilets and hygiene. This project reached a total of 2,078 toilet users exceeding the initial target of 1480 by 598 people. A total of 3,484 people participated in SOIL trainings and educational events in Cap-Haitien and expansions and improvements to SOIL’s waste treatment facility will now enable SOIL to serve a minimum of 1,000 EkoLakay toilets by the end of 2015. This is one of eight CIF grants. This project protected camp residents from cholera and other water-borne diseases. International Rescue Committee (IRC) worked in conjunction with DINEPA and UNICEF to remove waste from WRITTEN latrines in the most vulnerable IDP camps to extend their viability, directly supporting the DINEPA APPROVAL Strategy for Cholera Prevention Action in the camps. The number of camps this project worked in REQUIRED fluctuated as the Government of Haiti's plans for each area shifted. Overall this project directly PRIOR TO served displaced populations of about 42,000 when they were in the highest number of camps, to DISCLOSURE about 25,000 at the lowest number of camps. 10.0 10.0 10.0 The camps that housed many Haitians were often located on marginal land that is prone to flooding. The American Red Cross partnered with Concern Worldwide to address this problem by improving drainage at Place-de-la-Paix camp. Project activities included clearing canals and drainage ditches, relocating shelters, and constructing and backfilling drains with gravel. An estimated 16,000 people benefited from this project. The earthquake damaged much of Port-au-Prince's already limited water and sanitation infrastructure, increasing health concerns for residents living in crowded camps where disease can travel quickly. The American Red Cross partnered with the International Medical Corps to address these concerns by improving access to safe water, clean latrines and bathing facilities. Additional activities included hygiene promotion, trash collection and drainage projects such as canal clearing. This project reached 35,656 people directly in the Port-au-Prince metropolitan area. When the earthquake struck, it all but halted already limited sanitation services such as trash pickup and sewage disposal, leaving waste piled up in market areas and camps. The aim of this program through Catholic Relief Services was to improve hygiene and solid waste disposal in Metropolitan Port-au-Prince. This project served 248,745 people over a period of 34 months. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners IRC American Refugee Committee IFRC Partnership Amount Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date WRITTEN WRITTEN APPROVAL APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO REQUIRED PRIOR DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE 2,762,180 17,624,764 2,761,492 17,624,764 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 2,761,492 17,624,764 Start date WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 1-Nov-10 2010 End date WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 31-Jan-12 2014 19 Partners MG&F Rate Description The earthquake damaged much of Port-au-Prince’s already limited water and sanitation infrastructure, increasing health concerns for residents living in crowded camps where disease can WRITTEN travel quickly. In partnership with the International Rescue Committee, the American Red Cross APPROVAL helped to address these concerns by providing safe water, clean latrines, hygiene promotion, trash REQUIRED collection and drainage interventions such as ditch digging and canal clearing. This project reached PRIOR TO 58,850 beneficiaries in camps and neighboring communities of Port-au-Prince. DISCLOSURE 0.0 6.5 American Refugee Committee provided safe water, clean latrines, bathing facilities and hand washing stations in addition to hygiene promotion and drainage activities such as ditch digging and canal clearing. This project aimed to reduce risk of waterborne and vector-borne disease in spontaneous settlements and their peripheries in Port-au-Prince (PAP), and in areas where American Red Cross partners constructed transitional shelters. Services included hygiene promotion and improvements to basic water supply, increased access to safe water and latrines, excreta disposal, drainage, and trash collection.113,138 people were reached with hygiene promotion, and 11,280 people are benefitting from new or rehabilitated water systems or sanitation facilities. To stem the risk of waterborne and water related diseases American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported the following: provision of safe water, adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion, coordination of Movement water and sanitation activities, deployment of Water and Sanitation Emergency Relief Unit (ERU), provision of water through the ERU Water and Sanitation deployment, rapid emergency needs and capacity assessments, periodic microbiological water testing, distribution of water and sanitation relief supplies (household water, treatment, jerry cans, buckets, etc.) and training on use of items, mobilization of HRC volunteers to carry out hygiene promotion activities during distributions, contribution toward the construction of first liquid waste treatment center in the country (Mont-a-Cabrit), re-establishment of water supply where possible through rehabilitation of water supply infrastructure, construction and rehabilitation of sanitation infrastructure, vector control and prevention measures, waste disposal measures, drainage measures, training of community-based HRC volunteers on participatory hygiene, provision of printed communication materials (posters, flyers, manuals, educational materials, etc.) and other supplies to be used in the hygiene promotion activities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners ICRC Total - Water & Sanitation Partnership Amount Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 28,632 28,632 28,632 26,363,956 25,966,165 25,965,149 Start date 2010 End date 2010 Partners MG&F Rate 6.5 Description Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Livelihoods CECI USAID PADF 2,999,837 2,500,000 2,000,000 461,232 2,500,000 653,923 124,110 2,500,000 (Obligated) 387,061 1-Dec-14 19-Aug-13 1-Nov-14 30-Nov-17 30-Jun-16 30-Jun-17 20 9.0 0.0 10.0 The American Red Cross is funding the Centre for International Studies and Cooperation (CECI) to carry out a project that seeks to develop and strengthen livelihoods opportunities of 1000 women and men, primarily youth in Carrefour-Feuilles through vocational training and micro-enterprise development. This component of the American Red Cross / USAID partnership seeks to enhance employable skills and income generation, increase the number of women and men in Canaan able to secure stable employment and increase income generation viability of Canaan-based small and medium enterprises. This program will target people living in Canaan, an area of over 100,000 residents. This partnership with the Pan American Development Fund (PADF) seeks to enhance food security and contribute to more sustainable and resilient livelihoods for rural women and men in the Northwest Department of Haiti.The project seeks to train 880 farmers in various agricultural practices and productions, establish 1200 bio-intensive gardens, train 100 farmers on disaster resilient agriculture techniques, distribute 500 livestock packages to farmers, train 500 breeders/farmers in livestock methods, and establish 4 agricultural processing centers. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners VIVA RIO FONKOZE IOM Partnership Amount 101,053 8,227,141 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 101,053 8,227,141 WRITTEN WRITTEN APPROVAL APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO REQUIRED PRIOR DISCLOSURE TO DISCLOSURE 54,432 8,227,141 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE Start date 24-Jun-14 1-Mar-10 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE End date 15-Jun-15 31-Dec-11 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 21 Partners MG&F Rate 5.0 5.0 Description Viva Rio is a Brazilian community-based non-profit organization, which began work in Haiti in 2004 following an invitation from the United Nations. What began as a simple consultancy in Haiti has become today an efficient operation working with youth in some of the toughest neighborhoods in the Haitian capital. With support from the American Red Cross, Viva Rio is seeking to strengthen youth leadership and decrease violence through sports (capoeira) in the Carrefour-Feuilles Neighborhood. This is one of eight CIF grants. The American Red Cross partnered with Fonkoze, Haiti's largest microfinance institute, to provide microfinance grants and loans to reach 255,460 people, including female heads-of-households, business owners and families hosting displaced Haitians. Following the January 2010 earthquake, many displaced survivors left Port-au-Prince for other areas of Haiti, often overwhelming local services in these regions and depleting the already overstretched resources of their host families. To help reduce the burden faced by areas hosting displaced Haitians, the American Red Cross partnered with the International Organization for WRITTEN Migration (IOM) to help 20,719 people through a work program which, by supporting livelihoods, APPROVAL reduced pressure on host community resources. Activities included building or rehabilitating small REQUIRED water canals, conducting soil stabilization and expanding access to water in general. The project PRIOR TO also distributed basic household goods and/or shelter kits to 7,500 host families and provided DISCLOSURE additional indirect community benefits from disaster risk reduction and mitigation projects. IOM trained health promoters to educate people in host family communities about cholera prevention. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners Partnership Amount Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date Start date End date Partners MG&F Rate MC 4,850,155 4,850,155 4,850,155 1-Jul-10 30-Jun-11 10.0 DRC 1,500,928 1,500,928 1,500,928 1-Nov-10 31-Aug-11 5.0 MC 1,200,968 1,200,968 1,200,968 1-Jul-10 30-Jun-11 10.0 HELP IFRC Total - Livelihoods 117,256 117,256 117,256 99,110 99,110 99,110 23,596,448 19,711,766 19,061,161 20-Feb-14 2010 19-Feb-15 2012 5.0 6.5 Description Mercy Corps provided support to host families and reached a total of 82,963 beneficiaries by providing vouchers to purchase basic household goods from local vendors. Some of these people also benefitted from income generating activities, and the program also included hygiene promotion and disaster preparedness education. The Danish Red Cross helped displaced families in Les Cayes arrondissement by providing vouchers to cover school fees for 1,850 children as well as livelihoods grants for 2,000 families who host displaced children. Mercy Corps employed 8,700 people to complete small cash-for-work projects that removed rubble, dug drainage canals, recycled rubble to make building materials, cleaned up debris and renovated roads. HELP is the largest university scholarship program in Haiti. Through American Red Cross funding, HELP supported 167 straight-A students from all over Haiti to access university and also connect students with employment opportunities. This is one of eight CIF grants. American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported delivery of livelihood substitution activities such as cash-for-work for debris clearing, delivery of livelihoods / income substitution activities such as unconditional cash grants, support for community-led livelihood restoration activities through the provision of productive assets, tools, waste removal, and quick impact projects providing short-term livelihoods opportunities. Disaster Preparedness HRC 4,437,666 3,556,240 2,433,040 1-May-13 31-May-16 0.0 PADF 1,200,000 451,275 82,592 2-Feb-15 2-May-16 10.0 HRC 9,000,000 955,930 955,930 2010 30-Jun-19 22 0.0 The overall goal of “Gran No Pi Djamn” Program is for targeted communities in the North of Haiti to have increased resilience, stronger capacity, and reduced exposure to external shocks. A key component of this integrated program is to build the capacity of the Haitian Red Cross in three departments (Northeast, North and Northwest) through a multi-sectoral approach. The program targets 10 communal sections in the Greater North. This program is co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross in partnership with the Pan American Development Fund (PADF), the latter is responsible for upgrading up to 19 evacuation shelters. The aftermath of the devastating January 2010 earthquake significantly impacted the Haitian Red Cross' infrastructure and operations. As part of the American Red Cross strategy and as the earthquake recovery efforts scale down and partners begin to exit, the goal of this program is to help the Haitian Red Cross in its organizational development as auxiliary to GoH for disaster response, to facilitate Haitian Red Cross's proper planning and institutional development and to strengthen the Haitian Red Cross' central/HQ and Regional Branch capacity development planning for future years. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners IFRC HRC HRC WWF WWF Total - Disaster Preparedness Partnership Amount 4,393,956 150,000 25,450 35,000 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 4,393,956 147,266 25,450 34,210 4,393,956 147,266 25,450 34,210 208,902 155,258 155,258 19,450,974 9,719,585 8,227,702 Start date 2010 1-Jun-13 6-Jan-14 11-Apr-11 10-Oct-12 End date 2014 31-Dec-13 15-May-14 18-Jun-11 30-Sep-14 23 Partners MG&F Rate 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 Description American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported: establishment of early warning systems, community emergency evacuation and contingency plans, community emergency response teams, pre-positioning of emergency stocks, procurement and distribution of emergency equipment kits, training of volunteers and regional and local Red Cross committees in disaster preparedness. Also, the American Red Cross contributed to the purchase of relief supplies for Sandy affected individuals. In addition, as a learning organization, ARC contributed to two Movement-wide learning events. The Kouri Di Vwazan'w (KDV) project contributed to disaster risk reduction (DRR) of the Haitian population through the strengthening of the Haitian Red Cross' chapter capacities. More specifically the project sought to strengthen chapter capacities through continued training of DRR regional focal points, KDV instructors and volunteers and conducting awareness and education campaigns at community level. In September 2013, the Constitutional Court of the Dominican Republic ruled that many Dominicans of Haitian descent and officially registered as Dominican citizens at birth no longer met the criteria for Dominican nationality. As a result, a great number of people were repatriated into Haiti at the Haitian/Dominican border. This Quick Action Fund (QAF) assisted the Haitian Red Cross to scale-up operations at the border to provide timely assistance to the influx of returnees and/or the displaced by supporting the Haitian government in the provision of medical care, psychosocial support, provision of clean water and essential non-food items. This is one of five QAFs. In order to reduce future risk and vulnerability and maximize American Red Cross Haiti Assistance Program long term outcomes for shelter, water and sanitation, livelihoods and disaster risk reduction programs, World Wildlife Fund (WWF) conducted an in country situational analysis to identify specific ARC and external partner needs and finalize a project design and strategy to be jointly implemented by WWF and ARC. The goal of the Haiti Green Recovery Partnership was to mainstream environmental sustainability in American Red Cross implemented projects and to reduce risk and vulnerability for project beneficiaries by minimizing, mitigating or eliminating environmental degradation. The technical assistance from World Wildlife Fund supported and enhanced consideration and inclusion of environmental components in the American Red Cross' integrated programming approach for both LAMIKA and Gran No Pi Djamn. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners Grand Total - All Projects Notes: Partnership Amount 267,864,388 Amount Transferred to Partners Spent Partners to date to date 240,965,910 Start date End date Partners MG&F Rate 230,848,344 1. The "cut-off" date for the financial information for "Amount Transferred to Partners to Date" and "Partners Total Spent To Date" is FY15Q4- June 2015. 24 Description Attachment H: July 22, 2015 response July 22, 2015 Below the American Red Cross offers responses to the 17 questions posed in the July 8, 2015, letter from Chairman Charles Grassley. 1. Please provide the exact amount that was raised by the Red Cross for the Haiti relief effort and the exact amount that was spent. The American Red Cross actual spend as of June 30, 2015 is $400,503,814, actual revenue raised is $487,640,757. 2. For each year after the Haiti earthquake, please provide a list of organizations that the Red Cross partnered with on projects, subcontracted with, provided grants to, and similar associations related to the Haiti relief effort. In addition, for each organization please describe the purpose of the Red Cross associating with them, the amount of money transferred to them by the Red Cross and the amount of money actually spent by those organizations. The attached spreadsheet provides the requested information. 3. For each year after the Haiti earthquake, please provide a list of all Red Cross managed projects and projects that Red Cross funded but did not necessarily manage, a description of the project, the amount of money budgeted for each project as well as the amount actually spent, and the number of people assisted by the respective projects. The attached spreadsheet provides the requested information. It is important to point out that the American Red Cross manages all of our projects in Haiti, including projects on which we partner with other organizations to jointly implement. 4. For each project covered in question two and three, please describe the criteria used to determine that an individual was successfully assisted. The American Red Cross, like all non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working in disaster response and recovery operations, cares for people affected by the disaster in a variety of ways. We use the term “beneficiary” to refer to individuals who have received varying types and levels of assistance. In the immediate response to any disaster, the American Red Cross focuses on people’s most pressing needs, including shelter from the elements, adequate food and clean water, and vital medical attention. A successfully reached beneficiary during this phase would be someone who received a relief item or a service, such as a tarp, food, a vaccine, a cash grant, etc. As the priorities in Haiti shifted from meeting these immediate needs to helping Haitians become safer, healthier and better prepared for the long-term, the American Red Cross began serving beneficiaries in different ways. How someone benefits from the work of American Red Cross during this recovery period is, therefore, much more varied. A beneficiary might receive medical care in a cholera treatment center, be trained in safe home construction techniques, or participate in a business skills workshop. We start with a broad goal, such as improving a community’s ability to prevent and treat cholera, and break it down into specific and measurable objectives. Using indicators, such as the number of people receiving soap, buckets, educational presentations, and oral rehydration packets, as part of a cholera awareness and prevention program, we can monitor our progress toward that project’s goal by comparing how many people we served to how many people we had initially planned on reaching. American Red Cross’ approach to counting the number of people reached is that if there is uncertainty about whether a group of people received more than one service, it is better to be conservative and reliable in reporting even if it means under-reporting our impact. For example, if 10 people were reached with water and 15 people were reached with upgraded homes and the people were living in the same location, we would only count 15 people reached. This is because it is likely that the 10 people who received water were also home owners. However, if we can be sure that these groups of people are separate, we will add the figures and count 25 people reached. If a project is funded by the American Red Cross but implemented by a partner organization, the partner is responsible according to our contractual agreements for this reporting. As part of the project approval process with partners, our team works with the partner to create indicators that can best measure progress toward the goal. During regular intervals—typically quarterly—the partner submits an indicator tracking table which reports this information. A successfully reached beneficiary is someone who has been reported by our partner as receiving a good, service, training, or whatever the project’s deliverable may be. To ensure that these counts represent only successfully reached individuals, we use several monitoring and evaluation approaches during the project design, implementation and after the project has closed. These include third party or internal evaluations, beneficiary surveys, community meetings, and other methods. For example, when mosquito nets were distributed to help prevent the spread of malaria, teams went door-to-door afterwards to speak directly with residents and observe net usage rates. 5. How many permanent homes have been built in Haiti by the Red Cross since the program was first announced? Your question asks how many permanent homes have been “built,” but providing permanent homes can be achieved in a number of ways including repair, retrofitting, rental subsidy, and transitional shelters. In our research and planning we concluded that these housing solutions were the best fit for those we are assisting, and we would be able to increase the scope of our coverage through these approaches. Through repair, retrofitting, rental subsidy, and transitional shelters, we can provide safe and durable housing far more quickly and more cost effectively to far more people living underneath tarps and tents than can be done by building new homes. As noted in a recent GAO study of USAID’s new housing program (GAO-13-55; June 2013), USAID’s development of new housing settlements in Haiti “has been more costly and slower than expected; sustainability challenges remain”. Indeed, in a report to Congress from the Office of the Haiti Special Coordinator dated February 1, 2015, the State Department informed the Congress that “[w]ith experience, we have learned that this approach [i.e., construction of permanent homes on new settlement sites] is neither cost effective, nor sufficient to reach the intended number of beneficiaries.” http://www.state.gov/s/hsc/rpt/238650.htm. Through repair, retrofit, rental subsidy, transitional shelter and other programs, we have committed $173 million to provide homes so far to over 130,000 people in Haiti, and our work to provide permanent homes to displaced people is ongoing. We have also invested heavily in rubble removal, neighborhood renovation, camp formalization, and emerging settlement support, helping make communities safer and more livable. All of this has been done while facing the enormous challenges all organizations have faced in Haiti. As noted in the GAO report and numerous media articles, land tenure issues have affected a number of housing projects. The Government of Haiti – which has seen two Presidents and five Prime Ministers since the 2010 earthquake -- formally established a housing and public construction agency in July 2012, critical for coordination of sustainable investment in housing. The final National Housing Policy http://uclbp.gouv.ht/download/pnlh-document-officiel-002.pdf was not established until October of 2013. Regardless, we planned our efforts in housing focused on our mandate to help as many people as possible leave camps and in accordance with the drafts of the National Housing Policy circulated during 2011-2012. Our work through the years and today reflects alignment with the key aspects of this policy. Among the guiding tenets of this policy is the understanding that impacted people want to remain in the neighborhoods they lived in before the earthquake. Even if we found Page 2 of 72 land outside earthquake damaged areas to build new communities, the sustainability issues identified in the GAO report makes it unlikely that people would have lived there long term. Indeed, there are examples of new housing projects that are far from fully occupied. These factors have necessitated nimble and changing plans throughout the past five years. Following is a breakdown of the $173 million spent and committed in the shelter sector: Sub‐sector 1 Cost Shelter Sub‐category Households 2 People Reached to Date Emergency Shelter $34,450,794 Repair/Reinforcement, Retrofit, Relocation, Rental Subsidies & Construction Transitional Shelters $34,319,064 10,843 More than 860,000 people received 3 tarps/tents 54,215 $36,738,000 6,170 30,850 Upgrading/Progressive Shelters $5,360,646 5,026 25,130 Neighborhood renovation/development: Rehabilitating neighborhoods by demolishing homes identified by the Government of Haiti, removing rubble, improving access to water and sanitation and electricity, repairing and retrofitting homes, upgrading and rehabilitating schools, constructing roads, pathways, retention walls, a bridge, and other shared community assets; also providing training to more than 21,000 people ensuring safer home construction. $62,351,360 $173,219,864 21,794 22,039 131,989 (1) Includes 9% for American Red Cross Management, General & Fundraising and program costs. (2) The American Red Cross uses a multiplier of five people to estimate the average size of a typical Haitian household. (3) This figure is not included in the 132,000 shelter beneficiary count reflected in the Haiti Assistance Program Five‐Year Update published in January 2015. 6. Of the nearly half a billion dollars raised for the Haiti rebuilding effort, how much money was spent on Red Cross overhead expenses for each project? Of the money transferred to third parties, how much did the Red Cross charge for managing each third-party project? Management, General and Fundraising (MG&F) costs are not charged by project or to third parties. They are calculated against the total of all programs, such as the Haiti program. Therefore, an NGO awarded grant funding for a particular project will receive 100% of the grant awarded. MG&F expenses average 9 cents of every dollar spent. These costs are defined as expenses not identifiable with a single program but costs indispensable to conduct our activities. They include costs such as information technology systems, fundraising, finance, human resources and communications, to support all program lines including international and the Haiti program. Page 3 of 72 An average of 91 cents of every dollar the Red Cross spends is invested in humanitarian services and programs including disaster relief and recovery. Items such as food, shelter, financial assistance, purchasing supplies, training volunteers, and staff costs needed for the operation are included in our program costs. 7. For organizations that received money from the Red Cross, how much did each charge to overhead? Was the Red Cross aware of the overhead costs charged by other organizations prior to transferring money to them? If not, why not? MG&F rates for partner organizations are provided in the attached chart prepared in response to question 2 above. Please note that our contracts with the great majority of our partners, while permitting us to disclose this information to Congress, do not permit us to disclose the information to the media or donors. For those few partner contracts that do not permit us to disclose the information to Congress, we have requested approval from such partners to disclose the requested information to Congress. Once approval is received, we will provide such information. Yes, the American Red Cross was and is aware of costs charged by other organizations prior to finalizing agreements and transferring money, and we worked to keep those costs as low as possible and certainly well within industry standards. The American Red Cross requires plans and budgets be submitted by partners prior to awarding funds, and these budgets, in order to be approved, must break out costs to be covered by American Red Cross funds. In some cases, we have negotiated with partners to lower their established MG&F rates for our agreements with them. After grant awards are made, American Red Cross requires, per our agreements, careful reviews of financial and narrative reporting, detailing how partners spend our funds. 8. Please describe the criteria used to determine which organizations would receive Red Cross funding. The American Red Cross applies selection criteria to all proposals and appeals that we fund. Our partnerships are primarily established through competitive Request for Proposal (RFP)/Request for Application (RFA) processes. RFP/RFA announcements include specific scopes of work, terms of reference statements, and guidance on how to submit a proposal. The RFP or RFA generally includes standard criteria, terms, and conditions that the institution must accept before receiving a grant from the American Red Cross. Some local partnerships have been established through non-competitive solicitations as well (small grants to local Haitian community-based organizations). These organizations are initially identified because of their strong community ties and innovative approaches for addressing community needs. The American Red Cross has on occasion received and funded unsolicited proposals. However, we do not advertise or post criteria for unsolicited applications. Unsolicited proposals are held to the same standard criteria, terms, and conditions as solicited proposals. Proposals, both solicited and unsolicited, are reviewed and evaluated based on the responsiveness, relevance, appropriateness, and timeliness to requirements laid out in American Red Cross RFAs/RFPs. We review proposals from a technical and financial standpoint using rigorous criteria as set out in the table below: Proposal evaluation criteria 1 Organizational Capacity • Overall organizational capacity to perform the project requirements • Past and present experience in the relevant sector (e.g., health, construction, training) in Haiti • Past and present performance on similar projects • Past and present experience in the proposed project geographical area • Completeness of the applicant’s management plan, including organizational structure Page 4 of 72 2 3 4 Project Feasibility • Project structure and key personnel • Quality of project implementation plan and likelihood for its success in proposed timeframe • Innovative approaches and appropriateness to the Haitian context • Geographic targeting and beneficiary selection • Coordination with other stakeholders • Budget alignment with the programmatic, human resource, and supply requirements of the project Technical Capacity …as applicable to the solicitation: • Experience working with the private and public sectors at the local and national level in Haiti • Experience in community mobilization and participatory methods • Demonstrated experience in capacity building (i.e., coaching, mentoring and transforming community-based organizations and their personnel) • Demonstrated experience identifying and supporting community priorities • Demonstrated experience designing, achieving, analyzing and reporting on industry standard and/or Red Cross required indicators General • Cost efficiency • Quality and completeness of applicant’s monitoring and evaluation plans • Extent to which project proposal identifies and documents processes for accountability to local beneficiaries • Quality and completeness of proposal in addressing crosscutting issues, such as gender, disabilities, and environmental concerns • Ability to leverage other resources, co-financing for the project, and project sustainability or phase-out plans • Strength of quality control and quality assurance procedures 9. Why were only expatriates granted the opportunity to apply for senior-level management positions in Haiti? This statement is not correct. Haitians have always been encouraged to apply for all positions in our Haiti Assistance Program and since the beginning of the program more than 90% of our staff have been Haitian. The American Red Cross has made it a priority to hire Haitians, including retaining a local Human Resources firm to reinforce local recruiting efforts and make sure we were competitive in the recruitment and hiring process. As of February 2015, Haitians held 37 management positions in the delegation. These are positions that manage teams, programs and financial resources. These are all highly skilled team members who are leaders in our operation, among them the Senior Technical Advisors for Disaster Risk Reduction, HIV, and Livelihoods, Head of the Accountability to Beneficiaries team, the Operations Director and Head of HR. The deputy of our LAMIKA community redevelopment program and the Head of Technical Coordination team are internationally recruited Haitians. Finally, the competition to hire professional Haitians with specialties in disaster response and recovery has been high since the earthquake, since both local government and non-profits compete for the same pool of candidates. Despite this fact, we have employed a large number of Haitian managers and staff. Page 5 of 72 10. Why did the Red Cross not heed Ms. St. Fort’s advice in 2011 regarding the internal issues that led to the delay of the Campeche program? We are not aware of information from Ms. St. Fort in 2011 advising of delays in the Campeche program. The LAMIKA program which includes the neighborhood of Campeche began in 2012. Ms. St. Fort’s did raise perceived slow -downs in some other program areas which we did address. To put her concerns into context, it was Ms. St. Fort’s job, as the Director of the Haiti Assistance Program, to evaluate the program, find the places where improvements could be made and fix them. We rely on management, whose job it is to solely focus on Haiti, to keep us informed of their work, and we encourage free and frank communication. 11. After reaching its fundraising goal, why did the Red Cross keep soliciting money, unlike Doctors Without Borders, which ceased fundraising? For a disaster of the scale of the Haiti earthquake, the needs were so great that we could not in good conscience halt donations or imagine at the outset what precise amount of donations would be needed. We are confident that those donations were needed and we spent and committed them well. Indeed, the funds received by the American Red Cross for Haiti, while significant, amount to just approximately 4% of all funds pledged for Haiti following the 2010 earthquake. The American Red Cross has been responding to disasters for over a century and we work as part of the largest humanitarian and disaster relief network globally. In addition, we have extensive experience in conducting international recovery programs, including the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami Recovery Program which is just one of nine international disaster recovery programs conducted by the American Red Cross since Hurricane Mitch in 1998. Unlike Doctors Without Borders, which limits its mission to emergency medical aid, we are not just a disaster response organization. The American Red Cross does direct people to supporting other organizations or other aspects of Red Cross work when we have raised enough money to be able to deliver services. An example of this was the One Fund in Boston. We knew that our service delivery costs after the Boston bombing would be low so we asked people to give to the One Fund. 12. What is the Red Cross’ current timetable for leaving Haiti? Has that timetable changed since the rebuilding effort was first announced? If so, please explain why. The majority of American Red Cross post-earthquake programming will be concluded in 2016, however final commitments in disaster preparedness, livelihoods, and community construction are anticipated to go into 2017. Given the possibility of election-related unrest and the ever present threat of hurricanes, the possibility of extending the program into 2018 cannot be discounted. Even after the last of the earthquake-related funds are expended, we anticipate remaining in Haiti using other funds. In fact, we were present in Haiti for some years prior to, and at the time of, the earthquake supporting health and disaster preparedness programs. Given the challenging post-earthquake context, American Red Cross did not establish a fixed timetable for relief and recovery programming and this decision has proven correct in light of events subsequent to the earthquake such as multiple changes in government, a cholera epidemic, two hurricanes and numerous other storms and external events. The post-disaster situation in Haiti was very unusual and complex, due to the sheer scope of the earthquake’s impact across the entire country, including 1.5 million people who lost their homes. All of this occurred in a country which was extremely challenged prior to the earthquake. This meant that generally expected disaster response timelines, such as a 3-6 month relief phase and a predictable transition period into the recovery phase, were not applicable for this event. In fact, the relief phase extended almost two years. Some relief activities provided by American Red Cross, such as camp sanitation services, continued for longer periods than in other disasters. Page 6 of 72 Given the changing conditions in Haiti, we had to adapt our long term strategy many times over the past five years. For example, housing repair programs from 2011-2012 shifted in 2013 to a retrofitting approach designed to build safe, affordable, rentable space, necessary and appropriate for densely populated Port-au-Prince. Rental subsidy programs, while a good option for thousands of camp families in 2011-2013, later were less viable when the rental market became saturated. The American Red Cross identified different options, including repair and retrofit of homes to meet the changing need. It would have been a mistake on the part of American Red Cross, or for any organization, to establish a fixed set of objectives and timelines in 2010 which would not have sustainably met the needs of earthquake impacted people. 13. Please describe the “wonderful helicopter idea” that was mentioned as a way to spend remainder funds. We do not recall what was meant when that was written in the November 2013 email. The focus of the entire email chain was a discussion of the other options for spending the additional donor funds that were available. This included consideration of adding additional funding to projects that were underway or providing funding for the construction of St. Michel hospital in Jacmel, the only hospital in the Southeast department of Haiti, for which the American Red Cross is providing $10 million. This project is being executed in partnership with the Canadian Red Cross, the Haitian Red Cross, and the Japanese Government. 14. How many whistleblowers contacted the Ombudsman’s Office to provide information regarding the Haiti projects? What types of issues were raised by the whistleblowers and have the disclosures resulted in positive change? Please provide examples. The Ombudsman Office fulfills the role envisioned in House Report 110-87 (March 2007), which accompanied the American National Red Cross Governance Modernization Act of 2007, as a “neutral and impartial dispute resolution center whose major function” is to provide “confidential and informal assistance to the many internal and external constituents with concerns or complaints about the American Red Cross.” The Ombudsman office is thus not authorized to handle “whistleblower” or any other official or formal “complaints” on behalf of the American Red Cross. It is the Red Cross’ Office of Investigations, Compliance and Ethics (ICE) that handles whistleblower contacts. Information on such contacts with ICE regarding the Haiti projects is provided in 14.B below while 14.A discusses contacts received by the Office of the Ombudsman. A. In regard to the Haiti earthquake, the Office of the Ombudsman received 84 constituent contacts in FY10 and FY11. The issues raised by these contacts ranged from concern for Haitians and their needs, requests for help with donating, offers of help, and requests for assistance in contacting family and loved ones. Concerns with donating to the relief efforts included difficulties in making donations using 1-800-RED CROSS, the Red Cross text donation number, or the website. Other callers shared concerns around receiving the appropriate and correct receipts for their donations, or raised questions about how and when the Red Cross would expend donations received to benefit the Haitian people as quickly as possible. Some callers expressed a desire to go to Haiti to assist in relief operations or to make donations of clothing, food or other in-kind materials. In all cases, the Ombudsman Office answered questions, provided information, and referred callers to the appropriate resources, including the Concerned Connection Line (the “Whistleblower” line) and the Public Inquiry Line. Page 7 of 72 B. Below is Whistleblower Hotline Data prepared by ICE. Fiscal Year Whistleblower # Calls Received Whistleblower Calls Substantiated 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016* Total 221 23 8 0 0 8 0 260 77 12 2 0 0 2 0 93 $ Loss of Substantiated Allegations of Fraud 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0** % of Whistleblowers Who Remained Anonymous 50% 75% 80% 0% 0% 50% 0% 64% *Allegation to date in the fiscal year 2016. **The $0 loss reflects that of all the substantiated allegations involving fraudulent activities, neither the American Red Cross nor any associated law enforcement entity could substantiate the financial loss. For example, a caller alleged that a man selling mugs while claiming that the proceeds would go for Haiti Relief was instead using the proceeds for his own purposes. The man was arrested but the caller had not ‘suffered a loss’ because he had not purchased mugs. While the police charged the individual with fraudulent solicitation, no financial loss was proven. Special Note: From January 15, 2010 to June 30, 2010, a total of 214 fraudulent websites were forwarded to the FBI (IC3, Internet Crimes Section) which is not reflected in the hotline statistical information. These fraudulent websites were soliciting monies on behalf of the ‘American Red Cross, the International Red Cross, Haitian Red Cross or the International Federation of Red Cross Societies’, all which were fraudulent. We are unable to substantiate if any perpetrators were arrested as most of the websites originated from overseas. The majority of Whistleblower calls received consisted of these categories: • Fraudulent websites, fundraising • Allegations of misuse of Red Cross brand by partners • Complaints about the Haitian government and the US government • Non-specific allegations about fraud The majority of Whistleblower calls received that were substantiated consisted of these categories: • Fraudulent websites, fundraising out of US • Fraudulent fundraisers in the US • Misuse of Red Cross brand by partners 15. How many Red Cross employees contacted the Ombudsman’s Office to provide information regarding the Haiti projects? What types of issues were raised and have the disclosures resulted in positive change? Please provide examples. Five contacts were made by employees to the Ombudsman office in FY10 and FY11 regarding Haiti and one contact was made by an employee in FY13. The concerns raised consisted of the following: • • that some persons were either hired for or assigned Haiti work based on personal relationships rather than experience; unspecified questions or concerns pertaining to donations to Haiti; Page 8 of 72 • • • that a volunteer’s raising criticism of the Red Cross response could jeopardize his or her ability to continue volunteering with the Red Cross; that, at a chapter, funds intended for the Haiti relief operation had been erroneously placed in a general disaster fund; how the Red Cross is responding to the Haiti earthquake. In each case, the Ombudsman assisted the employee to think through and understand the options for raising and addressing his or her concern, including the Concerned Connection Line or “whistleblower” complaint process. 16. Aside from whistleblowers and employees, what types of complaints were raised by other internal and external constituents? What steps has the Ombudsman taken to provide workable solutions to the problems raised by complaints? All of the contacts made with the Ombudsman office regarding Haiti, including those“[a]side from whistleblowers and employees,” are outlined below. In each case, the Ombudsman described the available resources, including the Concerned Connection Line. FY15* Incomplete. Not all FY15 cases have been entered to date. Internal Fiscal Year Employee Volunteer 2 3 0 1 0 0 6 0 2 1 0 0 0 3 Total FY10 Total FY11 Total FY12 Total FY13 Total FY14 Total FY15 Total Combined FY10 Internal Theme Sub-Theme Clarity on what work RC doing Clarity on where $ going Trouble donating money External General Financial Public Donor 58 11 8 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 72 11 External General Financial Public Donor Total 71 13 1 2 1 4 92 Employee Volunteer General inquiry to how RC responding to Haiti earthquake Concerns with how RC responding 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 4 1 5 Question about funds going to Haiti vs. general disaster fund 1 0 0 0 1 Concern whether $ is going to something other than victims Worried not everyone who is trying to donate can donate 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 2 2 Wanting to confirm donation Trouble getting matching donation from employer 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 Billed more than once for same donation Page 9 of 72 Total Total 92 Total 9 5 10 Questioning why all funds may or may not have gone to Haiti 0 0 0 1 1 Upset that information from donation being used for more solicitations 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 10 0 0 0 3 4 10 3 4 10 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 5 7 1 8 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 1 2 1 5 7 1 8 71 1 2 1 5 7 1 8 71 Concern regarding Haiti that falls outside of RC scope or mission Complaint about timing of financial donation solicitation call Attempting to locate family in Haiti Interested in Haitian adoption Ideas for Haiti response Interested in maintaining a good volunteer who helps with Haiti at Chapter level Praise for RC efforts Vendor wanting to provide services Requesting funding from RC Wanting to donate $ Wanting to donate material items or space Looking to partner with the RC in the response Wanting to volunteer in Haiti Total FY10 FY11 Internal Theme Sub-Theme Clarity on what work RC doing General inquiry to how RC responding to Haiti earthquake Employee Volunteer 0 2 1 1 0 3 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 2 1 2 8 0 0 0 1 2 13 Clarity on General unspecified concerns re: where $ going donations to Haiti Internal Staffing - qualifications of personnel RC assigned to Haiti response related work concerns Concern regarding Haiti that falls outside of RC scope or mission Wanting to donate $ Looking to partner with the RC in the response Total FY11 FY12 Theme Internal Sub-Theme External General Financial Public Donor 0 Total 3 4 External General Financial Public Donor Employee Volunteer 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Concern regarding Haiti that falls outside of RC scope or mission Total FY12 Page 10 of 72 Total FY13 Theme Internal Sub-Theme Employee Volunteer 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 Clarity on what work General inquiry to how RC responding RC doing to Haiti earthquake Concern regarding Haiti that falls outside of RC scope or mission Total FY13 FY14 Theme Internal Sub-Theme Volunteer 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 FY15 Internal Sub-Theme External General Financial Public Donor Total Employee Concern regarding Haiti that falls outside of RC scope or mission Total FY14 Theme External General Financial Public Donor External General Financial Public Donor Total Employee Volunteer 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 4 0 4 Clarity on Concerns about RC Haiti response as what work a result of recent (2015) media RC doing coverage. Wanting more information. Concern regarding Haiti that falls outside of RC scope or mission Total FY15 Total 17. Please provide a copy of the itemized report the Red Cross has submitted to the Secretary of Defense in the past 5 fiscal years. Following are links to the US Army Audit Agency Reports from the past five fiscal years, which are made available to the public on Redcross.org. 2014 http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m43540131_2014_Consolodated_Fi nancial_Statement.pdf http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m43540127_2014_TheAmericanNati onalRedCrossFS.PDF 2013 http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m27440164_2013_USAAA_Review _of_the_Independent_Auditor's_Report.pdf http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m27440163_2013_Consolidated_Fi nancial_Statements_.pdf Page 11 of 72 2012 http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m19544826_2012-USAAAreport.pdf http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m19544869_2012-ConsolidatedFinancial-Statements.pdf 2011 http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m6340461_FY11FinancialStatement .pdf 2010 http://www.redcross.org/images/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m4740081_FY10FinancialStatement .pdf Page 12 of 72 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Partnerships ARC Partners Partnership Amount Emergency Relief WFP IFRC ICRC Amount Transferred to Partners to date Partners Spent to date 30,000,000 30,000,000 30,000,000 6,535,937 6,535,937 6,535,937 3,612,064 3,612,064 3,612,064 Start date End date Partners MG&F Rate 19-Jan-10 31-Dec-10 6.5 2010 2012 6.5 2010 2010 6.5 Total - Emergency Page 13 of 72 Description The American Red Cross funded food rations for over 1 million people and associated distribution costs, primarily to young mothers and children through a partnership with the UN World Food Programme. Contributions to the IFRC Earthquake Appeal covered the purchase of tarps/tents, hygiene kits, non-food items, shipping, transportation and general infrastructure costs to mount these distributions. The American Red Cross also donated nearly 3 million packaged meals for distribution in the early days of the response. These funds also contributed to Base Camp set-up which was the main operational hub in Port-au-Prince in the relief and early recovery phases. The American Red Cross contributed a total of $4,169,518 to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $158,919, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions made by the American Red Cross to the ICRC supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the ICRC mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline service, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps, and supporting the national water board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Relief 40,148,001 40,148,001 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) 40,148,001 Shelter Mercy Corps 2,397,819 1,629,919 1,107,550 8-Nov-13 Page 14 of 72 31-Dec-15 10.0 The primary goal of the LAMIKA program is to enhance community and household resilience through a sustainable and integrated approach that provides healthy, habitable, and improved homes and living conditions. The LAMIKA program, in accordance with the Haitian government's request Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Global Communities 14,800,000 7,485,235 4,794,813 3-Feb-14 2-Jul-15 for organizations to work in urban renewal, is being implemented in Carrefour-Feuilles, a poor residential neighborhood north of downtown Port-au-Prince which sustained extensive damage from the earthquake and is characterized by dense housing, poverty and limited access to safe infrastructure and services. The LAMIKA program conducts activities under three pillars in Social Engagement, Economic Strengthening and Physical Renewal to address needs across multiple sectors. * Pillar I is implemented by the American Red Cross, Pillar II by Mercy Corps and Pillar III by Global Communities. The program targets 48,318 direct beneficiaries residing in 8 neighborhoods of Carrefour Feuilles. To date, the project has achieved the following, among others: 7.1 Pillar I: Eight Community Intervention teams of 20 persons each have been set up, trained and equipped. Members have been trained in 10 modules associated with first aid, search and rescue, disaster risk reduction, and more. 16 distribution points have been established to distribute condoms or Oral Rehydration Salts (ORS), with more than 795,000 condoms and 22,000 ORS packets distributed so far and with corresponding education, outreach and follow-up. More than 32,000 people have been reached with health messaging, and more than 17,000 mosquito nets have been distributed. More than 1,100 people have been trained in first-aid, and more than 11,000 people are benefitting from community action plan activities to better respond to future disasters. Pillar II: 234 enterprises have been selected for support through small loans, 70 VSLA groups with a total of 1,515 members have been created (and they have saved over $48,000), 271 youth have been selected and are undergoing training for jobs preparation. Pillar III: Housing rehabilitation and expansion works are currently in progress to benefit of 500+ families. Approximately 1,500 people will be living within a 100 meter radius of potable water, 10 schools are Page 15 of 72 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Page 16 of 72 receiving major interventions such as structural improvements and improved water and sanitation facilities, 600 meters of new roads will be constructed, and 1,000 saplings will be planted. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) USAID CARE UN-HABITAT Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 2,118,089 1,621,523 1,127,356 Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 19-Aug-13 30-Jun-16 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 1-Dec-13 31-Mar-16 10.0 31-Mar-16 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 1-Apr-14 Page 17 of 72 Canaan is an emerging city north of the metropolitan area of Port-au-Prince, which spontaneously developed following the 2010 earthquake. Over 100,000 people live in Canaan or are currently building in the area. The Government of Haiti estimates that Canaan residents have already invested over $100 million of their own resources in the area. The goal of the program is to provide urban planning assistance, promote safer housing, build capacity of local entities to adopt safer and more sustainable construction, and to build expanded infrastructure services in the zone, including: increased water supply, new community spaces, paved footpaths and key roads, and the establishment of zoning and building regulations. This project with CARE seeks to contribute to the rehabilitation of urban housing and the closure of camps by helping homeowners construct safe rental accommodation, providing camp residents with safer housing, improved access to enhanced sanitation facilities and livelihoods opportunities, and better security to people currently living in damaged structures. To date, 117 households (585 people) have benefited from a settlement or relocation grant, 239 households (1,195 people) have benefited from a relocation program, 325 people have been trained in shelter activities, 387 people have been trained on income generating activites, 275 households (1,375 people) have received livelihoods grants, and 176 badly damaged homes have been repaired (benefitting 880 people). This project through UN-HABITAT is assisting the government bodies (UCLBP and relevant ministries) and municipal authorities build consensus regarding all camp exit strategies. The project seeks to formalize 2 or 3 selected camps, with a target of reaching 1,500 households, through urban integration with the surrounding neighborhood and through provision of support which could include housing support, rental subsidies, access to basic services such as road, water and sanitation networks, or a combination of these options. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) FRC JP/HRO HFH 1,529,698 1,388,033 1,335,146 2,987,830 2,987,830 2,879,866 Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 15-Mar-14 30-Jun-15 7.0 1-Oct-12 30-Nov-14 11.1 31-Mar-11 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 8-Mar-10 Page 18 of 72 In order to reduce camp residents' dependency on humanitarian assistance and decrease displaced households' density in long term camps, this project through the French Red Cross seeks to improve the resilience of the population in several camps by increasing self-management and access to services as well as expanding livelihood opportunities for internally displaced people and their surrounding neighborhoods. To date, this project has reached more than 7,300 people with hygiene promotion, trained 24 people on violence prevention, and trained 48 people on income generating activities. JP/HRO provided demolition and rubble removal services targeting homes and other buildings that were classified as “red” or requiring demolition, as per the Haitian Ministry of Public Works, Transport and Communications (MTPTC) standards. Through this project, more than 108,000 cubic meters of rubble were cleared (the equivilent of about 40 olympic-sized swimming pools of rubble). 3,204 people received temporary employment through this project. Additionally, 238 households (1,190 people) received rubble removal services from their home, making their homes safer to inhabit. With funding from the American Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity distributed 14,040 kits (benefitting approximately 70,200 people).The kits enabled beneficiaries to either construct a new shelter or make repairs to an existing shelter. Additional kits were pre-positioned for use in future disaster responses. Each kit contained the following components: two 5-gallon buckets, two tarpaulins, rope, wire, nails, duct tape, a hammer, a pry bar, two chisels, pliers, 10 dust masks, leather work gloves, safety glasses, a hacksaw with two replacement blades, and a folding knife. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) PADF IFRC IFRC IFRC 10,754,622 10,754,622 10,786,115 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,000,000 13,258,673 13,258,673 13,258,673 15-Aug-11 31-Oct-12 11.0 1-Nov-11 28-Feb-13 6.5 1-Sep-12 31-Dec-13 6.5 2010 2014 6.5 Page 19 of 72 The Pan-American Development Foundation (PADF) Ayiti Initiative on Reconstruction (REPAIR) project repaired and rehabilitated 4,018 yellowtagged, earthquake-damaged homes in Port-auPrince benefitting 20,090 people. The REPAIR project worked through small local contractors from the areas where the yellow houses are located and trained more than 900 builders, masons and small contractors to use improved construction techniques and home repair methodologies. Houses repaired under the PADF program are tagged and certified as compliant with the Haitian Government’s yellow house repair guidelines. At a Red Cross Red Crescent Movement level, of the 13,000 families (65,000 beneficiaries) were targeted for relocation assistance, and the American Red Cross funded the relocation of 5,347 of these families (26,735 people). This pledge covered 2049 HHs served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince (10,245 people). This pledge covered 2,067 (10,335 people) households served by relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince. The support from the American Red Cross contributed to the transitional shelter component of the IFRC Shelter Program including the purchase and distribution of shelter tool kits, construction materials and supplies which included tarpaulins, plywood sheets, hurricane tarps, paint, sand, gravel, tools, subcontractor labor charges, shelter concrete blocks and latrines and their associated costs to mount the operation. The three projects specifically supported by the American Red Cross contribution include the construction of transitional shelter units in the Annex de la Mairie, La Piste and Saint Marc sites. Also, American Red Cross funding contributed to the cash vouchers project for t-shelter recipients to increase the purchasing power and equip earthquake affected families with critical household items. In addition, funds from this pledge covered 1,231 households (6,155 people) served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-auPrince. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) UNOPS HFH ACTED HI HAVEN FRC 6,592,827 6,592,827 6,595,380 6,403,043 6,403,043 6,403,043 5,864,754 5,864,754 6,347,325 5,077,953 5,077,953 5,077,953 2,686,164 2,686,164 2,692,633 201,591 201,591 201,783 15-Aug-10 30-Nov-11 8.0 1-Sep-10 31-Dec-11 10.0 1-Jul-10 31-Dec-12 8.3 14-Aug-10 31-Dec-11 7.0 1-Jul-10 31-Jul-11 0.0 1-Apr-11 30-Sep-11 7.0 Page 20 of 72 UNOPS constructed 1,500 transitional homes (benefitting 7,500 people) each with a rainwater catchment system, and 606 latrines. Habitat for Humanity built 1,500 t-shelters (benefitting 7,500 people) each with a rain catchment system, plus 1341 grey water systems, 409 hand washing stations, 375 latrines (designed for four families each), 10 new water points, 8 hand pumps and rehabilitated one well. ACTED constructed 1,700 transitional homes (benfitting 8,500 people) each with a rainwater catchment system, and 1,032 latrines. ACTED distributed mosquito nets and lifestraw filters to 1,677 households. Disaster Risk Reduction activities included participatory natural disaster vulnerability identification, and assessments and risks mapping at the community level. Hygiene promotion training consisted of training of Community Hygiene Promoters (CHP). Handicap International built 1,000 shelters (971 tshelters built plus 29 t-shelters for classroom use). 599 latrines were built (567 latrines for shelters plus 32 latrines for classrooms). Among the 971 beneficiary households, 919 households benefited from WASH activities (latrines and hygiene promotion), 1,537 pupils benefited from 16 communitarian buildings (school classrooms) and 32 latrines. In total, 4,855 people benefitted from the tshelters. Haven constructed 499 homes (benefiting 2,495 people) each with rainwater harvesting units, and 189 latrines. The project also included hygiene promotion activities. The French Red Cross improved the sustainability of transitional homes by giving 1,425 vulnerable displaced families (7,125 people) vouchers valued at 6,000 GDES (roughly US$150) to be used to purchase a paint kit. Painting the homes helps them better withstand inclement weather, thus making them more durable. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) SpRC SRC FULLER GTG ICRC 2,881,250 2,881,250 2,881,250 802,123 802,123 802,123 48,000 48,000 48,000 47,838 47,838 47,838 158,919 158,919 158,919 1-Jan-11 30-Jun-12 10.0 1-Jul-11 30-Sep-12 10.0 18-Jun-12 29-Jul-12 7.0 7-Nov-13 31-Jan-14 0.0 2010 2010 6.5 Page 21 of 72 To meet the longer term housing needs of those displaced by the earthquake, the Spanish Red Cross upgraded 4,427 transitional shelters (benefitting 22,135 people) into permanent homes and constructed 1,500 latrines. Community members in Leogane were involved in the construction process, learning skills they could apply to future jobs. Through the American Red Cross partnership with the Swiss Red Cross, 599 homes (benefitting 2,995 people) were upgraded. All shelters were provided with a 400 gallon water tank for rain catchment. The American Red Cross contributed funds to support the Fuller Center's effort to help earthquake victims improve their own lives by providing shelter in healthy, holistic communities. Specific objectives included creating permanent multi-family housing units, fostering a sustainable community environment and providing industry and business opportunities for community members. Six housing units were built benefiting a total of 30 people. The goal of this project through Global Therapy Group was to provide disabled individuals access to appropriate rehabilitation services, improving their functional ability and their integration into all aspects of Haitian life. Funding covered the construction of one physical therapy rehabilitation clinic in Port-auPrince. This is one of eight CIF grants. Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $158,919, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Total - Shelter 84,611,193 75,890,297 points and sanitation facilities. 72,545,766 Health (Excluding Cholera) CRC HRC MAEC Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 2,343,091 2,232,000 2,022,042 150,000 136,203 91,133 1-Aug-12 31-Dec-15 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 1-Jan-11 30-Jun-15 0.0 15-Aug-14 14-Aug-15 5.0 Page 22 of 72 The American Red Cross is supporting the Canadian Red Cross to improve access to health services in the South-East Department of Haiti by contributing significant funds required for the reconstruction of St. Michel Hospital in Jacmel. The hospital is the only hospital in the South-East Department. The target population to be reached is 560,000. This project co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross aims to reduce the incidence of HIV among the most at-risk populations and in settings characterized by high-risk behaviors in 12 locations in Haiti. The project has reached 333,010 people. Maison-L'Arc-en-Ciel (MAEC) is an organization dedicated to working with vulnerable children affected by HIV/AIDS. The goal of this project is to be instrumental in the survival and vulnerability reduction of orphan children, youth and young adults affected by or infected with HIV/AIDS through reintegration of young people of age 18 and above, admission of new residents, and psycho-social and medical services. This project serves 80 to 100 people at a time, including at-risk children and youth and their families or foster homes. This is one of Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) HRC IRC 1,124,647 545 545 1,868,168 1,631,584 1,497,090 eight CIF grants. 1-Nov-14 30-Apr-17 yet to be determined 15-Oct-12 15-Aug-15 8.9 Page 23 of 72 This program is co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross and seeks to contribute to building resilience in targeted communities in Haiti through improved access to primary health services and availability of trained personnel in 6 geographical departments of Haiti: North, North-East, North-West, West, South and South-East departments. The project, coordinated closely with Government of Haiti's Ministry of Health, will target training and deployment of Polyvalent Community Health Agents (ASCPs) and Haitian Red Cross volunteers – Health (HRCV-H). The project will train and support the deployment of 40 ASCPs in collaboration with MSP, supported by the deployment of 320 (HRCV-Hs) – an average ratio of 1:8 of ASCP to HRCV-H covering a specific geographic area. The total number of people anticipated to be served by the project is 40,000. The goal of this project is to reduce the incidence and mitigate the consequences of gender-based violence (GBV) in Port-au-Prince by addressing the needs of survivors and by empowering women and girls to participate more actively in Haitian society. This partnership with the International Rescue Committee (IRC) is increasing the capacity of local and community-based organizations that already provide valuable services, conducts ongoing needs assessments and trainings with these organizations, and develops an adolescent girls program. The program is also helping create financial opportunities for women and to promote women's decision-making ability through empowerment and dialogue both within the home and community. The project has directly reached 8,500 people that participated in the trainings. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) HRC UNF HRC Medishare PIH 109,100 1,050,000 1,050,000 1,050,000 357,369 8,673,672 8,673,672 8,729,824 Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 8-Oct-14 7-Oct-15 yet to be determined 23-Jun-14 22-Jun-15 0.0 15-Nov-14 31-Dec-15 5.0 1-Oct-10 31-Dec-12 0.0 31-Dec-12 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 11-Nov-11 Page 24 of 72 The project goal is to contribute to raising awareness and strengthening the systematic response to domestic violence and gender equality in Haiti. Conference date TBD. Support for the Haiti 2015 Measles & Rubella vaccination campaign to reduce measles mortality and to expand implementation of supplementary immunization activities (SIAs) for measles vaccinations in Haiti, with the goal of reaching 1,050,000 children under the age of 5. Vaccinations have been procured by the United Nation’s Foundation while the Haitian Red Cross will carry out the social mobilization component of the program. The campaign is scheduled to take place during the second semester of 2015. The American Red Cross supported critical operating expenses, payroll and administrative fees for the Bernard Mevs Hospital Project Medishare Critical Care Trauma and Rehabilitation Program in Port-au-Prince. The hospital operates 24/7 for the general public, providing the only critical care and trauma services for all of Haiti. The American Red Cross supported the hospital for 27 months from October 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012, employing over 200 Haitian staff (40 Haitian nurses, 22 Haitian physicians and 150 allied healthcare professionals and Haitian support staff), supported by 10 full-time international mentors and 50 volunteers that provided specialized training. The American Red Cross supported Partners in Health (PIH) in the construction, equipping and opening of a national state of the art teaching hospital in Mirebalais. The direct number of people anticipated to be served by this project is 160,000 (catchment area for primary/secondary care) and the indirect number of people anticipated to be served by the project is 3.3 million people (catchment area for tertiary care).The hospital has more than 300 beds. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) GRC PIH ICRC St. Boniface Foundation 3,606,927 3,606,927 3,606,927 Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 1,366,340 1,366,340 1,366,340 100,000 99,547 99,547 31-Aug-10 31-Dec-13 7.0 12-Jan-10 28-Feb-11 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 1-May-10 31-Dec-12 0.0 31-Jan-14 31-Jul-14 5.0 Page 25 of 72 The American Red Cross supported the German Red Cross Society for the operation of a field hospital located in Carrefour, just outside of Port-auPrince. The field hospital opened immediately after the earthquake and continued to provide free medical services through the end of December 2010, treating over 70,000 patients. The hospital provided both fixed and mobile health services, as well as training for volunteers to provide psychosocial support and community health and hygiene promotion. In addition to supporting the operation of the hospital and the salaries of the staff, the American Red Cross also provided support to rehabilitate the soccer field that housed the hospital once the field hospital was closed. In the aftermath of the earthquake, the American Red Cross, through Partners in Health, provided operational support for Haiti's University Hospital (HUEH), the largest public hospital in Haiti. For the months between July 2010 and February 2011, PIH disbursed $3,284,914 to HUEH to pay supplementary compensation to its 1,440 Haitian staff. The American Red Cross reimbursed $2,077,266 of these costs (for the months July 2010 and November 2010 – February 2011), and provided over $500,000 for equipment and supply expenses, and support for other services for the hospital. Injuries from the earthquake resulted in the loss of limbs for more than 5,000 survivors. With support from the American Red Cross, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) rebuilt a prosthetic and physical rehabilitation center, Klinik Kay Kapab, run by the Haitian NGO Healing Hands for Haiti. The ICRC also provided technical assistance for the center to be able to create prosthetic devices for 1,000 people and provide rehabilitation services for 3,000 people. Via the St. Boniface Foundation, this project provided improved health care to a large population center whose clinic was destroyed in the earthquake. The construction of the clinic was funded by the Spanish Red Cross while funding from the American Red Cross was utilized to outfit the clinic with essential medical equipment. This is one of eight CIF grants. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) UNF UNF HRC Belizean Grove Foundation HRC ICRC 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 374,500 374,500 374,500 82,785 82,785 82,785 9,041 9,041 9,041 91,498 91,498 91,498 369,903 369,903 369,903 2-Mar-12 31-Dec-12 9.0 2-Feb-10 31-Dec-10 0.0 15-Oct-12 14-Feb-13 0.0 2-Jun-12 31-Dec-12 0.0 9-Jul-14 8-Jan-15 0.0 2010 2010 6.5 Page 26 of 72 The American Red Cross supported the multiagency coordinated measles vaccination campaign in 2011/2012 led by the United Nation's Foundation as well as associated social mobilization activities carried out by the Haitian Red Cross. The national coverage reached 92.4% (n=2,963,911 children vaccinated) for OPV and 94.6% (n= 3,069,396 children vaccinated) for MR vaccine. Additionally, 1.2 million units of vitamin A and 1.3 million units of albendozale (antiparasitic drug) were administered. Rapid Monitoring Coverage following the campaign conducted in all departments indicated that national coverage reached was more than 95%. In partnership with the Belizean Grove Foundation, the American Red Cross helped provide mobile medical services to 3,200 individuals. In December 2013, the first case of Chikungunya was reported in the Caribbean and reached Haiti in early 2014. The objective of this Quick Action Fund was to contribute towards eliminating the spread of this disease. Project objectives and activities included enhancing the capacity of the Haitian Ministry of Health to combat Chikungunya, and distributing insecticide mosquito nets, insecticide sprayers, foggers, protective wear and larva killing substances. This is one of five QAFs. Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518 distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $158,919, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, and supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) IFRC Total - Health (Excluding Cholera) 1,954,319 1,954,319 1,954,319 25,631,360 23,678,864 23,345,494 2010 2012 6.5 Cholera FRC NoRC 1,000,002 549,734 120,993 500,000 500,001 264,149 23-Jun-14 31-Dec-15 6.0 23-Jun-14 31-Dec-15 6.0 Page 27 of 72 American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported provision of preventive, community-level and curative basic health services, hygiene promotion, HIV awareness-raising and psychosocial support to the affected communities as follows: health assessments (access and availability of health services, prevention, health needs and risk of communicable diseases and epidemics), provision of reproductive health kits, medical and surgical supplies, health information, education and support, training of volunteers and staff, reinforcement of HRC capacity to deliver planned HIV program activities with a special emphasis on reaching most vulnerable populations, and vector control. This project through the French Red Cross targets 18 communal sections total, with 14 in the West and 4 in Lower Artibonite departments. The project is strengthening the capacities of HRC in support of the efforts of MSPP in prevention, response and communication related to the cholera epidemic. The activities include conducting hygiene promotion activities through HRC volunteers in cholera persistence areas, enhancing the capacities of HRC volunteers at local and regional level by providing materials and adapted trainings, rehabilitation, repairs and installation of water systems and hand washing stations and coordination and epidemiological information sharing between MSPP, DINEPA and HRC.To date, this project has reached 7,290 people with hygiene promotion activities. The goal of this project through the Norwegian Red Cross is to contribute to the elimination of cholera in Grande Goave and Petit Goave in the West department. The activities include repairs and rehabilitation of water systems and sanitation facilities, hygiene and health promotion activities; community-based disease surveillance and response to acute watery diarrhea spikes in communities.To date, this project has reached Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Oxfam GB SRC HRC 526,316 526,103 349,465 299,663 209,764 66,699 503,958 135,066 13,878 people with hygiene promotion activities. 23-Jun-14 23-Jun-15 5.0 23-Jun-14 22-Dec-15 5.0 1-Oct-14 30-Sep-15 3.6 Page 28 of 72 As the lead organization in the North and Northeast departments for coordinating cholera prevention and response, Oxfam (GB) is targeting 6 localities in 3 communes in the North and 4 localities in 4 communes in the Northeast. The activities include facilitating the inclusion of HRC in cholera response activities through coordination and cluster meetings with key WASH/Health actors, training of 210 HRC team members including volunteers in cholera prevention and response, constructing and rehabilitating 5 WASH facilities in health centers with cholera treatment center, rehabilitating 7 water systems and implementing mass media activities to promote safe sanitation, appropriate domestic water management, food handling and hygiene practices. To date, 3 water systems have been rehabilitated, benefitting 20,786 people. The American Red Cross' contribution is part of a larger US$2.7M program being implemented by the Swiss Red Cross in Cormier communal section in the West Department. Activities include setting up and operating a WASH training center in Cormier, constructing a community solar water kiosk in the WASH training center, establishing and training community WASH trainers and the training center management committee, providing training and technical support for household representatives on management and maintenance of community and individual water/sanitation and water treatment and hygiene. The Haitian Red Cross is contributing to the elimination of cholera in the Greater North through sensitization campaigns and distribution of hygiene products. In addition, HRC is carrying out key coordination responsibilities with MSPP on behalf of all Red Cross Movement partners. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) HOPE IMC CARE FRC 1,297,152 1,212,776 1,151,317 Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 1,249,137 1,249,137 1,249,137 989,841 989,841 989,966 1-Apr-11 30-Jun-16 4.0 15-Jan-11 14-Jan-12 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 1-Feb-11 31-Oct-11 9.8 21-Oct-10 21-Jul-11 10.0 Page 29 of 72 The project was initially designed to address the cholera outbreak in the North department. As cholera transitioned to an endemic phase, the American Red Cross has supported HOPE to integrate cholera treatment and prevention programs into their innovative community health model known as “Sante Nan Lokou”. The activities include treatment and prevention activities at the hospital, Cholera Treatment Center (CTC) and community level, including extensive hygiene education and WASH infrastructure improvement. To date, this project has reached 20,994 people with hygiene promotion and 8,544 with cholera support. International Medical Corps established Oral Rehydration Posts and Mobile Medical Units, provided needed staff and supplies, trained volunteers to conduct health and hygiene promotion, constructed and rehabilitated latrines and bathing facilities, provided chlorinated water supplies and trained community members on the proper preparation of chlorine solution, established water kiosks, and provided small grants to local organizations to assist them with community-based cholera response projects. 1,189,784 beneficiaries were reached through this project. CARE established Oral Rehydration Points, supported schools with cholera prevention activities, facilitated cholera case management training, ensured water and sanitation support to eight health facilities and prevented the spread of cholera through education and the distribution of critical relief supplies. The project reached 517,326 people. French Red Cross supported hygiene promotion programs, an ambulance service, the creation of camp hygiene and sanitation committees, disinfection of latrines and public places, cleaning drainage systems, installing and managing Oral Rehydration Posts, chlorinating local water supplies, and distributing soap, chlorine, waste bins and water drums. The French Red Cross also set up a number of Cholera Treatment Units in Port-au-Prince and rehabilitated three primary healthcare centers in Petit Goave. This project reached 403,661 people. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) HRC IFRC Medishare 95,934 95,934 95,979 2,196,767 2,196,767 2,196,767 45,081 45,081 45,081 30-Sep-13 30-Apr-14 0.0 8-Nov-10 and 30-Nov-11 28-Feb-11 and 30-Sep-11 7.5 28-Oct-10 28-Oct-10 0.0 Page 30 of 72 This project was part of the closeout plan for the American Red Cross directly implemented Cholera Project. The Haitian Red Cross continued the work in the two project areas by providing surveillance, training and referral services to communities. As part of this project, HRC implemented the following activities: Hygiene and sanitation education and promotion, community engagement and capacity building to address cholera, disease control, and surveillance in collaboration with local health system. Contributions to the 2010 IFRC Hispaniola Cholera Appeal were specifically earmarked to support immediate needs related to the cholera outbreak in Haiti including the following: Procurement and distribution of soap, oral rehydration salts (ORS), chlorine, cots, protective equipment, cholera kits and other specialized equipment, family hygiene kits and kitchen parcels, training of volunteers in epidemic surveillance and control and hygiene promotion messaging, production and dissemination of communication materials, radio and SMS cholera messaging campaigns, pre-positioning of medical supplies, establishment and maintenance of handwashing points and oral rehydration points, construction of latrines and showers, set-up of Cholera Treatment Centers (CTUs), case management, provision of clean water, periodic microbiological water testing, excreta disposal, solid waste disposal, associated costs to second a Delegate to a Cholera Emergency Response Team as well as a seconded Delegate to mount an Information Management database. The American Red Cross funded the shipment of 53,310 lbs. of relief items by air through Medishare at the request of the Haitian Ministry of Health to respond to the cholera outbreak. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) PAHO PIH PIH SAVE SAVE 1,500,200 1,500,200 1,500,200 Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 315,002 315,002 315,002 1,499,999 1,499,999 1,499,999 3-Dec-10 2-Nov-10 30-Oct-11 9.0 2-Nov-10 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 6-Feb-12 15-Jan-13 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 15-Mar-11 31-May-11 10.0 15-Jan-11 14-Sep-11 0.0 Page 31 of 72 Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) purchased, shipped and stored 1.4 million solutions of Oral Rehydration Salts, 480,000 bags of Ringer Lactate and a variety of other life-saving medicines and medical supplies during the critical early stages of the response. This partnership also enabled PAHO to purchase logistical equipment for their warehouse, implement an online information management system to track stock and medicines available in their warehouse, produce cholera beds and train Ministry of Health personnel for the transition of the cholera Alert and Response System to the Haitian government. Associated costs with shipment of cholera response supplies through Partners in Health. The American Red Cross supported a campaign conducted by Partners in Health and the Haitian organization, GHESKIO, with support from the Haitian Ministry of Health, to reduce cholera deaths in Haiti by introducing the oral cholera vaccination to the country. This pilot project vaccinated 90,000 Haitians against cholera. The pilot was conducted in both an urban area—the Cite de Dieu slum in Portau-Prince—and a rural area—Bocozel—in the Artibonite river valley. Save the Children managed Cholera Treatment Units (CTUs), transitioned the CTUs to Oral Rehydration Points (ORPs) with a referral system to CTUs, and conducted cholera prevention-focused hygiene promotion activities in Port-au-Prince. The American Red Cross worked together with the US Agency for International Development's Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) to fund this program. This project reached 117,393 with hygiene promotion and cholera support. Save the Children set up two Cholera Treatment Units and eleven Oral Rehydration Points in rural areas of Leogane, and reached people with health and hygiene promotion activities. The project also distributed relief supplies such as soap and aquatabs.This project reached 37,893 with hygiene promotion and cholera support. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Total - Cholera 15,139,921 14,146,274 12,965,623 Water & Sanitation SOIL UNOPS 701,700 203,871 129,530 376,344 376,344 375,476 10-Nov-14 9-Nov-16 6.0 4-Apr-14 3-Jan-15 7.0 Page 32 of 72 The American Red Cross initially partnered with SOIL as a Community Investment Fund (CIF) grantee supporting the scale up of SOIL’s social business model pilot for sustainably providing household sanitation services in northern Haiti. Following successful completion of the project, the partnership was expanded to Port-au-Prince. This current project aims to design and implement a sustainable sanitation service providing dignified sanitation access in impoverished communities in Port-au-Prince that can be scaled-up at minimal expense and has the potential to be sustained long term without external grant funding. Activities include: Latrine construction, upgrading composting waste treatment facility in Truitier Solid Waste Treatment Center, evaluate and improve the potential for independent entrepreneurs to profitably provide sustained service to EkoLakay toilets, and conduct a robust test of a potential private sector solution to Haiti’s sanitation crisis. The project aims to reach 2,200 people as entrepreneurs or beneficiaries of improved sanitation services. Following a request from UCLBP, the American Red Cross supported the UNOPS’s 16/6 initiative. The 16 Neighbourhoods/6 Camps project (16/6) was a government-prioritized initiative to provide an integrated response to the closing of six camps and the resettlement of displaced people.The project aimed to improve the options and quality of life of people returning to their neighborhoods of origin by addressing urgent physical infrastructure and social problems, as identified by the affected communities. Financed by the Haiti Reconstruction Fund, the 16/6 project it was implemented jointly by the Government of Haiti, the International Organization for Migration (IOM), UNDP, the International Labour Organization (ILO) and UNOPS. The ARC-funded portion of the project constructed 350 septic tanks connected to each house constructed under the 16/6 Program, benefitting 1,750 people. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) IRC CONCERN IMC CRS 2,041,000 2,041,000 2,041,000 111,107 111,107 111,107 Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 3,185,506 3,185,506 3,185,506 1-May-12 30-Nov-14 10.0 1-Jun-10 30-May-11 10.0 15-Dec-10 15-Jan-12 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 31-Oct-11 30-Apr-14 10.0 Page 33 of 72 This project protected camp residents from cholera and other water-borne diseases. International Rescue Committee (IRC) worked in conjunction with DINEPA and UNICEF to remove waste from latrines in the most vulnerable IDP camps to extend their viability, directly supporting the DINEPA Strategy for Cholera Prevention Action in the camps. The number of camps this project worked in fluctuated as the Government of Haiti's plans for each area shifted. Overall this project directly served displaced populations of about 42,000 when they were in the highest number of camps, to about 25,000 at the lowest number of camps. The camps that housed many Haitians were often located on marginal land that is prone to flooding. The American Red Cross partnered with Concern Worldwide to address this problem by improving drainage at Place-de-la-Paix camp. Project activities included clearing canals and drainage ditches, relocating shelters, and constructing and backfilling drains with gravel. An estimated 16,000 people benefited from this project. The earthquake damaged much of Port-au-Prince's already limited water and sanitation infrastructure, increasing health concerns for residents living in crowded camps where disease can travel quickly. The American Red Cross partnered with the International Medical Corps to address these concerns by improving access to safe water, clean latrines and bathing facilities. Additional activities included hygiene promotion, trash collection and drainage projects such as canal clearing. This project reached 35,656 people directly in the Portau-Prince metropolitan area. When the earthquake struck, it all but halted already limited sanitation services such as trash pickup and sewage disposal, leaving waste piled up in market areas and camps. The aim of this program through Catholic Relief Services was to improve hygiene and solid waste disposal in Metropolitan Port-au-Prince. This project served 248,745 people over a period of 34 months. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) IRC American Refugee Committee 2,973,562 2,974,656 2,974,656 2,762,180 2,762,180 2,761,492 1-Nov-10 31-Mar-12 9.0 1-Nov-10 31-Jan-12 0.0 Page 34 of 72 The earthquake damaged much of Port-au-Prince’s already limited water and sanitation infrastructure, increasing health concerns for residents living in crowded camps where disease can travel quickly. In partnership with the International Rescue Committee, the American Red Cross helped to address these concerns by providing safe water, clean latrines, hygiene promotion, trash collection and drainage interventions such as ditch digging and canal clearing. This project reached 58,850 beneficiaries in camps and neighboring communities of Port-au-Prince. American Refugee Committee provided safe water, clean latrines, bathing facilities and hand washing stations in addition to hygiene promotion and drainage activities such as ditch digging and canal clearing. This project aimed to reduce risk of waterborne and vector-borne disease in spontaneous settlements and their peripheries in Port-au-Prince (PAP), and in areas where American Red Cross partners constructed transitional shelters. Services included hygiene promotion and improvements to basic water supply, increased access to safe water and latrines, excreta disposal, drainage, and trash collection.113,138 people were reached with hygiene promotion, and 11,280 people are benefitting from new or rehabilitated water systems or sanitation facilities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) IFRC ICRC 17,624,764 17,624,764 17,624,764 28,632 28,632 28,632 2010 2014 6.5 2010 2010 6.5 Page 35 of 72 To stem the risk of waterborne and water related diseases American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported the following: provision of safe water, adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion, coordination of Movement water and sanitation activities, deployment of Water and Sanitation Emergency Relief Unit (ERU), provision of water through the ERU Water and Sanitation deployment, rapid emergency needs and capacity assessments, periodic microbiological water testing, distribution of water and sanitation relief supplies (household water, treatment, jerry cans, buckets, etc.) and training on use of items, mobilization of HRC volunteers to carry out hygiene promotion activities during distributions, contribution toward the construction of first liquid waste treatment center in the country (Mont-a-Cabrit), re-establishment of water supply where possible through rehabilitation of water supply infrastructure, construction and rehabilitation of sanitation infrastructure, vector control and prevention measures, waste disposal measures, drainage measures, training of community-based HRC volunteers on participatory hygiene, provision of printed communication materials (posters, flyers, manuals, educational materials, etc.) and other supplies to be used in the hygiene promotion activities. Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518 distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $158,919, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Total - Water & Sanitation 31,378,518 30,881,783 points and sanitation facilities. 30,805,886 Livelihoods CECI USAID 2,999,837 350,765 124,110 Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 1-Dec-14 19-Aug-13 Page 36 of 72 30-Nov-17 9.0 30-Jun-16 Written Approval required prior to disclosure The American Red Cross is funding the Centre for International Studies and Cooperation (CECI) to carry out a project that seeks to develop and strengthen livelihoods opportunities of 1000 women and men, primarily youth in Carrefour-Feuilles through vocational training and micro-enterprise development. This is a sub-project of the ARC-funded USAID CUCD program mentioned under the shelter sector. This sub-component of the American Red Cross / USAID partnerships seeks to enhance employable skills and income generation, increase the number of women and men in Canaan able to secure stable employment and increase income generation viability of Canaan-based small and medium enterprises. This program will target people living in Canaan, an area of over 100,000 residents. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) PADF VIVA RIO FONKOZE IOM 2,000,000 278,749 146,774 101,053 101,053 54,432 8,227,141 8,227,141 8,227,141 7,414,103 7,414,103 7,414,103 1-Nov-14 30-Jun-17 10.0 24-Jun-14 15-Jun-15 5.0 1-Mar-10 31-Dec-11 5.0 31-Aug-10 31-Dec-11 7.5 Page 37 of 72 This partnership with the Pan American Development Fund (PADF) seeks to enhance food security and contribute to more sustainable and resilient livelihoods for rural women and men in the Northwest Department of Haiti.The project seeks to train 880 farmers in various agricultural practices and productions, establish 1200 bio-intensive gardens, train 100 farmers on disaster resilient agriculture techniques, distribute 500 livestock packages to farmers, train 500 breeders/farmers in livestock methods, and establish 4 agricultural processing centers. Viva Rio is a Brazilian community-based non-profit organization, which began work in Haiti in 2004 following an invitation from the United Nations. What began as a simple consultancy in Haiti has become today an efficient operation working with youth in some of the toughest neighborhoods in the Haitian capital. With support from the American Red Cross, Viva Rio is seeking to strengthen youth leadership and decrease violence through sports (capoeira) in the Carrefour-Feuilles Neighborhood. This is one of eight CIF grants. The American Red Cross partnered with Fonkoze, Haiti's largest microfinance institute, to provide microfinance grants and loans to reach 255,460 people, including female heads-of-households, business owners and families hosting displaced Haitians. Following the January 2010 earthquake, many displaced survivors left Port-au-Prince for other areas of Haiti, often overwhelming local services in these regions and depleting the already overstretched resources of their host families. To help reduce the burden faced by areas hosting displaced Haitians, the American Red Cross partnered with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) to help 20,719 people through a work program which, by supporting livelihoods, reduced pressure on host community resources. Activities included building or rehabilitating small water canals, conducting soil stabilization and expanding access to water in general. The project also distributed basic household goods and/or shelter kits to 7,500 host Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) MC DRC MC HELP IFRC 4,808,097 4,850,155 4,850,155 1,500,928 1,500,928 1,500,928 1,200,968 1,200,908 1,200,908 117,256 117,256 117,256 99,110 99,110 99,110 families and provided additional indirect community benefits from disaster risk reduction and mitigation projects. IOM trained health promoters to educate people in host family communities about cholera prevention. 1-Jul-10 30-Jun-11 10.0 1-Nov-10 31-Aug-11 5.0 1-Jul-10 30-Jun-11 10.0 20-Feb-14 19-Feb-15 5.0 2010 2012 6.5 Page 38 of 72 Mercy Corps provided support to host families and reached a total of 82,963 beneficiaries by providing vouchers to purchase basic household goods from local vendors. Some of these people also benefitted from income generating activities, and the program also included hygiene promotion and disaster preparedness education. The Danish Red Cross helped displaced families in Les Cayes arrondissement by providing vouchers to cover school fees for 1,850 children as well as livelihoods grants for 2,000 families who host displaced children. Mercy Corps employed 8,700 people to complete small cash-for-work projects that removed rubble, dug drainage canals, recycled rubble to make building materials, cleaned up debris and renovated roads. HELP is the largest university scholarship program in Haiti. Through American Red Cross funding, HELP supported 167 straight-A students from all over Haiti to access university and also connect students with employment opportunities. This is one of eight CIF grants. American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported delivery of livelihood substitution activities such as cash-for-work for debris clearing, delivery of livelihoods / income substitution activities such as unconditional cash grants, support for community-led livelihood restoration activities Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Total - Livelihoods 30,968,493 26,640,168 through the provision of productive assets, tools, waste removal, and quick impact projects providing short-term livelihoods opportunities. 26,234,917 Disaster Preparedness HRC PADF HRC HRC 4,437,666 2,732,120 2,433,040 1,200,000 451,275 9,000,000 955,930 955,930 150,000 150,000 150,000 1-May-13 31-May-16 0.0 2-Feb-15 2-May-16 10.0 2010 30-Jun-19 0.0 1-Dec-14 31-May-16 yet to be determined Page 39 of 72 The overall goal of “Gran No Pi Djamn” Program is for targeted communities in the North of Haiti to have increased resilience, stronger capacity, and reduced exposure to external shocks. A key component of this integrated program is to build the capacity of the Haitian Red Cross in three departments (Northeast, North and Northwest) through a multi-sectoral approach. The program targets 10 communal sections in the Greater North. This program is co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross in partnership with the Pan American Development Fund (PADF), the latter is responsible for upgrading up to 19 evacuation shelters. The aftermath of the devastating January 2010 earthquake significantly impacted the Haitian Red Cross' infrastructure and operations. As part of the American Red Cross strategy and as the earthquake recovery efforts scale down and partners begin to exit, the goal of this program is to help the Haitian Red Cross in its organizational development as auxiliary to GoH for disaster response, to facilitate Haitian Red Cross's proper planning and institutional development and to strengthen the Haitian Red Cross' central/HQ and Regional Branch capacity development planning for future years. As learning organizations, the goal of the HRC/ARC Earthquake Recovery Learning Conference (date TBD) is to collectively reflect on the Haiti earthquake recovery efforts with key stakeholders and define how lessons learned from the Haiti operation can contribute to humanitarian and organizational learning and programmatic and operational improvements for future responses. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) IFRC HRC HRC WWF 4,351,956 4,351,956 4,351,956 150,000 150,000 147,266 25,450 25,450 25,450 Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure Written Approval required prior to disclosure 2010 2014 6.5 1-Jun-13 31-Dec-13 0.0 6-Jan-14 15-May-14 0.0 30-Sep-14 Written Approval required prior to disclosure 10-Oct-12 Page 40 of 72 American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported: establishment of early warning systems, community emergency evacuation and contingency plans, community emergency response teams, pre-positioning of emergency stocks, procurement and distribution of emergency equipment kits, training of volunteers and regional and local Red Cross committees in disaster preparedness. Also, the American Red Cross contributed to the purchase of relief supplies for Sandy affected individuals. In addition, as a learning organization, ARC contributed to two Movementwide learning events. The KDV project contributed to disaster-risk reduction of the Haitian population through the strengthening of the Haitian Red Cross' chapter capacities. More specifically the project sought to strengthen chapter capacities through continued training of DRR regional focal points, KDV instructors and volunteers and conducting awareness and education campaigns at community level. In September 2013, the Constitutional Court of the Dominican Republic ruled that many Dominicans of Haitian descent and officially registered as Dominican citizens at birth no longer met the criteria for Dominican nationality. As a result, a great number of people were repatriated into Haiti at the Haitian/Dominican border. This Quick Action Fund assisted the Haitian Red Cross to scale-up operations at the border to provide timely assistance to the influx of returnees and/or the displaced by supporting the Haitian government in the provision of medical care, psychosocial support, provision of clean water and essential non-food items. This is one of five QAFs. The goal of the Haiti Green Recovery Partnership was to mainstream environmental sustainability in American Red Cross implemented projects and to reduce risk and vulnerability for project beneficiaries by minimizing, mitigating or eliminating environmental degradation. The technical assistance from World Wildlife Fund supported and enhanced consideration and inclusion of environmental components in the American Red Cross' integrated Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Total - Disaster Preparedness 19,315,072 8,816,731 8,063,642 Grand Total - All Projects 216,224,065 193,561,950 187,874,413 Page 41 of 72 programming approach for both LAMIKA and Gran No Pi Djamn. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Project Name ARC Partners Emergency Relief Contribution to Food Distribution WFP Domestic Heater Meals ARC Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC Contribution to ICRC Appeal ICRC Budgeted Amount Total Spent to date 32,215,079 32,215,079 15,275,135 15,275,135 7,018,524 7,018,524 3,878,764 3,878,764 Start date End date 19-Jan-10 31-Dec-10 2010 2010 2010 2012 2010 2010 Page 42 of 72 Description The American Red Cross funded food rations for over 1 million people and associated distribution costs, primarily to young mothers and children through a partnership with the UN World Food Programme. Contributions to the IFRC Earthquake Appeal covered the purchase of tarps/tents, hygiene kits, non-food items, shipping, transportation and general infrastructure costs to mount these distributions. The American Red Cross also donated nearly 3 million packaged meals for distribution in the early days of the response. These funds also contributed to Base Camp set-up which was the main operational hub in Port-au-Prince in the relief and early recovery phases. The American Red Cross contributed a total of $4,169,518 to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $158,919, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions made by the American Red Cross to the ICRC supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the ICRC mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline service, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps, and supporting the national water board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Hope for Haiti Now Fund ARC Sub Total MG&F ARC Total - Emergency Relief 1,724,074 1,724,074 60,111,577 60,111,577 5,945,101 5,945,101 66,056,678 66,056,678 2010 2011 MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program— like the Haiti program—but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. Nine cents was used for MG&F. Shelter LAMIKA - Integrated Neighborhood Rehabilitation and Recovery ARC in partnership with MC and GC 31,655,600 18,532,193 Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. 1-Nov-11 Page 43 of 72 30-Jun-16 The primary goal of the LAMIKA program is to enhance community and household resilience through a sustainable and integrated approach that provides healthy, habitable, and improved homes and living conditions. The LAMIKA program, in accordance with the Haitian government's request for organizations to work in urban renewal, is being implemented in Carrefour-Feuilles, a poor residential neighborhood north of downtown Port-au-Prince which sustained extensive damage from the earthquake and is characterized by dense housing, poverty and limited access to safe infrastructure and services. The LAMIKA program conducts activities under three pillars in Social Engagement, Economic Strengthening and Physical Renewal to address needs across multiple sectors. * Pillar I is implemented by the American Red Cross, Pillar II by Mercy Corps and Pillar III by Global Communities. The program targets 48,318 direct beneficiaries residing in 8 neighborhoods of Carrefour Feuilles. To date, the project has achieved the following, among others: Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Pillar I: Eight Community Intervention teams of 20 persons each have been set up, trained and equipped. Members have been trained in 10 modules associated with first aid, search and rescue, disaster risk reduction, and more. 16 distribution points have been established to distribute condoms or Oral Rehydration Salts (ORS), with more than 795,000 condoms and 22,000 ORS packets distributed so far and with corresponding education, outreach and follow-up. More than 32,000 people have been reached with health messaging, and more than 17,000 mosquito nets have been distributed. More than 1,100 people have been trained in first-aid, and more than 11,000 people are benefitting from community action plan activities to better respond to future disasters. Pillar II: 234 enterprises have been selected for support through small loans, 70 VSLA groups with a total of 1,515 members have been created (and they have saved over $48,000), 271 youth have been selected and are undergoing training for jobs preparation. Participatory and Safer Housing and Urban Development Program in Canaan (CUCD) USAID Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 19-Aug-13 Page 44 of 72 30-Jun-16 Pillar III: Housing rehabilitation and expansion works are currently in progress to benefit of 500+ families. Approximately 1,500 people will be living within a 100 meter radius of potable water, 10 schools are receiving major interventions such as structural improvements and improved water and sanitation facilities, 600 meters of new roads will be constructed, and 1,000 saplings will be planted. Canaan is an emerging city north of the metropolitan area of Port-au-Prince, which spontaneously developed following the 2010 earthquake. Over 100,000 people live in Canaan or are currently building in the area. The Government of Haiti estimates that Canaan residents have already invested over $100 million of their own resources in the area. The goal of the program is to provide urban planning assistance, promote safer housing, build capacity of local entities to adopt safer and more sustainable construction, and to build expanded infrastructure services in the zone, including: increased water supply, new community spaces, paved footpaths and key roads, and the establishment of zoning and building regulations. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Retrofit for Rental CARE From Camp Transformation to Urban Revitalization (CATUR) UN-HABITAT Camp Autonomization Project FRC 2,656,517 1,957,561 Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 1,918,554 1,675,683 1-Dec-13 31-Mar-16 1-Apr-14 31-Mar-16 15-Mar-14 30-Jun-15 This project with CARE seeks to contribute to the rehabilitation of urban housing and the closure of camps by helping homeowners construct safe rental accommodation, providing camp residents with safer housing, improved access to enhanced sanitation facilities and livelihoods opportunities, and better security to people currently living in damaged structures. To date, 117 households (585 people) have benefited from a settlement or relocation grant, 239 households (1,195 people) have benefited from a relocation program, 325 people have been trained in shelter activities, 387 people have been trained on income generating activites, 275 households (1,375 people) have received livelihoods grants, and 176 badly damaged homes have been repaired (benefitting 880 people). This project through UN-HABITAT is assisting the government bodies (UCLBP and relevant ministries) and municipal authorities build consensus regarding all camp exit strategies. The project seeks to formalize 2 or 3 selected camps, with a target of reaching 1,500 households, through urban integration with the surrounding neighborhood and through provision of support which could include housing support, rental subsidies, access to basic services such as road, water and sanitation networks, or a combination of these options. In order to reduce camp residents' dependency on humanitarian assistance and decrease displaced households' density in long term camps, this project through the French Red Cross seeks to improve the resilience of the population in several camps by increasing self-management and access to services as well as expanding livelihood opportunities for internally displaced people and their surrounding neighborhoods. To date, this project has reached more than 7,300 people with hygiene promotion, trained 24 people on violence prevention, and trained 48 people on income generating activities. Page 45 of 72 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Community Investment Fund (CIF)Balance ARC HRC Institutional Asset Development Program ARC Rubble Removal and Demolition JP/HRO 1,106,400 - 3,135,512 236,104 3,747,351 3,607,015 1-May-13 30-Jun-16 1-Nov-14 31-Dec-16 1-Oct-12 30-Nov-14 Page 46 of 72 The Community Investment Fund (CIF) is a $1.5M financial commitment to enhance engagement with and support to smaller, local organizations. It is designed to address small requests for funding and/or the identification of critical activities which could be effectively implemented by local organizations. To date the American Red Cross has awarded a total of eight CIF grants to the following partners: Global Therapy Group, Phase I (for more details see line 39 under the Shelter sector), Maison L’Arc-en-Ciel (for more details see line 51 under the Health sector), St. Boniface Foundation (for more details see line 62 under the Health sector), SOIL (for more details see line 103 under the Water & Sanitation sector), Viva Rio (for more details see line 126 under the Livelihoods sector) and HELP (fore more details see line 134 under the Livelihoods sector). Two additional CIF grants have been recently awarded which are funded from the CIF-Balance line. These two CIFs are the following: 1) Congregation of the “Petites Sœurs de St. Therese de L’Enfant Jesus” for Improved Food Security in Dumas/Fort Liberte in the North of Haiti in the amount of $96,938 (Livelihoods). This project includes activities that address the strengthening of agriculture, food security, environment, training for young people and farmers, education and capacity building of farmers. 2) Global Therapy Group, Phase 2 for WASH Facilities in the amount of $26,150 (Water & Sanitation). This project will support the installation of sanitation facilities at the clinic built with Phase I CIF funds and provide training and education in effective WASH interventions for patients and their families. There are currently several other CIFconcepts / proposals in the pipeline in progress and under review. After the 2010 earthquake, the Haitian Red Cross suffered significant damage to physical assets that hosted activities of many of its core functions. This project will support Haitian Red Cross physical asset development (of 3 to 4 key buildings) in coordination with ongoing organizational development (OD) programs supporting comprehensive HRC institutional strengthening. JP/HRO provided demolition and rubble removal services targeting homes and other buildings that were classified as “red” or requiring demolition, as per the Haitian Ministry of Public Works, Transport and Communications (MTPTC) standards. Through this project, more than 108,000 cubic meters of rubble were cleared (the equivilent of about 40 olympic-sized swimming pools of rubble).3,204 people Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Emergency Shelter HFH Ayiti Initiative on Reconstruction (REPAIR) PADF Miron Relocation (Quick Action Fund) ARC Relocation and Rental Subsidies Mais Gate IFRC Relocation and Rental Subsidies Carrefour-Feuilles IFRC Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 13,488,498 12,983,364 63,939 61,545 2,508,409 2,414,472 5,016,819 4,828,943 received temporary employment through this project. Additionally, 238 households (1,190 people) received rubble removal services from their home, making their homes safer to inhabit. 8-Mar-10 31-Mar-11 15-Aug-11 31-Oct-12 1-Jul-11 31-Mar-12 1-Nov-11 28-Feb-13 1-Sep-12 31-Dec-13 Page 47 of 72 With funding from the American Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity distributed 14,040 kits (benefitting approximately 70,200 people).The kits enabled beneficiaries to either construct a new shelter or make repairs to an existing shelter. Additional kits were pre-positioned for use in future disaster responses. Each kit contained the following components: two 5-gallon buckets, two tarpaulins, rope, wire, nails, duct tape, a hammer, a pry bar, two chisels, pliers, 10 dust masks, leather work gloves, safety glasses, a hacksaw with two replacement blades, and a folding knife. The Pan-American Development Foundation (PADF) Ayiti Initiative on Reconstruction (REPAIR) project repaired and rehabilitated 4,018 yellow-tagged, earthquake-damaged homes in Port-au-Prince benefitting 20,090 people. The REPAIR project worked through small local contractors from the areas where the yellow houses are located and trained more than 900 builders, masons and small contractors to use improved construction techniques and home repair methodologies. Houses repaired under the PADF program are tagged and certified as compliant with the Haitian Government’s yellow house repair guidelines. From a request from the Government of Haiti, the project aimed to relocate IDP families situated in a dangerous ravine through a rental subsidy program. A total of 103 families (515 people) were relocated in December, 2011. This is one of five QAFs. At a Red Cross Red Crescent Movement level, of the 13,000 families (65,000 beneficiaries) were targeted for relocation assistance, and the American Red Cross funded the relocation of 5,347 of these families (26,735 people). This pledge covered 2049 HHs served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince (10,245 people). This pledge covered 2,067 (10,335 people) households served by relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-auPrince. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC Transitional Shelter Project UNOPS Transitional Shelter Project HFH Transitional Shelter Project ACTED Transitional Shelter Project HI Transitional Shelter Project HAVEN 16,629,091 16,006,344 8,268,755 7,959,097 8,030,727 7,729,983 7,355,602 7,080,141 6,368,793 6,130,286 3,369,000 3,242,833 2010 2014 15-Aug-10 30-Nov-11 1-Sep-10 31-Dec-11 1-Jul-10 31-Dec-12 14-Aug-10 31-Dec-11 1-Jul-10 31-Jul-11 Page 48 of 72 The support from the American Red Cross contributed to the transitional shelter component of the IFRC Shelter Program including the purchase and distribution of shelter tool kits, construction materials and supplies which included tarpaulins, plywood sheets, hurricane tarps, paint, sand, gravel, tools, subcontractor labor charges, shelter concrete blocks and latrines and their associated costs to mount the operation. The three projects specifically supported by the American Red Cross contribution include the construction of transitional shelter units in the Annex de la Mairie, La Piste and Saint Marc sites. Also, American Red Cross funding contributed to the cash vouchers project for t-shelter recipients to increase the purchasing power and equip earthquake affected families with critical household items. In addition, funds from this pledge covered 1,231 households (6,155 people) served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince. UNOPS constructed 1,500 transitional homes (benefitting 7,500 people) each with a rainwater catchment system, and 606 latrines. Habitat for Humanity built 1,500 t-shelters (benefitting 7,500 people) each with a rain catchment system, plus 1341 grey water systems, 409 hand washing stations, 375 latrines (designed for four families each), 10 new water points, 8 hand pumps and rehabilitated one well. ACTED constructed 1,700 transitional homes (benfitting 8,500 people) each with a rainwater catchment system, and 1,032 latrines. ACTED distributed mosquito nets and lifestraw filters to 1,677 households. Disaster Risk Reduction activities included participatory natural disaster vulnerability identification, and assessments and risks mapping at the community level. Hygiene promotion training consisted of training of Community Hygiene Promoters (CHP). Handicap International built 1,000 shelters (971 t-shelters built plus 29 t-shelters for classroom use). 599 latrines were built (567 latrines for shelters plus 32 latrines for classrooms). Among the 971 beneficiary households, 919 households benefited from WASH activities (latrines and hygiene promotion), 1,537 pupils benefited from 16 communitarian buildings (school classrooms) and 32 latrines. In total, 4,855 people benefitted from the t-shelters. Haven constructed 499 homes (benefiting 2,495 people) each with rainwater harvesting units, and 189 latrines. The project also included hygiene promotion activities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Shelter Paint Kits - Housing Improvements FRC Progressive Shelters SpRC Progressive Shelters SRC Permanent Multi-Family Housing Units FULLER Construction of Rehabilitation Clinic (Community Investment Fund) GTG Disaster Response Activities ARC HAP M&E ARC 252,836 243,368 3,613,677 3,478,348 1,006,026 968,352 60,202 57,947 59,999 57,752 10,758,051 10,241,702 182,488 175,654 1-Apr-11 30-Sep-11 1-Jan-11 30-Jun-12 1-Jul-11 30-Sep-12 18-Jun-12 29-Jul-12 7-Nov-13 31-Jan-14 2010 2011 2010 2011 Page 49 of 72 The French Red Cross improved the sustainability of transitional homes by giving 1,425 vulnerable displaced families (7,125 people) vouchers valued at 6,000 GDES (roughly US$150) to be used to purchase a paint kit. Painting the homes helps them better withstand inclement weather, thus making them more durable. To meet the longer term housing needs of those displaced by the earthquake, the Spanish Red Cross upgraded 4,427 transitional shelters (benefitting 22,135 people) into permanent homes and constructed 1,500 latrines. Community members in Leogane were involved in the construction process, learning skills they could apply to future jobs. Through the American Red Cross partnership with the Swiss Red Cross, 599 homes (benefitting 2,995 people) were upgraded. All shelters were provided with a 400 gallon water tank for rain catchment. The American Red Cross contributed funds to support the Fuller Center's effort to help earthquake victims improve their own lives by providing shelter in healthy, holistic communities. Specific objectives included creating permanent multi-family housing units, fostering a sustainable community environment and providing industry and business opportunities for community members. Six housing units were built benefiting a total of 30 people. The goal of this project through Global Therapy Group was to provide disabled individuals access to appropriate rehabilitation services, improving their functional ability and their integration into all aspects of Haitian life. Funding covered the construction of one physical therapy rehabilitation clinic in Port-au-Prince. This is one of eight CIF grants. Directly implemented relief costs associated with the American Red Cross's response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the emergency shelter category. These costs include the purchase, transportation and distribution of relief supplies including tents, tarps, rope and mats. Monitoring & evaluation expenses for some directly implemented projects were tracked separately at the start of the operation. This covered assessment of the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and impact of activities per program objectives. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Contribution to ICRC Appeal ICRC Hope for Haiti Now Fund ARC Sub Total MG&F Total - Shelter ARC 199,317 191,853 2,008,808 1,933,580 157,747,958 134,314,678 15,589,788 13,255,669 173,337,746 147,570,347 2010 2010 2010 2011 Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $158,919, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. 9 cents was used for MG&F. Health (Excluding Cholera) Page 50 of 72 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) St. Michel Hospital Reconstruction in Jacmel CRC Haiti HIV/AIDS Prevention (HHAP) ARC in partnership with HRC Community Support to Children Affected by HIV (Community Investment Fund) MAEC Enhanced Health Service Delivery Program (Community Health Volunteer Network) ARC in partnership with HRC Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 5,621,859 3,924,845 197,438 125,045 3,343,278 681 1-Aug-12 31-Dec-15 1-Jan-11 30-Jun-15 15-Aug-14 14-Aug-15 1-Nov-14 30-Apr-17 Page 51 of 72 The American Red Cross is supporting the Canadian Red Cross to improve access to health services in the South-East Department of Haiti by contributing significant funds required for the reconstruction of St. Michel Hospital in Jacmel. The hospital is the only hospital in the South-East Department. The target population to be reached is 560,000. This project co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross aims to reduce the incidence of HIV among the most at-risk populations and in settings characterized by high-risk behaviors in 12 locations in Haiti. The project has reached 333,010 people. Maison-L'Arc-en-Ciel (MAEC) is an organization dedicated to working with vulnerable children affected by HIV/AIDS. The goal of this project is to be instrumental in the survival and vulnerability reduction of orphan children, youth and young adults affected by or infected with HIV/AIDS through reintegration of young people of age 18 and above, admission of new residents, and psycho-social and medical services. This project serves 80 to 100 people at a time, including at-risk children and youth and their families or foster homes. This is one of eight CIF grants. This program is co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross and seeks to contribute to building resilience in targeted communities in Haiti through improved access to primary health services and availability of trained personnel in 6 geographical departments of Haiti: North, North-East, North-West, West, South and South-East departments. The project, coordinated closely with Government of Haiti's Ministry of Health, will target training and deployment of Polyvalent Community Health Agents (ASCPs) and Haitian Red Cross volunteers – Health (HRCVH). The project will train and support the deployment of 40 ASCPs in collaboration with MSP, supported by the deployment of 320 (HRCV-Hs) – an average ratio of 1:8 of ASCP to HRCV-H covering a specific geographic area. The total number of people anticipated to be served by the project is 40,000. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Gender Based Violence Prevention Project IRC 2015 Caribbean Domestic Violence & Gender Equality Conference ARC in partnership with HRC 2015 Haiti Measles and Rubella Initiative UNF 2015 Haiti Measles and Rubella Initiative Social Engagement HRC Operational Support for Bernard Mevs Hospital Medishare Mirebalais Teaching Hospital Construction PIH 2,458,978 1,903,325 143,603 - 1,382,064 1,311,431 470,387 - 11,416,731 10,889,413 Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 15-Oct-12 15-Aug-15 8-Oct-14 7-Oct-15 23-Jun-14 22-Jun-15 15-Nov-14 31-Dec-15 1-Oct-10 31-Dec-12 11-Nov-11 31-Dec-12 Page 52 of 72 The goal of this project is to reduce the incidence and mitigate the consequences of gender-based violence (GBV) in Port-au-Prince by addressing the needs of survivors and by empowering women and girls to participate more actively in Haitian society. This partnership with the International Rescue Committee (IRC) is increasing the capacity of local and community-based organizations that already provide valuable services, conducts ongoing needs assessments and trainings with these organizations, and develops an adolescent girls program. The program is also helping create financial opportunities for women and to promote women's decision-making ability through empowerment and dialogue both within the home and community. The project has directly reached 8,500 people that participated in the trainings. The project goal is to contribute to raising awareness and strengthening the systematic response to domestic violence and gender equality in Haiti. Conference date TBD. Support for the Haiti 2015 Measles & Rubella vaccination campaign to reduce measles mortality and to expand implementation of supplementary immunization activities (SIAs) for measles vaccinations in Haiti, with the goal of reaching 1,050,000 children under the age of 5. Vaccinations have been procured by the United Nation’s Foundation while the Haitian Red Cross will carry out the social mobilization component of the program. The campaign is scheduled to take place during the second semester of 2015. The American Red Cross supported critical operating expenses, payroll and administrative fees for the Bernard Mevs Hospital Project Medishare Critical Care Trauma and Rehabilitation Program in Port-au-Prince. The hospital operates 24/7 for the general public, providing the only critical care and trauma services for all of Haiti. The American Red Cross supported the hospital for 27 months from October 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012, employing over 200 Haitian staff (40 Haitian nurses, 22 Haitian physicians and 150 allied healthcare professionals and Haitian support staff), supported by 10 full-time international mentors and 50 volunteers that provided specialized training. The American Red Cross supported Partners in Health (PIH) in the construction, equipping and opening of a national state of the art teaching hospital in Mirebalais. The direct number of people anticipated to be served by thisproject is 160,000 (catchment area for primary/secondary care) and the indirect number of people anticipated to be served by the project is 3.3 million people (catchment area for tertiary care).The Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Field Hospital Support in Carrefour GRC Operational Support for Haiti's University Hospital PIH Prosthetics Clinic Construction ICRC Villa Clinic Support (Community Investment Fund) St. Boniface Foundation 4,747,622 4,504,987 Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 1,798,447 1,706,534 131,625 124,332 hospital has more than 300 beds. 31-Aug-10 31-Dec-13 12-Jan-10 28-Feb-11 1-May-10 31-Dec-12 31-Jan-14 31-Jul-14 Page 53 of 72 The American Red Cross supported the German Red Cross Society for the operation of a field hospital located in Carrefour, just outside of Port-au-Prince. The field hospital opened immediately after the earthquake and continued to provide free medical services through the end of December 2010, treating over 70,000 patients. The hospital provided both fixed and mobile health services, as well as training for volunteers to provide psychosocial support and community health and hygiene promotion. In addition to supporting the operation of the hospital and the salaries of the staff, the American Red Cross also provided support to rehabilitate the soccer field that housed the hospital once the field hospital was closed. In the aftermath of the earthquake, the American Red Cross, through Partners in Health, provided operational support for Haiti's University Hospital (HUEH), the largest public hospital in Haiti. For the months between July 2010 and February 2011, PIH disbursed $3,284,914 to HUEH to pay supplementary compensation to its 1,440 Haitian staff. The American Red Cross reimbursed $2,077,266 of these costs (for the months July 2010 and November 2010 – February 2011), and provided over $500,000 for equipment and supply expenses, and support for other services for the hospital. Injuries from the earthquake resulted in the loss of limbs for more than 5,000 survivors. With support from the American Red Cross, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) rebuilt a prosthetic and physical rehabilitation center, Klinik Kay Kapab, run by the Haitian NGO Healing Hands for Haiti. The ICRC also provided technical assistance for the center to be able to create prosthetic devices for 1,000 people and provide rehabilitation services for 3,000 people. Via the St. Boniface Foundation, this project provided improved health care to a large population center whose clinic was destroyed in the earthquake. The construction of the clinic was funded by the Spanish Red Cross while funding from the American Red Cross was utilized to outfit the clinic with essential medical equipment. This is one of eight CIF grants. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Post-Earthquake Health and Hygiene Promotion in Camps Program (Part 1) ARC Post-Earthquake Health and Hygiene Promotion in Camps Program (Part 2) ARC Strengthening Immunizations Services through Measles Control Operational Support for Measles Campaign UNF UNF Measles vaccinations 2nd round HRC Mobile Medical Services Belizean Grove Foundation Response to Chikungunya Outbreak (Quick Action Fund) HRC Blood Services Augmentation ARC 69,798 66,231 3,669,703 3,482,157 2,632,502 2,497,964 492,936 467,744 108,966 103,397 11,900 11,292 120,434 114,279 976,323 926,426 1-May-10 30-Nov-12 1-May-10 30-Nov-12 2-Mar-12 31-Dec-12 2-Feb-10 31-Dec-10 15-Oct-12 14-Feb-13 2-Jun-12 31-Dec-12 9-Jul-14 8-Jan-15 15-Jan-10 31-Mar-11 Page 54 of 72 The American Red Cross Post-Earthquake Health and Hygiene Promotion Program followed a community-based approach to providing first aid and promoting hygiene, health, disease prevention, and safety in the camps. Program activities included hygiene promotion, condom distribution, and education on preventing cholera, malaria, HIV, and sexual and gender-based violence. The program also conducted disease mitigation activities in the camps. In most cases, this program worked in the same locations as the Haiti Emergency Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Program, complementing disaster risk reduction work with health and hygiene promotion services to camp communities. 337,392 people were reached (counting first visits only), 1,616,361 condoms were distributed, 229,151 benefited from handwashing activities, 35,251 ORS sachets were distributed, 2,268,941 bars of soap and 9,550,085 Aquatabs were distributed. The American Red Cross supported the multi-agency coordinated measles vaccination campaign in 2011/2012 led by the United Nation's Foundation as well as associated social mobilization activities carried out by the Haitian Red Cross. The national coverage reached 92.4% (n=2,963,911 children vaccinated) for OPV and 94.6% (n= 3,069,396 children vaccinated) for MR vaccine. Additionally, 1.2 million units of vitamin A and 1.3 million units of albendozale (antiparasitic drug) were administered. Rapid Monitoring Coverage following the campaign conducted in all departments indicated that national coverage reached was more than 95%. In partnership with the Belizean Grove Foundation, the American Red Cross helped provide mobile medical services to 3,200 individuals. In December 2013, the first case of Chikungunya was reported in the Caribbean and reached Haiti in early 2014. The objective of this Quick Action Fund was to contribute towards eliminating the spread of this disease. Project objectives and activities included enhancing the capacity of the Haitian Ministry of Health to combat Chikungunya, and distributing insecticide mosquito nets, insecticide sprayers, foggers, protective wear and larva killing substances. This is one of five QAFs. In the immediate aftermath of the earthquake, the American Red Cross Biomedical Services Department purchased and transported 4,265 units of blood to supplement the Haitian Red Cross's diminished capacity to collect and process Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Contribution to ICRC Appeal ICRC Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC Disaster Response Activities ARC Hope for Haiti Now Fund ARC 486,885 462,002 2,572,375 2,440,909 237,449 225,314 402,819 382,232 blood. 2010 2010 2010 2012 2010 2011 2010 2011 Page 55 of 72 Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518 distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $158,919, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, and supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported provision of preventive, community-level and curative basic health services, hygiene promotion, HIV awareness-raising and psychosocial support to the affected communities as follows: health assessments (access and availability of health services, prevention, health needs and risk of communicable diseases and epidemics), provision of reproductive health kits, medical and surgical supplies, health information, education and support, training of volunteers and staff, reinforcement of HRC capacity to deliver planned HIV program activities with a special emphasis on reaching most vulnerable populations, and vector control. Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the emergency health category. These costs include purchase, transportation and distribution of first-aid supplies. Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Sub Total MG&F ARC Total - Health (Excluding Cholera) 67,263,496 50,403,499 6,652,434 4,984,961 73,915,930 55,388,461 tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. 9 cents was used for MG&F. Cholera Cholera Prevention and Response Program FRC Cholera Prevention and Response Program NoRC 1,226,423 225,689 613,210 359,373 23-Jun-14 31-Dec-15 23-Jun-14 31-Dec-15 Page 56 of 72 This project through the French Red Cross targets 18 communal sections total, with 14 in the West and 4 in Lower Artibonite departments. The project is strengthening the capacities of HRC in support of the efforts of MSPP in prevention, response and communication related to the cholera epidemic. The activities include conducting hygiene promotion activities through HRC volunteers in cholera persistence areas, enhancing the capacities of HRC volunteers at local and regional level by providing materials and adapted trainings, rehabilitation, repairs and installation of water systems and hand washing stations and coordination and epidemiological information sharing between MSPP, DINEPA and HRC. To date, this project has reached 7,290 people with hygiene promotion activities. The goal of this project through the Norwegian Red Cross is to contribute to the elimination of cholera in Grande Goave and Petit Goave in the West department. The activities include repairs and rehabilitation of water systems and sanitation facilities, hygiene and health promotion activities; community-based disease surveillance and response to acute watery diarrhea spikes in communities. To date, this project has reached 13,878 people with hygiene promotion activities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Cholera Prevention and Response Program Oxfam GB Cholera Prevention and Response Program SRC Cholera Prevention and Response Program HRC Health Service Delivery Project HOPE 645,485 449,660 367,513 106,648 618,064 25,723 1,590,853 1,382,288 23-Jun-14 23-Jun-15 23-Jun-14 22-Dec-15 1-Oct-14 30-Sep-15 1-Apr-11 30-Jun-16 Page 57 of 72 As the lead organization in the North and Northeast departments for coordinating cholera prevention and response, Oxfam (GB) is targeting 6 localities in 3 communes in the North and 4 localities in 4 communes in the Northeast. The activities include facilitating the inclusion of HRC in cholera response activities through coordination and cluster meetings with key WASH/Health actors, training of 210 HRC team members including volunteers in cholera prevention and response, constructing and rehabilitating 5 WASH facilities in health centers with cholera treatment center, rehabilitating 7 water systems and implementing mass media activities to promote safe sanitation, appropriate domestic water management, food handling and hygiene practices. To date, 3 water systems have been rehabilitated, benefitting 20,786 people. The American Red Cross' contribution is part of a larger US$2.7M program being implemented by the Swiss Red Cross in Cormier communal section in the West Department. Activities include setting up and operating a WASH training center in Cormier, constructing a community solar water kiosk in the WASH training center, establishing and training community WASH trainers and the training center management committee, providing training and technical support for household representatives on management and maintenance of community and individual water/sanitation and water treatment and hygiene. The Haitian Red Cross is contributing to the elimination of cholera in the Greater North through sensitization campaigns and distribution of hygiene products. In addition, HRC is carrying out key coordination responsibilities with MSPP on behalf of all Red Cross Movement partners. The project was initially designed to address the cholera outbreak in the North department. As cholera transitioned to an endemic phase, the American Red Cross has supported HOPE to integrate cholera treatment and prevention programs into their innovative community health model known as “Sante Nan Lokou”. The activities include treatment and prevention activities at the hospital, Cholera Treatment Center (CTC) and community level, including extensive hygiene education and WASH infrastructure improvement. To date, this project has reached 20,994 people with hygiene promotion and 8,544 with cholera support. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Cholera Project ARC Cholera Prevention and Treatment Efforts IMC Cholera Response and Treatment Efforts CARE Cholera Prevention and Treatment Efforts FRC 3,940,932 3,825,341 Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 1,531,967 1,487,033 1,213,961 1,178,479 1-Jan-11 30-Nov-12 15-Jan-11 14-Jan-12 1-Feb-11 31-Oct-11 21-Oct-10 21-Jul-11 Page 58 of 72 Cholera response and prevention activities were directly implemented by the American Red Cross, focusing on improving awareness about proper hand-washing and household water treatment, as well as distributing oral rehydration salts (ORS), soap, water purification tablets, and other hygiene commodities. The American Red Cross shipped supplies to affected communities, mobilized health teams and volunteers, helped establish treatment facilities, distributed clean water to thousands of people, and launched nationwide public education campaigns using cellphones and weekly radio shows to reach millions of people with prevention messages. 1,194,940 people were reached. The project training, deployed and maintained four cholera response teams: one in 50 camps of Port-au-Prince and surroundings, one in Arcahaie and Cabaret, and two in 10 communes in the Nord and 13 communes in the Nord-Est. Installation and maintenance was completed of Oral Rehydration Posts/Points (ORPs), including 50 ORPs in Portau-Prince camps, 50 ORPs in Arcahaie and Cabaret (Ouest), 75 ORPs in the Nord and 51 ORPs in the Nord-Est. International Medical Corps established Oral Rehydration Posts and Mobile Medical Units, provided needed staff and supplies, trained volunteers to conduct health and hygiene promotion, constructed and rehabilitated latrines and bathing facilities, provided chlorinated water supplies and trained community members on the proper preparation of chlorine solution, established water kiosks, and provided small grants to local organizations to assist them with community-based cholera response projects. 1,189,784 beneficiaries were reached through this project. CARE established Oral Rehydration Points, supported schools with cholera prevention activities, facilitated cholera case management training, ensured water and sanitation support to eight health facilities and prevented the spread of cholera through education and the distribution of critical relief supplies. The project reached 517,326 people. French Red Cross supported hygiene promotion programs, an ambulance service, the creation of camp hygiene and sanitation committees, disinfection of latrines and public places, cleaning drainage systems, installing and managing Oral Rehydration Posts, chlorinating local water supplies, and distributing soap, chlorine, waste bins and water drums. The French Red Cross also set up a number of Cholera Treatment Units in Port-au-Prince and rehabilitated three primary healthcare centers in Petit Goave. This project Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Cholera Handover Project HRC Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC Medishare Cholera Outbreak Response Medishare PAHO Supplies PAHO 117,655 114,249 2,694,159 2,615,137 55,288 53,667 1,839,876 1,785,910 reached 403,661 people. 30-Sep-13 30-Apr-14 8-Nov-10 and 30-Nov-11 28-Feb-11 and 30-Sep-11 28-Oct-10 28-Oct-10 3-Dec-10 30-Oct-11 Page 59 of 72 This project was part of the closeout plan for the American Red Cross directly implemented Cholera Project. The Haitian Red Cross continued the work in the two project areas by providing surveillance, training and referral services to communities. As part of this project, HRC implemented the following activities: Hygiene and sanitation education and promotion, community engagement and capacity building to address cholera, disease control, and surveillance in collaboration with local health system. Contributions to the 2010 IFRC Hispaniola Cholera Appeal were specifically earmarked to support immediate needs related to the cholera outbreak in Haiti including the following: Procurement and distribution of soap, oral rehydration salts (ORS), chlorine, cots, protective equipment, cholera kits and other specialized equipment, family hygiene kits and kitchen parcels, training of volunteers in epidemic surveillance and control and hygiene promotion messaging, production and dissemination of communication materials, radio and SMS cholera messaging campaigns, prepositioning of medical supplies, establishment and maintenance of handwashing points and oral rehydration points, construction of latrines and showers, set-up of Cholera Treatment Centers (CTUs), case management, provision of clean water, periodic microbiological water testing, excreta disposal, solid waste disposal, associated costs to second a Delegate to a Cholera Emergency Response Team as well as a seconded Delegate to mount an Information Management database. The American Red Cross funded the shipment of 53,310 lbs. of relief items by air through Medishare at the request of the Haitian Ministry of Health to respond to the cholera outbreak. Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) purchased, shipped and stored 1.4 million solutions of Oral Rehydration Salts, 480,000 bags of Ringer Lactate and a variety of other life-saving medicines and medical supplies during the critical early stages of the response. This partnership also enabled PAHO to purchase logistical equipment for their warehouse, implement an online information management system to Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Cholera Response Supply Shipment PIH Oral Cholera Vaccination PIH Cholera Programming in Port-auPrince SAVE Cholera Programming in Leogane SAVE Sub Total MG&F ARC track stock and medicines available in their warehouse, produce cholera beds and train Ministry of Health personnel for the transition of the cholera Alert and Response System to the Haitian government. Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 2-Nov-10 Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 6-Feb-12 15-Jan-13 386,325 374,994 15-Mar-11 31-May-11 1,839,629 1,785,671 15-Jan-11 14-Sep-11 22,508,836 19,485,095 2,226,149 1,927,097 2-Nov-10 Associated costs with shipment of cholera response supplies through Partners in Health. The American Red Cross supported a campaign conducted by Partners in Health and the Haitian organization, GHESKIO, with support from the Haitian Ministry of Health, to reduce cholera deaths in Haiti by introducing the oral cholera vaccination to the country. This pilot project vaccinated 90,000 Haitians against cholera. The pilot was conducted in both an urban area—the Cite de Dieu slum in Port-au-Prince—and a rural area—Bocozel—in the Artibonite river valley. Save the Children managed Cholera Treatment Units (CTUs), transitioned the CTUs to Oral Rehydration Points (ORPs) with a referral system to CTUs, and conducted cholera prevention-focused hygiene promotion activities in Port-au-Prince. The American Red Cross worked together with the US Agency for International Development's Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) to fund this program. This project reached 117,393 with hygiene promotion and cholera support. Save the Children set up two Cholera Treatment Units and eleven Oral Rehydration Points in rural areas of Leogane, and reached people with health and hygiene promotion activities. The project also distributed relief supplies such as soap and aquatabs.This project reached 37,893 with hygiene promotion and cholera support. MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. 9 cents Page 60 of 72 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Total - Cholera 24,734,985 was used for MG&F. 21,412,192 Water & Sanitation EkoLakay Social Business Pilot in Port-au-Prince SOIL Construction of Septic Tanks in Support of 16/6 Program UNOPS 829,486 152,552 444,880 387,824 10-Nov-14 9-Nov-16 4-Apr-14 3-Jan-15 Page 61 of 72 The American Red Cross initially partnered with SOIL as a Community Investment Fund (CIF) grantee supporting the scale up of SOIL’s social business model pilot for sustainably providing household sanitation services in northern Haiti. Following successful completion of the project, the partnership was expanded to Port-au-Prince. This current project aims to design and implement a sustainable sanitation service providing dignified sanitation access in impoverished communities in Port-au-Prince that can be scaled-up at minimal expense and has the potential to be sustained long term without external grant funding. Activities include: Latrine construction, upgrading composting waste treatment facility in Truitier Solid Waste Treatment Center, evaluate and improve the potential for independent entrepreneurs to profitably provide sustained service to EkoLakay toilets, and conduct a robust test of a potential private sector solution to Haiti’s sanitation crisis. The project aims to reach 2,200 people as entrepreneurs or beneficiaries of improved sanitation services. Following a request from UCLBP, the American Red Cross supported the UNOPS’s 16/6 initiative. The 16 Neighbourhoods/6 Camps project (16/6) was a governmentprioritized initiative to provide an integrated response to the closing of six camps and the resettlement of displaced people.The project aimed to improve the options and quality of life of people returning to their neighborhoods of origin by addressing urgent physical infrastructure and social problems, as identified by the affected communities. Financed by the Haiti Reconstruction Fund, the 16/6 project it was implemented jointly by the Government of Haiti, the International Organization for Migration (IOM), UNDP, the International Labour Organization (ILO) and UNOPS. The ARC-funded portion of the project constructed 350 septic tanks connected to each house constructed under the 16/6 Program, benefitting 1,750 people. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Latrine Desludging Project IRC Improving Drainage in Place-de-laPaix CONCERN Improving Water Sanitation Services IMC Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Management CRS Improving Water Sanitation Services IRC 2,412,684 2,107,964 131,341 114,752 Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 3,765,614 3,290,020 3,515,073 3,072,217 1-May-12 30-Nov-14 1-Jun-10 30-May-11 15-Dec-10 15-Jan-12 31-Oct-11 30-Apr-14 1-Nov-10 31-Mar-12 Page 62 of 72 This project protected camp residents from cholera and other water-borne diseases. International Rescue Committee (IRC) worked in conjunction with DINEPA and UNICEF to remove waste from latrines in the most vulnerable IDP camps to extend their viability, directly supporting the DINEPA Strategy for Cholera Prevention Action in the camps. The number of camps this project worked in fluctuated as the Government of Haiti's plans for each area shifted. Overall this project directly served displaced populations of about 42,000 when they were in the highest number of camps, to about 25,000 at the lowest number of camps. The camps that housed many Haitians were often located on marginal land that is prone to flooding. The American Red Cross partnered with Concern Worldwide to address this problem by improving drainage at Place-de-la-Paix camp. Project activities included clearing canals and drainage ditches, relocating shelters, and constructing and backfilling drains with gravel. An estimated 16,000 people benefited from this project. The earthquake damaged much of Port-au-Prince's already limited water and sanitation infrastructure, increasing health concerns for residents living in crowded camps where disease can travel quickly. The American Red Cross partnered with the International Medical Corps to address these concerns by improving access to safe water, clean latrines and bathing facilities. Additional activities included hygiene promotion, trash collection and drainage projects such as canal clearing. This project reached 35,656 people directly in the Port-au-Prince metropolitan area. When the earthquake struck, it all but halted already limited sanitation services such as trash pickup and sewage disposal, leaving waste piled up in market areas and camps. The aim of this program through Catholic Relief Services was to improve hygiene and solid waste disposal in Metropolitan Port-au-Prince. This project served 248,745 people over a period of 34 months. The earthquake damaged much of Port-au-Prince’s already limited water and sanitation infrastructure, increasing health concerns for residents living in crowded camps where disease can travel quickly. In partnership with the International Rescue Committee, the American Red Cross helped to address these concerns by providing safe water, clean latrines, hygiene promotion, trash collection and drainage interventions such as ditch digging and canal clearing. This project reached 58,850 beneficiaries in camps Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Improving Water and Sanitation Services American Refugee Committee WatSan Project ARC 3,265,197 2,852,117 1,724,827 1,506,982 and neighboring communities of Port-au-Prince. 1-Nov-10 31-Jan-12 1-Jan-11 30-Sep-12 Page 63 of 72 American Refugee Committee provided safe water, clean latrines, bathing facilities and hand washing stations in addition to hygiene promotion and drainage activities such as ditch digging and canal clearing. This project aimed to reduce risk of waterborne and vector-borne disease in spontaneous settlements and their peripheries in Port-au-Prince (PAP), and in areas where American Red Cross partners constructed transitional shelters. Services included hygiene promotion and improvements to basic water supply, increased access to safe water and latrines, excreta disposal, drainage, and trash collection.113,138 people were reached with hygiene promotion, and 11,280 people are benefitting from new or rehabilitated water systems or sanitation facilities. This project reduced risk of waterborne and vector-borne disease in spontaneous settlements and their peripheries in Port-au-Prince (PAP), and in areas in which t-shelters were constructed by ARC partners, through hygiene promotion and improvements to basic water supply, excreta disposal, drainage, and trash collection. Achievements included improved access to safe water and sanitation in camps for 41,031 direct beneficiaries, of which 8,000 people had access to safe latrines and 15,050 who had access to showers in camps. Ten temporary water systems were installed in eight different localities, 1,609 cubic meter of safe water was distributed in 5 camps. A total of 301 individual cabins and shower were constructed in 20 sites and another 14 were rehabilitated in two other sites, distribution of 20 solid waste containers in one site, construction and rehabilitation of four communal hand wash stations, construction of 92 meter of drainage, construction and rehabilitation of 29 urinals, four water systems, 20 rainwater harvesting systems, 10 camps received cleaning materials for latrine maintenance, a total of 75 Camp Management Committee and WASH Committee members were trained in construction, operation and maintenance of WASH facilities. Out of those, 36 were also trained in leadership, Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Disaster Response Activities ARC Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC 1,197,835 1,046,550 20,834,386 18,203,021 organizational skills and conflict management. 2010 2011 2010 2014 Page 64 of 72 Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the emergency water & sanitation category. These costs include purchase, transportation and distribution of hygiene kits, buckets and jerry cans. To stem the risk of waterborne and water related diseases American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported the following: provision of safe water, adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion, coordination of Movement water and sanitation activities, deployment of Water and Sanitation Emergency Relief Unit (ERU), provision of water through the ERU Water and Sanitation deployment, rapid emergency needs and capacity assessments, periodic microbiological water testing, distribution of water and sanitation relief supplies (household water, treatment, jerry cans, buckets, etc.) and training on use of items, mobilization of HRC volunteers to carry out hygiene promotion activities during distributions, contribution toward the construction of first liquid waste treatment center in the country (Mont-aCabrit), re-establishment of water supply where possible through rehabilitation of water supply infrastructure, construction and rehabilitation of sanitation infrastructure, vector control and prevention measures, waste disposal measures, drainage measures, training of community-based HRC volunteers on participatory hygiene, provision of printed communication materials (posters, flyers, manuals, educational materials, etc.) and other supplies to be used in the hygiene promotion activities. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Contribution to ICRC Appeal ICRC HAP M&E ARC Hope for Haiti Now Fund ARC Sub Total MG&F Total - Water & Sanitation ARC 33,846 29,571 1,241 1,084 2,318,623 2,025,783 42,335,345 36,415,796 4,187,012 3,601,562 46,522,357 40,017,358 2010 2010 2010 2011 2010 2011 Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518 distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $158,919, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Monitoring & evaluation expenses for some directly implemented projects were tracked separately at the start of the operation. This covered assessment of the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and impact of activities and improve the performance and ensure program objectives are met. Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. 9 cents was used for MG&F. Page 65 of 72 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Livelihoods Economic Strengthening and Livelihoods Improvement CECI Participatory and Safer Housing and Urban Development Program in Canaan (CUCD) / Livelihoods component USAID Creating Opportunities for Youth in Cite Soleil and Martissant ARC Economic Strengthening and Livelihoods Improvement in the Northwest PADF Gigando Pela Paz (Community Investment Fund) VIVA RIO 3,769,984 262,862 Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 2,513,459 1,579 2,513,459 203,022 126,996 74,823 1-Dec-14 30-Nov-17 19-Aug-13 30-Jun-16 1-Dec-14 31-May-17 1-Nov-14 30-Jun-17 24-Jun-14 15-Jun-15 Page 66 of 72 The American Red Cross is funding the Centre for International Studies and Cooperation (CECI) to carry out a project that seeks to develop and strengthen livelihoods opportunities of 1000 women and men, primarily youth in Carrefour-Feuilles through vocational training and microenterprise development. This is a sub-project of the ARC-funded USAID CUCD program mentioned under the shelter sector. This subcomponent of the American Red Cross / USAID partnerships seeks to enhance employable skills and income generation, increase the number of women and men in Canaan able to secure stable employment and increase income generation viability of Canaan-based small and medium enterprises. This program will target people living in Canaan, an area of over 100,000 residents. The aim of this program is to increase opportunities for growth and skills development for young women and men in Cite Soleil and Martissant, two densely populated and highly vulnerable communities, to enhance their physical, mental and economic well-being and prepare them to be agents of change in their communities. The program aims to reach 5,000 to 8,000 youth over a period of 2.5 years. This partnership with the Pan American Development Fund (PADF) seeks to enhance food security and contribute to more sustainable and resilient livelihoods for rural women and men in the Northwest Department of Haiti. The project seeks to train 880 farmers in various agricultural practices and productions, establish 1200 bio-intensive gardens, train 100 farmers on disaster resilient agriculture techniques, distribute 500 livestock packages to farmers, train 500 breeders/farmers in livestock methods, and establish 4 agricultural processing centers. Viva Rio is a Brazilian community-based non-profit organization, which began work in Haiti in 2004 following an invitation from the United Nations. What began as a simple consultancy in Haiti has become today an efficient operation working with youth in some of the toughest neighborhoods in the Haitian capital. With support from the American Red Cross, Viva Rio is seeking to strengthen youth leadership and decrease violence through sports (capoeira) in the Carrefour-Feuilles Neighborhood. This is one of eight CIF grants. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Livelihoods and Host Family Support FONKOZE Host Family Support IOM Host Family Voucher Support MC School Voucher Project ARC School Voucher Project DRC Cash for Work MC 10,339,292 9,887,265 9,317,523 8,910,167 6,042,478 5,828,849 1,461,129 1,397,250 1,886,261 1,803,795 1,509,292 1,443,235 1-Mar-10 31-Dec-11 31-Aug-10 31-Dec-11 1-Jul-10 30-Jun-11 1-Dec-10 1-Dec-11 1-Nov-10 31-Aug-11 1-Jul-10 30-Jun-11 Page 67 of 72 The American Red Cross partnered with Fonkoze, Haiti's largest microfinance institute, to provide microfinance grants and loans to reach 255,460 people, including female headsof-households, business owners and families hosting displaced Haitians. Following the January 2010 earthquake, many displaced survivors left Port-au-Prince for other areas of Haiti, often overwhelming local services in these regions and depleting the already overstretched resources of their host families. To help reduce the burden faced by areas hosting displaced Haitians, the American Red Cross partnered with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) to help 20,719 people through a work program which, by supporting livelihoods, reduced pressure on host community resources. Activities included building or rehabilitating small water canals, conducting soil stabilization and expanding access to water in general. The project also distributed basic household goods and/or shelter kits to 7,500 host families and provided additional indirect community benefits from disaster risk reduction and mitigation projects. IOM trained health promoters to educate people in host family communities about cholera prevention. Mercy Corps provided support to host families and reached a total of 82,963 beneficiaries by providing vouchers to purchase basic household goods from local vendors. Some of these people also benefitted from income generating activities, and the program also included hygiene promotion and disaster preparedness education. After the earthquake, many Haitians lost their primary source of income and were left without the means to meet basic needs, including sending their children to school. The American Red Cross helped displaced families in three camps in the Croix Deprez neighborhood by directly paying second and third trimester school fees as well as providing grants for displaced families to cover education-related expenses like uniforms, transportation and lunch money. This project reached 2,727 children. The Danish Red Cross helped displaced families in Les Cayes arrondissement by providing vouchers to cover school fees for 1,850 children as well as livelihoods grants for 2,000 families who host displaced children. Mercy Corps employed 8,700 people to complete small cashfor-work projects that removed rubble, dug drainage canals, recycled rubble to make building materials, cleaned up debris and renovated roads. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Cash Transfer Pilot Project ARC Youth Education and Leadership (Community Investment Fund) HELP Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC Disaster Response Activities ARC Sub Total MG&F ARC Total - Livelihoods 739,015 706,706 147,359 140,917 124,554 119,109 16,346 15,632 43,648,971 33,799,674 4,316,931 3,342,825 47,965,902 37,142,498 2010 2011 20-Feb-14 19-Feb-15 2010 2012 2010 2011 MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. 9 cents was used for MG&F. Disaster Preparedness Gran No Pi Djanm Program ARC in partnership with HRC and PADF 19,845,586 8,107,108 Because the needs of families differ, the American Red Cross committed to providing some families with the financial assistance necessary to choose what local goods and services they needed most. The American Red Cross piloted an innovative cash transfer program to give small cash grants to more than 1,800 families in camps through text messaging to cell phones. Efforts focused on helping families relocate from areas at high risk of flooding. HELP is the largest university scholarship program in Haiti. Through American Red Cross funding, HELP supported 167 straight-A students from all over Haiti to access university and also connect students with employment opportunities. This is one of eight CIF grants. American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported delivery of livelihood substitution activities such as cash-for-work for debris clearing, delivery of livelihoods / income substitution activities such as unconditional cash grants, support for community-led livelihood restoration activities through the provision of productive assets, tools, waste removal, and quick impact projects providing shortterm livelihoods opportunities. Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the livelihoods category. 1-Dec-12 Page 68 of 72 31-May-16 The overall goal of “Gran No Pi Djamn” Program is for targeted communities in the North of Haiti to have increased resilience, stronger capacity, and reduced exposure to external shocks. A key component of this integrated program is to build the capacity of the Haitian Red Cross in three departments (Northeast, North and Northwest) through a multi-sectoral approach. The program targets 10 communal sections in the Greater North. This program is co- Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) LAMIKA - Integrated Neighborhood Rehabilitation and Recovery ARC Canaan Social Engagement Program ARC HRC Institutional Change & Development Program ARC in partnership with HRC Quick Action Fund (QAF)- Balance ARC 61,658 54,009 4,263,126 13,745 13,230,391 1,230,928 1,128,326 - implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross in partnership with the Pan American Development Fund (PADF), the latter is responsible for upgrading up to 19 evacuation shelters. 1-Nov-11 30-Jun-16 1-Dec-14 31-May-16 2010 30-Jun-19 1-Dec-14 30-Jun-16 Page 69 of 72 See detailed description of the LAMIKA Program under the "Shelter" category. Canaan is an emerging city north of the metropolitan area of Port-au-Prince, Haiti, which spontaneously developed following the 2010 earthquake. Over 100,000 people live in Canaan or are currently building in the area. The Government of Haiti estimates that Canaan residents have already invested over $100 million of their own resources in the area. The overall program goal is to mobilize and organize the communities within Canaan to improve their resilience. This will be accomplished through three programmatic pillars: Social engagement, disaster risk reduction, and environmental engagement. This directly implemented program will complement the American Red Cross's partnership with USAID. The aftermath of the devastating January 2010 earthquake significantly impacted the Haitian Red Cross' infrastructure and operations. As part of the American Red Cross strategy and as the earthquake recovery efforts scale down and partners begin to exit, the goal of this program is to help the Haitian Red Cross in its organizational development as auxiliary to GoH for disaster response, to facilitate Haitian Red Cross's proper planning and institutional development and to strengthen the Haitian Red Cross' central/HQ and Regional Branch capacity development planning for future years. The Quick Action Fund (QAF) represents a $1M financial commitment made by the American Red Cross, specifically to quickly respond to sudden humanitarian emergency needs in Haiti. To date five QAFs have been funded from the commitment as detailed below: Miron Relocation (for more details see line 26 under the Shelter sector), Response to Chinkungunya Outbreak (for more details see line 69 under the Health sector), Returnee Support Haiti-DR Border (for more details see line 152 under the Disaster Preparedness sector). In addition, two additional QAFs have been awarded which were funded from the QAF-Balance line. These two Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Earthquake Recovery Learning Conference ARC in partnership with HRC Haiti Emergency Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Project ARC Contribution to IFRC Appeal IFRC Disaster Response Activities ARC 220,507 193,151 4,303,558 3,769,676 6,397,564 5,603,908 131,788 115,439 QAFs are the following: Sandy Restocking of Relief Supplies in the amount of $50,000 (Disaster Preparedness/closed) and Blood Supply (1000 units) and Restocking of Blood Testing Kits in the amount of $275K (Health- in close out process). 1-Dec-14 31-May-16 15-Mar-10 28-Feb-13 2010 2014 2010 2011 Page 70 of 72 As learning organizations, the goal of the HRC/ARC Earthquake Recovery Learning Conference (date TBD) is to collectively reflect on the Haiti earthquake recovery efforts with key stakeholders and define how lessons learned from the Haiti operation can contribute to humanitarian and organizational learning and programmatic and operational improvements for future responses. This project reduced the risks faced by camp residents through a community-based approach. Disaster preparedness activities included establishing and training resident disaster response committees, developing preparedness plans and installing early warning systems in camps, while mitigation activities included digging ditches, installing drainage systems and reinforcing embankments. In most cases, this program worked in the same camps as the American Red Cross implemented Post-Earthquake Health Promotion Program (PEHP), thus providing comprehensive services to camp communities. American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported: establishment of early warning systems, community emergency evacuation and contingency plans, community emergency response teams, pre-positioning of emergency stocks, procurement and distribution of emergency equipment kits, training of volunteers and regional and local Red Cross committees in disaster preparedness. Also, the American Red Cross contributed to the purchase of relief supplies for Sandy affected individuals. In addition, as a learning organization, ARC contributed to two Movement-wide learning events. Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the disaster preparedness sector. Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Kouri Di Vwazan'w ("KDV" - Tell your Neighbor) HRC Returnee Support at the Haitian / Dominican Border (Quick Action Fund) HRC Haiti Green Recovery Partnership WWF Sub Total MG&F Total - Disaster Preparedness Grand Total - All Projects ARC 220,507 190,417 37,413 32,771 Written approval required prior to disclosure Written approval required prior to disclosure 50,147,517 19,526,505 4,959,644 1,931,193 55,107,161 21,457,698 487,640,757 389,045,233 1-Jun-13 31-Dec-13 6-Jan-14 15-May-14 10-Oct-12 30-Sep-14 The KDV project contributed to disaster-risk reduction of the Haitian population through the strengthening of the Haitian Red Cross' chapter capacities. More specifically the project sought to strengthen chapter capacities through continued training of DRR regional focal points, KDV instructors and volunteers and conducting awareness and education campaigns at community level. In September 2013, the Constitutional Court of the Dominican Republic ruled that many Dominicans of Haitian descent and officially registered as Dominican citizens at birth no longer met the criteria for Dominican nationality. As a result, a great number of people were repatriated into Haiti at the Haitian/Dominican border. This Quick Action Fund assisted the Haitian Red Cross to scale-up operations at the border to provide timely assistance to the influx of returnees and/or the displaced by supporting the Haitian government in the provision of medical care, psychosocial support, provision of clean water and essential non-food items. This is one of five QAFs. The goal of the Haiti Green Recovery Partnership was to mainstream environmental sustainability in American Red Cross implemented projects and to reduce risk and vulnerability for project beneficiaries by minimizing, mitigating or eliminating environmental degradation. The technical assistance from World Wildlife Fund supported and enhanced consideration and inclusion of environmental components in the American Red Cross' integrated programming approach for both LAMIKA and Gran No Pi Djamn. MG&F is Management, General Expenses, and Fundraising. These expenses are not identifiable with a single program – like the Haiti program- but are required to conduct the work of the American Red Cross. In the case of Haiti, 91 cents of every dollar donated for Haiti has been, or will be, spent on programs to help Haitians affected by the quake. Nine cents was used for MG&F. Page 71 of 72 Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Note: Costs include the grant amount as well as an allocation of costs for Red Cross program services needed to implement the project. These are estimated costs because program services are not separately tracked on a project-by-project basis, but at the program level, according to Not-for-Profit accounting standards. Page 72 of 72 Attachment 1: February 10, 2016 ARC response Summary of HAP Management Costs by Expenses Category Salaries and Wages Employee Benefits Travel and Maintenance Equipment Maintenance and Rental Supplies and Materials Contractual Services Financial and Material Assistance Depreciation and Amortization Grand Total: General Management $ 31,196,265.44 $ 9,467,347.54 $ 3,260,685.88 $ 3,247,095.66 $ 1,216,356.03 $ 19,959,019.51 $ 1,219,492.17 $ 8,617.77 $ 69,574,880.00 Percentage of Total 44.84% 13.61% 4.69% 4.67% 1.75% 28.69% 1.75% 0.01% 100% Summary of HAP Management Costs by Expenses Category General Management (in millions) Percentage of Total Salaries and Wages $ 31.2 44.84% Employee Benefits $ 9.5 13.61% Travel and Maintenance $ 3.3 4.69% Equipment Maintenance and Rental $ 3.2 4.67% Supplies and Materials $ 1.2 1.75% Contractual Services $ 20.0 28.69% Financial and Material Assistance $ 1.2 1.75% Depreciation and Amortization $ 0.0 0.01% Grand Total: $ 69.6 100% 1 Attachment J: March 24, 2016 ARC response Ezh (Judiciary-Rep) From: Melt-zen David Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 1:32 PM To: Josh (Judiciary-Rep) Cc: DeFrancis. Suzy; Rhoa, Brian; Latham, Dawn Subject: RE: Follow-Up to Yesterday's Conference Call Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Josh - In response to your request for a description of the expense categories we use to track our Haiti Assistance Program management expenses, below are examples of the types of expenses that go into each category: Expense Category [Expense Item Examples naval and maintenance Flights {including from the US to Haiti); Meals and Lodging for staff travelling to Haiti for meetings and monitoring of projects Equipment Maintenance and Rental Computers, printers and other similar office equipment; Equipment rental and leases (including vehicles in Haiti]; Equipment maintenance and repairs; Auto fuel and maintenance. and Material? Office supplies; Training supplies; Copying and printing supplies; Promotional materials; Books; and Subscriptions. Contractual Services Professional fees; Building maintenance; Office and residence rental; Utilities; Communication expenses; Call center charges; staff hired through a temporary agency; Bank charges; Software licenses; Postage; and Shipping. Financial and Material Assistance Payments to the International Federation to cover expenses incurred by the International Federation to coordinate response and recovery efforts; American Red Cross staff training. You also asked during a phone call whether bonuses are paid out ofthe "Employee Benefits? category. The answer is that bonuses are not paid out of the Employee Benefits category. Bonuses would be charged to "Salaries and Wages?. Ofthe 918 staff who have worked on HAP, one individual received a bonus for special achievement one-tenth of one percent of all staff}. in addition to this one staff member, an additional 18 staff received payments intended to either incentivize them to join or remain working for HAP either in Haiti or traveling extensively to Haiti, which is a rather challenging environment in which to work. Such payments also serve to save expenses incurred in hiring and training new staff as well as mitigate program delays associated with vacant positions. Amounts have also been paid to staff as part of an employee referral program. In total, 19 [1 18] of the 918 staff received payments. The average size ofthe sums paid to the 19 staff is 55,340. i know Gail is interested in meeting with you to discuss your remaining Haiti-related request which was for the names ofthe individuals in the command and control slides. Regards, David Message-m? From: Josh (Judiciary?Rep) Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 2:01 PM To: Meltzer, David Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy; Rhoa, Brian, Latham, Dawn Subject: RE: Follow-Up to Yesterday's Conference Call Sounds good, thank you From: lvleltzer, David Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 12:01 PM To: Josh {Judiciary?Rep) Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy Rhoa, Brian Latham, Dawn Subject: Re: Follow-Up to Yesterday's Conference Call Josh, I'm out of the country and will get back to you following my return. Regards, David On Feb 24, 2016, at 5:50 PM, Josh {Judiciary-Rep} ?wrote: 3- David circling back to this production. I've been able to run the traps on this internally and we have just a couple clean up requests regarding it. First, can you provide us with a description for the expense categories? No need to do salary/wages or employee benefits. But we'd like a bit more color and granularity for all the other categories. For example, with travel and maintenance does this include flights from the US to Haiti? Vehicles in Haiti? Fuel costs? I assume these categories have already been defined by ARC, if not please let us know and i can be more clear with a follow up request. Second, with respect to the command and control slides, can you provide the names of the individuals in the positions? :3 Thanks so much, Josh :5 2? From: Josh (Judiciary?Rep) Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 7:08 PM To: Meltzer, David Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy Rhoa, Brian Latham, Dawn Subject: Re: Follow-Up to Yesterday's Conference Call 3? Thank you, David. We?ll take a look. Original Message From: Meltzer, David Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 4:36 PM a To: Josh {Judiciary-Rep} Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy; Rhoa, Brian; Latham, Dawn Subject: RE: Follow-Up to Yesterday's Conference Call 2: Josh, Attached are our responses to the three requests made during our recent conference call. Specifically, attached is: 1. A chart providing the total number of Full-Time Equivalent staff who have worked on the Haiti Assistance Program since its inception six years ago with the total divided in two parts - Haitian and non-Haitian staff. 2. A breakdown of the $69 million in program costs inCUrrecl by the American Red Cross in administering the Haiti Assistance Program. 3; a 3. The chain of command for staff engaged in: a. On?sight project oversight; b. Monitoring and evaluation c. Grant management and oversight of partner reporting; (J. Financial, risk and project management; and e. Human resources management to attract and retain high caliber staff for projects managed by external partners and/or internal project sub-teams (directly implemented program). Regards, David From: Josh (revamp) Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 3:25 PM To: Meitzer, David Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy; Rhoa, Brian; Latham, Dawn 2? Subject: RE: Follow-Up to Yesterday's Conference Call David :2 Thanks for follow up. With respect to those categories, if that is the extent to which ARC can break it down, we'd appreciate that (it would provide the most up to date example, too]. I: Thank you, Josh From: Meltzer, David 3- Sent: Tuesday, February 02. 2016 5:22 PM s. To: Josh lJLidiciary?Rep} Cc: oeFrancis, Suzv Rhos. Brian Latham, Dawn Subject: RE: Follow?Up to Yesterday's Conference Call 3: Our accounting system does not track our program costs in the specific categories you listed. However, we are able to break down the $69 million in program costs by the categories externally audited and publicly reported upon which are in line with GAAP. These categories are: 3> Salaries and wages Employee benefits Travel and maintenance 2? Equipment maintEnance and rental Supplies and materials Contractual services Financial and material assistance Depreciation and amortization Finally, you are correct that salaries are included in program costs. Regards, David :5 From: Josh (Judiciary?Rep) Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2016 4:43 PM To: Meltzer, David Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy; Rhoa, Brian; Latham, Dawn Subject: RE: Follow?Up to Yesterday's Conference Call 21> David Thanks again for your time yesterday. We'd like to add the following: 2) #2 A breakdown of the $69 million in program costs incurred by the American Red Cross in administering the Haiti Assistance Program. 32' If possible, we?d like the costs broken down into the following categories: a. On-sight project oversight; b. Monitoring and evaluation; a c. Grant management and oversight of partner reporting; d. Financial, risk and project management; and e. Human resources management to attract and retain high caliber staff for projects managed by external partners and/or internal project sub?teams (directly implemented program]. a f. Other categories that were used within ?program costs" by ARC for HAP. g. Salariesfbenefits listed according to the preceding categories {on the call ARC mentioned that salaries were included in program costs, cerrect me it I am wrong] ?e Let me know if you have questions. Thanks, David. >losh From: Meltzer, David Sent: Thursday. January 28. 2016 12:23 PM To: Finn?Brown. Josh Musician-Rem Cc: Denancis. Suzi: Rhea. Brian a Subject: Follow-Up to Yesterday's Conference Call Josh, Before asking our team to start pulling the data you requested during yesterday's call, I want to double check with you that we understand your request well. My notes indicate that you are requesting: 1. The total number of Full-Time Equivalent (FFE) staff who have worked on the Haiti Assistance Program since its inception six years ago with the total divided in two parts - Haitian and non-Haitian staff. ,3 2. A breakdown ofthe $69 million in program costs incurred by the American Red Cross in administering the Haiti Assistance Program. :s 3. The chain of command for staff engaged in: a. On~sight project oversight; b. Monitoring and evaluation c. Grant management and oversight of partner reporting; d. Financial, risk and project management; and e. Human resources management to attract and retain high caliber staff for projects managed by external partners and/or internal project Sub?teams (directly implemented program). Does the preceding accurately capture the request? :2 Regards, David Attachment K: ESP-6 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF Coordinator: Support Agencies: Department of Homeland Security/ Federal Emergency Management Agency Primary Agencies: Department of Homeland Security/ Federal Emergency Management Agency American Red Cross Corporation for National and Community Service Department of Agriculture Department of Defense Department of Health and Human Services Department of Homeland Security Department of Housing and Urban Development Department of the Interior Department of Justice Department of Labor Department of Transportation Department of the Treasury Department of Veterans Affairs General Services Administration Social Security Administration U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Postal Service U.S. Small Business Administration American Red Cross National Center for Missing and Exploited Children National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster Other Nongovernmental Organizations INTRODUCTION Purpose Emergency Support Function (ESF) #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services coordinates and provides life-sustaining resources, essential services, and statutory programs when the needs of disaster survivors exceed local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area government capabilities. Scope Mass care, emergency assistance, temporary housing, and human services agencies and organizations at the local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal levels work together to provide life-sustaining assistance to disaster survivors. The four primary functions of ESF #6 are:  Mass Care: Congregate sheltering, feeding, distribution of emergency supplies, and reunification of children with their parent(s)/legal guardians and adults with their families  Emergency Assistance: Coordination of voluntary organizations and unsolicited donations and management of unaffiliated volunteers; essential community relief May 2013 ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-1 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex services; non-congregate and transitional sheltering; support to individuals with disabilities and others with access and functional needs in congregate facilities; support to children in disasters; support to mass evacuations; and support for the rescue, transportation, care, shelter, and essential needs of household pets and service animals  Temporary Housing: Temporary housing options including rental, repair and loan assistance; replacement; factory-built housing; semi-permanent construction; referrals; identification and provision of safe, secure, functional and physically accessible housing; and access to other sources of temporary housing assistance  Human Services: Disaster assistance programs that help survivors address unmet disaster-caused needs and/or non-housing losses through loans and grants; also includes supplemental nutrition assistance, crisis counseling, disaster case management, disaster unemployment, disaster legal services, and other state and Federal human services programs and benefits to survivors. Federal ESF #6 agencies are linked closely with two Recovery Support Functions (RSFs) defined in the National Disaster Recovery Framework: Housing and Health and Social Services. Following an incident, these RSFs may be activated concurrently with ESF #6, although their initial focus is on planning and information sharing rather than response. When active at the same time, the ESFs and RSFs collaborate and share information while focusing on their respective functions. There is intentional overlap between ESF and RSF missions, but, as ESF requirements diminish, RSFs assume the residual ESF activities that are associated with recovery. The timing of this transition depends on the scope of the incident and the needs of survivors. ESF #6 works closely with the Housing RSF to coordinate the transition of survivors from sheltering and temporary housing to long-term and permanent housing as quickly as possible. ESF #6 also coordinates closely with the Health and Social Services RSF to ensure continuous support for social services needs in the impacted communities. RELATIONSHIP TO WHOLE COMMUNITY A basic premise of emergency management is that disaster response begins and ends at the community level. This is particularly true for the functions of ESF #6, as many disasters occur with little or no warning, thereby, requiring that life-sustaining services be provided quickly to prevent additional suffering and loss of life. ESF #6 partner agencies and organizations rely on the whole community to meet the needs of disaster survivors. Key elements of the whole community include individuals with disabilities and others with access and functional needs 1) whose needs must be considered well in advance when preparing for disasters and emergencies and 2) who are important partners to support the delivery of core capabilities during incident response (e.g., through associations and alliances that serve these populations). People with disabilities and others with access and functional needs include individuals who are from diverse cultures, races, and nations of origin; individuals who do not read, have limited English proficiency, or are non-English speaking; people who have physical, sensory, behavioral, mental health, intellectual, developmental and cognitive disabilities; senior citizens with and without disabilities or other access and functional needs; children with and without ESF #6-2 ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex disabilities or other access and functional needs and their parents; individuals who are economically or transportation disadvantaged; women who are pregnant; individuals who have chronic medical conditions; and those with pharmacological dependency. Community disaster and emergency plans should include provisions for individuals who own household pets or have responsibility for service and other animals. Planning factors should include resources and processes for the rescue, transportation, care, shelter, and essential needs of animals. The whole community also includes local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal governments; nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), including voluntary, faith-based, community-based, and other nonprofit organizations in the civic/nonprofit sector; academia; the private sector; individuals; and communities. Partners from all elements of the whole community work together to address shortfalls and help to ensure that the life-sustaining needs of disaster survivors are met. Individuals/Households Disaster response begins with individuals and households executing their disaster plans, which should include having sufficient food and water on hand, a plan for communication, pre-identified shelter locations, pre-identified evacuation routes, and a Go Kit that includes important documents, lists of medications, household pet or service animal vaccination records, and photo identification for all members of the household. Individuals with disabilities or others with access and functional needs implement their plan for accessible transportation and/or support resources, including service animals. Households with animals activate their plan for the evacuation, transportation, sheltering, and care of their animals. Private Sector/Nongovernmental Organizations This ESF #6 Annex uses the term NGO to refer to voluntary, faith-based, communitybased, and other nongovernmental organizations in the civic/nonprofit sector. NGOs, together with academia and the private sector, are integral elements of the whole community response, coordinating with local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and/or Federal partners to provide ESF #6 resources, programs, and services to affected individuals/households and communities. These partners collaborate to resolve the disaster-related unmet needs of affected individuals and communities. NGOs and the private sector also provide operational information to local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal ESF #6 or equivalent points of contact. This information allows government ESF #6 planners to identify actual or potential shortfalls and/or excesses and adjust services to the needs of the community. Local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal agencies coordinate with NGOs and the private sector to support the management of unsolicited donated goods and services and unaffiliated volunteers and organizations. These resources, when incorporated effectively into the whole community response, can help accelerate the recovery of individuals, households, and communities. May 2013 ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-3 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Local, State, Tribal, Territorial, and Insular Area Governments Local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments are responsible for the welfare of those who reside in their jurisdictions. State and territorial governments are usually organized using the ESF structure; however, local, tribal, and insular area jurisdictions may not address all of the components of ESF #6 or may have adopted a different emergency response structure. The state designates one or more official(s) to coordinate with Federal ESF #6 during incidents requiring a coordinated Federal response. At the local level, government agencies, NGOs, and the private sector coordinate ESF #6 activities to meet the immediate needs of disaster survivors. When the impact of the incident exceeds local resources, the state may provide additional support. Resources from national-level NGOs and the private sector may augment local and state response capabilities. When these resources are insufficient, Federal assistance may be requested through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Regional office. Other Federal departments and agencies may also respond under their own authorities to provide assistance to the affected community. Additionally, other Federal ESFs, including ESF #3, ESF #8, and ESF #11, may supplement or support activities under ESF #6. Local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments have obligations under civil rights laws to ensure equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities and others with access and functional needs when providing mass care services. 1 Federal Government See the description of the Federal Government’s relationship to the whole community below. CORE CAPABILITIES AND ACTIONS ESF Role Aligned to Core Capabilities The following table focuses on the response core capabilities that ESF #6 most directly supports, including the related ESF #6 actions. Though not listed in the table, all ESFs, including ESF #6, support the core capabilities of Planning, Operational Coordination, and Public Information and Warning. 1 See FEMA’s Guidance on Planning for Integration of Functional Needs Support Services in General Population Shelters and Chapter 7 of the Department of Justice’s Americans with Disabilities Act Best Practices Tool Kit for State and Local Governments for more information. ESF #6-4 ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Core Capability ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Housing, and Human Services Mass Care Services  Supports local, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments and NGOs in the coordination and provision of mass care, emergency assistance, temporary housing, and human services resources, programs, and services.  Provides life-sustaining services to the affected population, including hydration, feeding, and sheltering, as well as support for reunifying families.  Supports the establishment, management, and operation of congregate and non-congregate care facilities.  Coordinates with local, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments and NGOs to facilitate the return of evacuees to their pre-disaster or alternate locations.  Develops an initial temporary housing strategy to transition survivors from congregate to non-congregate care alternatives and provides relocation assistance or interim housing solutions for households unable to return to their pre-disaster residence.  Anticipates and identifies current and future ESF #6 requirements in coordination with local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal governments, NGOs, and private sector partners.   Activates Federal ESF #6 data systems.  Provides general care for separated/unaccompanied minors until they are placed in the care of appropriate authorities.   Supports nontraditional congregate care facilities. Acquires, transports, and delivers ESF #6 resources and services to meet the needs of disaster survivors, including children and individuals with disabilities and others with access and functional needs. Provides technical assistance for the development of local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, Federal, NGO, and private sector operational plans for mass care, emergency assistance, temporary housing, and human services. Mass Care May 2013  Sheltering: Provides life-sustaining services in congregate facilities that provide a safe, sanitary, and secure environment for individuals and households displaced by disasters. Also includes support to survivors sheltering in place and in ESF #8 medical shelters.  Feeding: Provides feeding services at fixed sites and distribution sites and through mobile feeding units. Feeding services may include hot or shelf-stable meals, infant formula, baby food, snacks, beverages, and food packages, as well as diverse dietary meals (e.g., low sodium, low fat, vegetarian/vegan, halal, kosher). ESF #6 works in concert with ESF #11 and local, state, and tribal governments; NGOs; and the private sector to acquire, prepare, cook and/or distribute food and food supplies. Additional support may include the provision of technical assistance for the development of state feeding plans.  Distribution of Emergency Supplies: Acquires and delivers lifesustaining resources, hygiene items, and clean-up items to meet the urgent needs of disaster survivors. Additional support includes transportation, warehousing, equipment, technical assistance, and other mission-critical services. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-5 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Housing, and Human Services Core Capability Mass Care Services (continued) ESF #6-6 Reunification: Provides facilitated assistance for children separated from their parent(s)/legal guardian(s), as well as adults from their families, due to disaster. Supports reunification efforts at the local, state, territorial, and/or tribal levels with technical assistance. Emergency Assistance  ESF #6 coordinates resources and emergency assistance in support of local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments, NGOs, and the private sector.  Voluntary Agency Coordination: Facilitates the coordination of NGOs, places of worship, and the private sector to ensure that capabilities, resources, and services are integrated into local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area response.  Volunteer and Donation Management: Coordinates unaffiliated volunteers, unaffiliated organizations, and unsolicited donated goods to support all ESFs.  Essential Community Relief Services: Coordinates and delivers debris removal from disaster survivor residences; sandbagging; mudout; tear-out; chainsaw work; warehouse management; transportation and distribution coordination; childcare services; emotional and spiritual care and counseling; financial assistance; financial counseling; disaster-related case work and case management; and other essential services.  Mass Evacuation: Supports affected and host jurisdiction mass evacuation activities, including provision of mass care services and tracking the movement of evacuees, their household pets, service animals, and medical equipment. Deploys resources to support affected and host jurisdiction evacuation operations to include mass evacuation tracking system kits and staff to provide technical assistance. In coordination with ESF #8, provides mass care services to medical patient evacuees. (Note: Evacuees who have chronic medical conditions may be evacuated with the general population. For evacuation of patients, refer to ESF #8.)  Disability and Other Access and Functional Needs Support: Coordinates and provides equipment, supplies, and services required to assist children and adults with disabilities and others with access and functional needs to maintain their independence.  Household Pets and Service Animals: Coordinates and provides rescue, transportation, shelter, reunification, care, and essential needs of household pets and service animals during response operations to ensure their safety and well-being. Service animals are not pets and may not be separated from the individual with a disability or other access and functional need; service animals should be permitted anywhere the public goes.  Nonconventional/Transitional Sheltering: Provides resources and technical assistance in support of local, state, tribal, affected and host territory, and insular area governments and NGOs when traditional sheltering is not available or feasible or when the impact of the disaster is of such magnitude that extended shelter operations are required. Temporary Housing  Temporary Roof Repair: Quick repairs to damaged roofs on private homes that allow residents to return to and remain in their own homes while making permanent repairs.  ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Housing, and Human Services Core Capability Mass Care Services (continued)          Repair Program: Provides financial assistance to homeowners or landlords for the repair of their primary residence, utilities, and residential infrastructure. Replacement Program: Provides financial assistance to homeowners to assist with the replacement of their destroyed primary residence. Housing Resource Databases: Identifies housing resources from the private sector and other Federal agencies available to disaster survivors, including physically accessible housing options. Rental Assistance: Provides financial assistance to eligible disaster survivors for the rental of a housing resource. Transportation to Other Locations: Assists individuals and families relocating outside of the disaster area to locations where short- or long-term housing resources are available. Transportation services may also include returning survivors to their pre-disaster location. Direct Financial Housing: Makes payments directly to landlords for a rental resource on behalf of disaster survivors. Hotel/Motel Program: Provides temporary accommodations for eligible displaced survivors unable to return to their pre-disaster primary residence. Direct Housing Operations: Provides temporary housing units to survivors when other housing resources are not available. Units provided are appropriate to the needs of the community and include units accessible to those with disabilities and others with access and functional needs. Mortgage Relief: Issues moratoriums on foreclosures of federally insured loans. Loan servicers provide special forbearances, loan modifications, refinancing, and waivers of late charges. Human Services         May 2013 Human Services provides assistance to address the non-housing needs of individuals and families. Crisis Counseling: Provides crisis counseling, mental health services, and other similar immediate, short-term psychological assistance to disaster survivors. Disaster Case Management: Assists eligible survivors with developing and carrying out a disaster recovery plan. Streamlines assistance, prevents duplication of benefits, and provides an efficient referral system. Legal Services: Provides low-income survivors with free legal advice. Unmet Needs: Helps disaster survivors with medical, dental, funeral, personal property, transportation, moving/storage, and other expenses. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance: Provides eligible households with supplemental nutrition assistance through established programs when income is lost due to a declared disaster. Tax Relief: State, territorial, and Federal governments provide reimbursement or tax relief to survivors with substantial verified disaster-caused losses. Unemployment Assistance: Provides survivors who have lost their jobs due to a disaster with unemployment benefits. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-7 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Housing, and Human Services Core Capability Public and Private Services and Resources       Public Health and Medical Services       Critical Transportation      ESF #6-8 Assesses the need for and coordinates the provision of life-sustaining ESF #6 services, resources, and supplies from government agencies, NGOs, and the private sector. Gathers, assesses, prioritizes, coordinates, and communicates resource requirements. Provides subject matter expertise to identify resource requirements to meet the life-sustaining needs of disaster survivors and their household pets and service animals. Gathers, assesses, prioritizes, and communicates relevant information. Communicates plans, requirements and strategies to core capability providers. Acquires and manages resources, supplies, and services from core capability providers via contracts, mission assignments, inter-agency agreements, and donations. Identifies and communicates requirements for life-saving and lifesustaining needs of disaster survivors and household pets and service animals. Coordinates with core capability service providers to ensure that ESF #6 service delivery locations are appropriately provisioned and operated in a safe, sanitary, secure, and timely manner. Gathers, assesses, prioritizes, coordinates, and communicates public health and medical requirements of survivors and their household pets and service animals in congregate care facilities to core capability providers. Gathers, assesses, prioritizes, and communicates relevant public health and medical needs information to survivors in facilities where mass care services are provided. Communicates plans, requirements, and strategies to core capability service providers. Acquires and manages resources, supplies, and services from core capability service providers via contracts, mission assignments, interagency agreements, and donations. Supports the collection, analysis, dissemination, and reporting of transportation infrastructure damage from ESF #6 service delivery sites. Identifies, requests, and acquires transportation resources for the delivery of life-sustaining supplies and services to the affected area(s). Identifies and provides critical transportation for survivors with disabilities and others with access and functional needs. Supports mobilization and implementation of mechanisms to track the movement of evacuees, resources, household pets, individuals with disabilities or other access and functional needs with their service animals, medical equipment, and luggage. Provides mass care support to survivors at embarkation, debarkation, and reception centers; evacuation transportation hubs; and postdecontamination areas to make sure that basic needs are met, including hydration, feeding, tracking, medical needs, and information. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Core Capability Critical Transportation (continued) Fatality Management Services May 2013 ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Housing, and Human Services  Provides resources, subject matter expertise, and coordination with other FEMA components and ESF #6 partners to support mass evacuation activities and ensure the safe evacuation of household pets and service animals. (Note: Evacuees who have chronic medical conditions may be evacuated with the general population. For evacuation of patients, refer to ESF #8.)  Provides resources for the care of survivors evacuating from the affected area.  Communicates plans, requirements, and strategies to core capability service providers.  Acquires and manages resources, supplies, and services from core capability service providers via contracts, mission assignments, interagency agreements, and donations.  Provides mechanisms to support notification/transportation of family members to make appropriate arrangements for deceased relatives.  Provides support and funding for crisis counseling services to the bereaved, as well as for local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area crisis counseling programs.  Provides transportation and mass care services for survivors reuniting with deceased family members.  Communicates plans, requirements, and strategies to core capability service providers.  Acquires and manages resources, supplies, and services from core capability service providers via contracts, mission assignments, interagency agreements, and donations. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-9 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Agency Actions Primary Agency Actions Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Federal Emergency Management Agency         ESF #6-10 FEMA financial and/or direct assistance is predicated on a disaster declaration (major or emergency) for Individual Assistance. Verifies survivors’ disaster-related losses and makes referrals to appropriate Federal agencies and NGOs that provide disaster relief. Establishes Disaster Recovery Centers with other ESF # 6 partner agencies and affected states to provide survivors with a central location where they can receive information and services. Coordinates with ESF #6 partners and the private sector to identify available and physically accessible housing resources and provides this information to disaster survivors. Provides financial assistance to eligible disaster survivors to repair damage to their pre-disaster primary residence. Provides financial and/or direct assistance to eligible survivors for their disaster-related lodging and temporary housing needs, including physically accessible housing. Provides Other Needs Assistance, such as personal property, medical, and funeral expenses, resulting from the disaster. Provides funding for the repair of multi-family housing for the purpose of housing disaster survivors.  Provides essential assistance, including life-sustaining services, after a major disaster to meet immediate threats to life and property, including congregate, non-congregate, and transitional sheltering, feeding; reunification; distribution of emergency supplies; rescue, transportation, care, shelter and essential needs of household pets and service animals; mass evacuation; support to children and adults with disabilities and others with access and functional needs in congregate facilities; warehousing and distribution of donations; emergency residential roof covering; and emergency repair of primary residences damaged as the result of a disaster.  Provides grants and direct assistance to eligible survivors whose primary residence has been damaged or destroyed and whose losses are not covered by insurance under the Individuals and Households Program (IHP). ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Primary Agency Actions DHS (continued)   May 2013 Provides eligible survivors whose primary residence is damaged by a disaster with a safe, secure, and functional place to live under the Housing Program, which includes: − Temporary Housing: Funds to rent an alternate place to live or for a temporary housing unit when rental properties are not available. − Repair: Grants to repair damage from the disaster that is not covered by insurance. − Replacement: Provides funds up to the program limit for home replacement. − Semi-Permanent or Permanent Housing Construction: Provides financial or direct assistance to construct permanent or semipermanent housing. − Direct Housing Assistance: Provides temporary housing units on private sites, commercial parks, or other temporary group sites. Provides eligible survivors with assistance that helps them recover from the disaster under the Human Services program, which includes: − Other Needs Assistance: Medical, dental, funeral, personal property, transportation, moving and storage, and critical needs assistance. − Disaster Unemployment Assistance: Provides unemployment benefits and re-employment services to individuals who have become unemployed because of major disasters. − − Legal Services: Provides free legal assistance to disaster survivors. − Transportation Assistance: Provides physically accessible transportation assistance to relocate or return individuals displaced from their pre-disaster primary residences or to and from alternative locations as a result of a declared disaster. − Disaster Case Management: Provides financial assistance to local or state government agencies or qualified private organizations. − Cora Brown Fund: Provides assistance to the disaster-related needs of uninsured or under-insured individuals or families who are unable to obtain adequate assistance from other local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal government programs or from voluntary organizations. Crisis Counseling: Provides supplemental funding to states for short-term crisis counseling services. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-11 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Primary Agency Actions American Red Cross As the co-lead for mass care and support agency for ESF #6:  Works with DHS/FEMA to identify available mass care capacity, anticipate mass care requirements, and establish strategies to address gaps in coordination with local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and other Federal agencies; NGOs; and private sector partners.  Provides mass care technical assistance to DHS/FEMA and serves as its principal mass care subject matter expert.  Facilitates coordination and planning among government, NGO, and private sector entities that provide mass care services in response to major disasters.  Supports DHS/FEMA in working with designated state lead agencies for mass care in planning, preparedness, and response activities to include exercise participation.  Works closely with DHS/FEMA at designated DHS/FEMA locations to support ESF #6 mass care activities as requested.  Provides situational awareness and reports on current mass care activities prior to and during response operations.  (In conjunction with DHS/FEMA) facilitates the mobilization of NGO and private sector partners for the provision of mass care services in support of states.  Supports reunification efforts through its Safe and Well Web site and reunification teams.  Provides critical disaster relief and preparedness information to the public through proactive media. The American Red Cross’ role as a service provider is separate and distinct from its role in the National Response Framework. In its role as a service provider, the American Red Cross works closely with local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments, NGOs, and private sector entities to provide life-sustaining services to survivors of every disaster, large and small, to include sheltering, feeding, distribution of emergency supplies, and disaster health/mental health, reunification, and casework services. Support Agency Actions Corporation for National and Community Service Provides teams of trained National Service Participants (including AmeriCorps members and Retired and Senior Volunteer Program volunteers) to carry out a wide range of response support activities emphasizing disadvantaged communities and residents with disabilities and others with access and functional needs, including: ESF #6-12  Provides canvassing, needs assessment, and information distribution support for state and Federal operations.  Provides shelter and feeding support and distribution of water, food, ice, and other emergency goods.  Performs debris clearance, temporary roof repair, and elimination of identified health/safety hazards.    Provides unaffiliated volunteer support and warehousing assistance. Performs registration and call center support. Provides case management assistance. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service  Supports ESF #6 to coordinate an integrated Federal response to meet the mass care and emergency assistance needs of animals, including household pets, service animals, and their owners.  Facilitates whole community multi-agency coordination with nongovernmental agencies for animal response activities.  Provides technical assistance and subject matter expertise regarding animal response issues. Food and Nutrition Service (FNS)  Non-Stafford Act Authority: Locates and secures supplies of food, including U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Foods in state and Federal inventories, to supplement those in the disaster area to the extent funds appropriated to FNS for disaster food assistance are available.  Stafford Act Authority (Sec. 412 and 413): Provides disaster food assistance in accordance with ESF #11 that includes USDA foods, infant formula, and infant food for emergencies and major disasters, as well as authorization of the Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for major disasters. United States Forest Service  If available, provides appropriate resources (e.g., cots, blankets, sleeping bags, personnel) for shelters.  Resources will be assigned commensurate with each unit’s level of training and the adequacy and availability of equipment. ESF #4 or the USDA/Forest Service Disaster and Emergency Operations Branch is the contact for this support. Rural Development Department of Defense/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers May 2013  Provides information (location, type, owners, and/or management service) on USDA-financed housing units that are available and habitable.  Provides technical advice through staff to assist with mass care and housing operations.  Provides Letters of Priority Entitlement, allowing the holder of the letter (identified evacuee and/or survivor) to go to the top of waiting lists for placement in USDA financed housing.  Assists eligible recipients to meet emergency housing assistance needs resulting from Stafford Act emergencies or major disasters.  Provides construction, engineering, and project management expertise and support for temporary housing and sheltering (to include management of temporary roofing support following hurricane disasters).  Provides assistance by inspecting mass care shelter sites to ensure suitability and accessibility of facilities to safely shelter survivors.  Provides assistance in constructing temporary shelter facilities, including accessible shelters, in the affected area, as required. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-13 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Human Services  Executes requirements as defined under the Crisis Counseling Assistance and Training Program.  Executes requirements as defined under the Disaster Case Management Program, which provides services to assist survivors with developing and carrying out a disaster recovery plan.  Provides subject matter expertise, consultation, and technical assistance to ESF #6 partners on disaster human services issues (e.g., accessing HHS programs that address human services needs in an emergency, effective human services delivery to children, persons with disabilities and others with access and functional needs, economically disadvantaged persons, and other individuals and families served by HHS programs).  Provides assistance as requested to state, tribal, territorial, and insular area agencies that administer emergency human services programs.  Assists in the provision of medical pharmaceuticals, supplies, and services, including durable medical equipment, through the Emergency Prescription Assistance Program.  Coordinates with ESF #6 in area of disaster human services planning to promote seamless transition to HHS-led Health and Social Services Recovery Support Function under the National Disaster Recovery Framework. Public Health and Medical Services  Provides HHS medical workers to augment health services personnel as appropriate.  Provides medical care and mental/behavioral health services for impacted populations either in or outside the shelter locations in accordance with appropriate guidelines used by local health agencies.  Provides technical assistance for shelter operations related to food, vectors, water supply, and waste disposal.  Assists in the provision of medical supplies and services, including durable medical equipment.  Coordinates emergency medical care in shelters as needed at the request of affected state(s) in accordance with appropriate guidelines used by local health agencies.  Coordinates closely with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) to facilitate the expeditious reunification of pediatric patients displaced as a result of disaster.  Provides technical expertise in issues related to the assessment of health and medical needs of shelter occupants.  Assists with monitoring of public health conditions that can affect the health of all shelter occupants including shelter workers. Veterinary Medical Services ESF #6-14  Identifies and provides qualified veterinary medical personnel for events requiring veterinary medical services or public health support for household pets and service animals.  Coordinates and provides emergency and disaster-related veterinary medical care services to impacted animal populations and provides veterinary public health, zoonotic disease control, environmental health, and related services. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)  Works with local and state partners to assess impacts to low-income families and families with members with disabilities or other access and functional needs in HUD-assisted housing and helps support re-housing efforts with community partners.  Works with partners to assess damages to HUD-assisted housing units and identify timelines for repairs to help re-house low-income families and families with members with disabilities or other access and functional needs.  Reaches out to local and state housing and community development partners to identify issues, provide support, and enforce the Fair Housing Act and compliance with other civil rights statutes.  Assesses impacts to HUD-supported community programs, including grantees under the Community Development Block Grant, Continuums of Care that supports homeless populations, and other HUD programs.  Provides available HUD staff via mission assignments to help address housing and community development issues through existing programs and resources. When requested and funded by FEMA, administers the Disaster Housing Assistance Program.  Works with HUD grantees, owner/operators, and industry groups to input vacancies into existing FEMA or state housing databases for use by FEMA and state case workers to house low-income households.  In response to an act of criminal mass victimization (mass violence or domestic or international terrorism), may coordinate through the Office for Victims of Crime with local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal agencies and NGOs to provide assistance via the Antiterrorism and Emergency Assistance Program or other mechanisms.  As requested and approved pursuant to an ESF #13 mission, provides security at mass care facilities when necessary to augment the capacity of local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area authorities.  Provides guidance, promulgates regulations, conducts investigations and compliance reviews, and enforces Federal civil rights laws, including their general application to emergency management and specific application to mass care services, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Department of Justice Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration: Provides technical assistance related to worker safety and health issues. Employment Training Administration: Executes requirements as defined under the Disaster Unemployment Assistance program to provide financial assistance to individuals whose employment or self-employment has been lost or interrupted as a direct result of presidentially declared disaster. Department of Transportation May 2013 Provides highway information and other resources related to supporting transportation activities and information on status of and plans for transportation infrastructure and operations. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-15 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions Department of the Treasury Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau: Provides Federal alcohol and tobacco excise tax refunds to businesses that have lost assets in a disaster. Bureau of the Public Debt: Assists disaster survivors by expediting replacement or redemption of U.S. savings bonds and may waive the minimum holding period for Series EE and I savings bonds presented to authorized paying agents for redemption. Internal Revenue Service  Assists survivors with filing claims for tax refunds and provides tax information and assistance.  Distributes disaster kits containing tax forms and publications to help survivors determine the amount of a casualty loss deduction for destroyed property and provides information on ways to reconstruct destroyed financial records.  Provides copies or transcripts of previously filed tax returns free of charge to taxpayers located in the federally declared disaster area.  May postpone tax deadlines to provide extra time to file and pay before assessing any penalty or additional amount to the tax and executes agreement to supplement DHS/FEMA’s teleregistration capabilities. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)        May provide for food preparation and stockpiling in its facilities during the incident, as well as facilities for mass sheltering. Provides medical supplies and services and medical workers to augment health services personnel to support mass care operations. Administers the laws providing benefits and other services to veterans and the dependents and beneficiaries of veterans. During incident operations, provides emergency healthcare services to veteran beneficiaries in VA medical facilities, to active duty military personnel, and, as resources permit, to civilians in communities affected by national security emergencies. Works with lenders concerning foreclosure/waiver/underwriting/credit protection flexibilities related to VA-issued home loans. Assists veterans affected by disasters to help them avoid defaulting on existing home mortgages and/or foreclosure on their homes, as well as assistance for veterans with disabilities or other access and function needs to retrofit their homes with necessary accessibility measures (e.g., wheelchair ramp). Develops and maintains plans to make available housing assets that are habitable, to which VA has title and possession, for use by survivors in catastrophic disasters. General Services Administration Provides resource support for ESF #6 requirements as requested to meet the needs of the affected population. Small Business Administration (SBA)    ESF #6-16 Provides low-interest, long-term disaster loan assistance for qualified homeowners and renters, nonagricultural businesses of all sizes, and nonprofit organizations to fund the repair and replacement of disasterdamaged property. Provides loan funds that also may include money for such things as relocation, mitigation, refinancing of existing liens, and code-required upgrades. Additionally, the SBA Administrator has the authority to declare an SBA Agency declaration if the SBA damage criteria is met. The request must come from the governor. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions Social Security Administration Provides Social Security Disability, Social Security Retirement, Social Security Survivors, Special Veterans, and Supplemental Security Income benefits; ensures continuity of service to beneficiaries; and provides expedited processing of new Federal benefit claims during emergency operations. U.S. Postal Service (USPS)   National Center for Missing and Exploited Children  Serves as the Nation’s resource on the issues of missing and sexually exploited children.  Provides information and resources to law enforcement, parents, children (including child victims), and other professionals.  Reunites children with their parents and guardians through the following activities: Provides extended mail services to relocated persons. Provides change-of-address cards for survivors to notify the USPS of relocation addresses for mail forwarding; assists in the distribution, collection, and mailing of those cards; and provides an electronic file of address-change information furnished by survivors. − Establishes a toll-free hotline and TTY and VRS lines to receive reports of displaced children; create a Web site that is compliant with Section 508 to provide information about displaced children; and deploy staff to the location of the declared disaster event to gather information about displaced children. − − Provides information to the public about additional resources. − Refers reports of displaced adults to the Attorney General’s designated authority and the National Emergency Family Registry and Locator System. Partners with local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal law enforcement agencies. American Bar Association (ABA) Through the ABA’s Young Lawyers Program, provides free disaster legal services for low-income individuals who, prior to or because of the disaster, are unable to secure legal services adequate to meet their disaster-related needs. National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (NVOAD) NVOAD is a nationwide coalition of organizations that work together in all phases of disaster to help communities prepare for and recover from disaster. Its 104 members include 50 national organizations (faith-based, community-based, and other NGOs) and 54 state and territorial VOAD members (representing hundreds of additional local/regional VOAD members throughout the country). May 2013  Facilitates and encourages collaboration, communication, cooperation, and coordination to build relationships among members while groups plan and prepare for emergencies and disaster incidents.  Assists in communicating to the government and the public the services provided by its national member organizations.  Facilitates information sharing during planning, preparedness, response, and recovery and after a disaster incident.  Provides members with information pertaining to the severity of the disaster, needs identified, and actions of volunteers throughout the response, relief, and recovery process. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-17 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions NVOAD (continued) Provides guidance in case management, sharing client information, promoting spiritual and emotional care, and managing unaffiliated volunteers and unsolicited donated goods, long term recovery, and other areas.  Coordinates committees of NVOAD members and partners, including those focused on communications, disaster case management, donations management, emotional and spiritual care, government relations, housing, international affairs, long-term recovery groups, mass care, technology, and volunteer management.  Creates and regularly updates documents for public and member use, such as points of consensus, guidelines, and manuals on particular topics of interest. Provides specific liaisons to work at designated DHS/FEMA locations to support ESF #6 activities as requested. ACTS World Relief  Provides mobile feeding units of specialized unmet needs meals, staffed by trained responders who can prepare and distribute thousands of meals a day.  Provides counseling and emotional and spiritual care; assists with cleanup activities; provides medical assistance; receives and distributes emergency supplies; trains volunteers to become responders in community emergency response, homeland security, psychological first aid and food safety; and provides National Incident Management System–compliant badges to volunteers with a barcode to track volunteer hours and training and to check their backgrounds. Adventist Community Services  Receives, processes, and distributes clothing, bedding, and food products.  Provides emergency food and counseling and disaster childcare. All Hands Volunteers  Provides clean-up assistance, including debris removal, mud-out, tearout, tree removal, and other services expediting survivors return to their pre-disaster residence.  Provides volunteer management, including the ability to affiliate spontaneous, unaffiliated volunteers and groups.  Provides voluntary agency coordination, including the technical expertise to facilitate the coordination of voluntary, community, and faith-based organizations; the private sector; and other nonprofit organizations, in collaboration with other NVOAD members, to ensure that capabilities, resources, and services are integrated into response efforts to minimize duplication of organizational resources. American Baptist Men/USA: Provides cleanup, repair, and initial rebuilding. Short-term volunteers work cooperatively with Church World Service. American Disaster Reserve  Provides trained teams to assist government agencies and other organizations in the operation of emergency operations centers and the performance of disaster management functions.  Provides trained teams to meet specific needs identified by local jurisdictions and established in memorandums of understanding.  Provides technology applications of the Internet to disaster management. ESF #6-18  ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions NVOAD (continued) American Radio Relay League (ARRL) – Amateur Radio Emergency Services (ARES): Provides volunteer radio communications services to local, county, state, and Federal governments, as well as to voluntary organizations. American Red Cross  In addition to its role as co-lead for the mass care function of ESF #6, serves as a support agency to the emergency assistance, temporary housing, and human services functions of the ESF.  Provides disaster preparedness, response and recovery activities, and services throughout the country, consistent with its congressional charter.  For information on the American Red Cross role as co-lead for the mass care component of ESF #6, see the American Red Cross information in the Primary Agency section of the Agency Actions section. Ananda Marga Universal Relief Team (AMURT)   Provides food and clothing, shelters, and counseling. Renders emergency medical services and sanitation. Catholic Charities, USA  Provides assistance to communities in addressing the crisis and recovery needs of local families.  Provides ongoing and long-term recovery services for individuals and families, including temporary housing assistance for low-income families, counseling programs for children and the elderly, and special counseling for disaster relief workers. Christian Disaster Response: Provides an initial on-site disaster assessment program, emergency food service (fixed-site kitchen/feeding and mobile food service), in-kind donations of disaster recovery supplies, advocacy for disaster survivors (elderly, poor, minorities), and home repair or rebuilding. Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) May 2013  Collects information before CRWRC Disaster Response Services teams arrive on how they can best help.  Addresses clean-up needs by removing downed trees and completing minor repairs, especially covering roofs to protect homes from the elements.  Assesses needs by going door to door in disaster affected communities to inventory unmet needs and provide a database of these needs to a community organization.  Assists local recovery organizations to expand their ability to help disaster survivors.  Signs a contract and stays the course repairing/rebuilding damaged homes until what was promised is delivered.  Partners with a local organization in a disaster-affected area doing work from cleanup to reconstruction.  As the last phase of support, provides community development consultation services to help local recovery organizations move from disaster response to addressing the long-term needs of their community ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-19 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions NVOAD (continued) Church of the Brethren Disaster Ministries Engages a network of faith-based volunteers to repair or rebuild stormdamaged homes, focusing on communities.  Provides trained, skilled project leaders to supervise volunteer work teams.  Cooperates with local recovery organization to enhance the long-term recovery of the community.  Provides Maryland-based warehousing and distribution services in New Windsor, MD.  Children’s Disaster Services: − Supports families and children by setting up temporary respite centers in shelters and assistance centers. − Maintains a nationwide network of volunteers who are trained and screened to care for the unique needs of children impacted by disaster. − Consults with parents, caregivers, and community groups on their particular concerns about children and disaster. − Maintains a Critical Response Team on call for mass casualty incidents Church of Scientology Disaster Response: Assists relief crews in providing food and water and provides emotional and spiritual care. Church World Service  Stands on the side of the oppressed through advocacy with and for those most in need.  Seeks out unmet needs of all survivors—particularly people who were marginalized before the disaster.  Provides a larger vision of life that includes emotional and spiritual care; physical rebuilding, and assistance with long-term recovery of those in need.  Restores and builds community relationships. Convoy of Hope  Facilitates relief efforts between faith-based organizations, churches, and other NGOs.  Deploys fleets of trucks to move bulk commodities to survivors, including water, food, ice, hygiene kits, and clean-up kits.  Provides up to 300,000 sq. ft. warehouse headquarters with warehouse partnerships across the country; sets up and supports points of distribution (PODs); provides mobile distribution of supplies; coordinates and mobilizes volunteers and supports clean-up and debris removal teams. Disaster Psychiatry Outreach: Provides education and training in disaster mental health to a range of professionals in the emergency management sector.  ESF #6-20 ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions NVOAD (continued) Episcopal Relief and Development Sends immediate relief grants for basic items, such as food, water, medical assistance, and financial aid within the first 90 days following a disaster.  Provides ongoing recovery activities through rehabilitation grants, which offer the means to rebuild, replant ruined crops, and counsel those in trauma.  Works primarily through Church World Service in providing its disasterrelated services.  Feed the Children: Provides help to survivors of natural disasters occurring in the United States and around the world and depending on the situation and provides food, water, blankets, cleaning supplies, or other relief supplies to individuals and families affected. Feeding America  Collects, transports, warehouses, and distributes donated food and grocery products for other agencies involved in both feeding operations and distribution of relief supplies through its national network of food banks.  Processes food products collected in food drives by communities wishing to help another disaster-affected community, develops, certifies, and supports their food banks, serves as a liaison between the food banks and the donors and educates the public about the problems and solutions of hunger. Friends Disaster Service  Provides cleanup and rebuilding assistance to the elderly, disabled, low income, or uninsured survivors of disasters.  Provides an outlet for Christian service to friends and volunteers, with an emphasis on love and caring. Habitat for Humanity International: Facilitates community involvement and support during the long-term recovery process; conducts community housing assessments for long-term recovery; works with partner families to build or rehabilitate simple, decent, and affordable homes after a disaster; and offers construction and development technical assistance to communities. Headwaters Relief Organization: Supports disaster survivors through emotional and spiritual care and mental health programs; provides support services; and engages in repair and rebuild activities. HOPE Coalition America: Supports disaster survivors by assisting with budgeting and developing financial recovery plans. Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) Through the HSUS National Disaster Animal Response Team™: May 2013  Serves as a resource for individuals, animal-related organizations, government agencies, and others concerned about the urgent needs of animals before, during, and after disasters.  Provides assistance with animal rescue, handling, and transport in a timely and humane way. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-21 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions NVOAD (continued) International Aid: Provides trained disaster aid and medical personnel, trauma counseling, food and medical supplies, and disease prevention products, including portable medical clinics and water purification systems. International Critical Incident Stress Foundation: Provides leadership, education, training, consultation, and support services in comprehensive crisis intervention and disaster behavioral health services to the emergency response professions, other organizations, and communities worldwide. International Relief and Development: Distributes food and critical supplies and helps communities develop effective social services through collaborative efforts to improve roads; renovate schools; rebuild utility, water, and sewage systems; and establish health facilities. International Relief Friendship Foundation: Provides needs assessment, case management, distribution of designated relief supplies, and spiritual care and counseling. Lutheran Disaster Response  Provides funding to assist with disaster response in both natural and technological disasters, volunteer coordination, long-term rebuilding efforts, and support for preparedness planning through synods, congregations, and Lutheran social ministry organizations.  Provides spiritual and emotional counseling and pastoral care through trained coordinators based in its network of affiliated social ministry organizations. Medical Teams International: Enlists volunteers as needed to the stricken areas and sends money and supplies for cleaning and reconstruction. Mennonite Disaster Service: Assists disaster survivors by providing volunteer personnel to clean up and remove debris from damaged and destroyed homes and to repair or rebuild homes. Special emphasis is placed on assisting those less able to help themselves, such as the elderly and people with disabilities. Mercy Medical Airlift (Angel Flight): Ensures that no needy patient is denied access to distant specialized medical evaluation, diagnosis, or treatment for lack of a means of long-distance medical air transportation and ensures the provision of urgent transportation in situations of compelling human need and homeland security emergencies. National Association of Jewish Chaplains: Provides emotional and spiritual care. National Baptist Convention USA Inc.  Provides facilities for shelter, shelter in place, reception centers, warehousing, POD sites, and distribution for donated goods including food, clothing, and household items.  Provides volunteers for immediate disaster response, in both natural and technological disasters; long-term rebuilding efforts; and support for preparedness planning through districts, and social ministry organizations. National Emergency Response Team: Provides coordinated emergency services with local, state, territorial, insular area, and Federal government agencies. National Organization for Victim Assistance: Provides social and mental health services for individuals and families who experience trauma after disaster, including traumatic reaction support, validation, stabilization, and education. ESF #6-22 ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions NVOAD (continued) Nazarene Disaster Response Provides cleanup and rebuilding assistance, especially to the elderly, disabled, widowed, and those least able to help themselves.  Works in the recovery phase by assisting with the emotional needs of disaster survivors. NECHAMA – Jewish Response to Disaster  Manages spontaneous unaffiliated volunteers in direct fieldwork and assists in volunteer coordination and the operation of volunteer reception centers.  Provides pre- and post-disaster event training related to disaster cleanup, chainsaw operation, safety, and volunteer management.  Lends cleanup tools for extended periods to resource-challenged organizations responding to disaster. Program is open to established and/or community start-up organizations.  NECHAMA is a faith-based organization that welcomes volunteers of all faiths and provides assistance to disaster survivors regardless of religious affiliation. Operation Blessing: Transports food and emergency supplies to disaster survivors. The Phoenix Society for Burn Survivors: Provides social services and emotional support for individuals who experience major burn injuries, as well as their families. Points of Light Foundation and Volunteer Center National Network: Coordinates spontaneous, unaffiliated volunteers and meets the needs of the local community and other disaster response agencies through its affiliated network of local volunteer centers. Presbyterian Church in America(PCA)/Mission to North America Disaster Response  Provides assistance with debris removal, roof tarping, chainsaw work, muck-out work, general clean-up, temporary repairs, and reconstruction.  Provides Sheds of Hope, a project whereby PCA/Mission to North America Disaster Response builds a shed on personal property at the request of the owner to store recovered items or building materials for the repair/rebuild. The shed may be moved to another location should the property owner decide not to rebuild in the same location.  Provides emotional and spiritual care for disaster affected survivors and disaster response volunteers.  Provides training on how to prepare the presbytery or church for disasters; training for assessors and first responders; and training in emotional care.  May 2013 ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-23 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions NVOAD (continued) Presbyterian Disaster Assistance  Maintains a National Response Team of 90 that is deployed to disasterimpacted areas to help connect the local church judicatories to the larger response and provides emotional and spiritual care to caregivers, responders, and faith community leadership. Responds to both natural and human-caused events. The team is highly trained and works collaboratively with other response agencies to provide both support and training.  Provides support, training, and technical assistance both within the Presbyterian Church and in collaboration with other faith-based and voluntary organizations to provide volunteer work team hospitality (housing, food, sanitation, connection to case managed long-term recovery work, and tools if available) where long term recovery is required.  Provides volunteer labor and material assistance at the local level.  Collaborates with other voluntary organizations to provide long term recovery organizing and training to community-based long term recovery groups. REACT International: Provides emergency communication facilities for other agencies through its national network of Citizens Band (CB) radio operators and volunteer teams. The Salvation Army  Provides mass care services, including congregate sheltering, feeding, and the distribution of emergency supplies, such as food, clean-up supplies, household items, and emergency communications.  Provides client assistance, immediate and long-term, through the casework and case management processes, including referrals to government organizations and NGOs for additional services.  Offers emotional and spiritual care, through trained caregivers, to disaster survivors and rescue workers.  Where circumstances and resources warrant, provides community recovery support, including clean-up and reconstruction programs. Samaritan’s Purse: Provides emotional and spiritual care and provides cleanup assistance. Save the Children ESF #6-24  Provides trained staff and volunteers to offer temporary respite care for children in shelters; provides psychosocial recovery programs for children and adult caregivers; provides essential non-food items to support children and families; and provides assistance to help children and families access services (including childcare and afterschool programs).  Provides community and state child-focused disaster planning (e.g., assessments, training, exercising support, technical guidance).  Provides training in childcare emergency preparedness and children’s disaster preparedness workshops and provides training in temporary respite care for shelters and community hubs (child-friendly spaces). ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions NVOAD (continued) Society of St. Vincent De Paul  Provides social services to individuals and families and collects and distributes donated goods.  Makes stores’ merchandise available to disaster survivors. Operates retail stores, homeless shelters, and feeding facilities that are similar to those run by the Salvation Army and provides warehousing facilities for storing and sorting donated merchandise during the emergency period. Southern Baptist Convention Disaster Relief  Provides more than 200 mobile feeding units staffed by volunteers who can prepare and distribute thousands of meals a day.  Provides disaster childcare. The agency has several mobile childcare units.  Assists with cleanup activities, temporary repairs, reconstruction, counseling, and bilingual services. Tzu Chi Foundation: Provides emotional and spiritual care and provides medical and financial assistance. United Church of Christ  Provides local disaster response coordinators who help to organize local volunteers as needed for cleanup and rebuilding efforts; participates in response and long-term recovery committee efforts in communities affected by natural disasters.  Provides personal protection equipment (Tyvek® suits, gloves, goggles, respirators) for volunteers and home owners to clean out houses.  Provides volunteer work groups to assist long-term recovery committees in rebuilding/repairing homes.  Provides training on community preparedness, response, and recovery; provides assistance in communities impacted by technology-caused disasters. United Jewish Communities  Organizes direct assistance, such as financial and social services, to Jewish and general communities in the United States following disaster.  Provides rebuilding services to neighborhoods and enters into longterm recovery partnerships with residents. United Methodist Committee on Relief  Trains and mobilizes community-based volunteers in response and recovery activities; provides funding for local United Methodist Committee on Relief units in response and recovery projects based on the needs of each situation.  Provides spiritual and emotional care to disaster survivors and provides Disaster Case Management assistance by training local United Methodist and community based volunteers. United Way Worldwide May 2013  Provides experience, expertise, and resources to local United Ways facing local, state, regional, or national emergencies.  Provides support and coordination, with Alliance of Information and Referral Systems, to the network of 2-1-1 providers. ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex ESF #6-25 Emergency Support Function #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing, and Human Services Annex Support Agency Actions NVOAD (continued) Volunteers of America: Makes trucks available for transporting survivors and supplies to designated shelters; collects and distributes donated goods; and provides mental healthcare for survivors of disaster. World Vision: Trains and mobilizes community-based volunteers in major response and recovery activities; provides consultant services to local unaffiliated churches and Christian charities involved in locally designed recovery projects; and collects, manages, and organizes community-based distribution for donated goods. ESF #6-26 ESF #6 – Mass Care, Emergency Assistance, Temporary Housing and Human Services Annex May 2013 Attachment L: November 6, 2015 production from GAO 910 US. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 441 St. N.W. Washington. DC 20548 November 6. 2015 The Honorable Chuck Grassley Chairman Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate Dear Senator Grassley: I am writing to provide the records related to GAO's September 2015 report on the American Red Cross that you requested in your September 28. 2015 letter to the Comptroller General. As you requested. these records include: 1. All records and communications that indicate the reasons cited by the Red Cross for not providing the material requested by the GAO. 2. A list of all material GAO requested but the Red Cross refused to provide. 3. A list of all Red Cross of?cials that GAO contacted. including their titles. 4. A list of all Red Cross of?cials that did not provide the material GAO requested. If you have any questions about these records. please contact Andrew Sherrill, Director. Education. Workforce. and Income Security. GAO. at (202) 512-7252 or sherrilla@gao.gov. Sincerely yours. We 53% Katherine Siggerud Managing Director Congressional Relations Enclosure 1. All Records and Communications that Indicate the Reasons Cited by the Red Cross for Not Providing the Material Requested by GAD Spicer, Scott Sent: Friday. August 01,. 2014 3:09 PM To: Meltzer. David cc: Peaches. Lori; oerrancis. Suzy: GAO Subject: RE: Following Up on Cross Meeting David? We have considered the concerns you and your colleagues have raised about our ongoing review of the Red Cross in the wake of our meeting of June 19'h and subsequent e-mail communications. We believe that a refraining of our objectives to more closely re?ect the language of the 2007 American National Red Cross 3 Governance Modernization Act may help to address your concerns, while also satisfying the continuing interest of our congressional requester. In that regard} the revised objectives of our review are as follows: i How are the nature and extent of Red Cross?s disaster-related services determined when it is involved in Federal programs or activities? - What oversight applies to the Red Cross?s disaster-related services when it is involved in Federal programs or activities? In the interest of ?nding a useful way forward, we would like to arrange a meeting to discuss our information needs and priorities and how they relate to our audit objectives and our statutoryr audit and access authority. ?will be contacting Lori Polacheck to arrange a meeting later this month. Thank you? From: Meltzer, David Sent: Monday, Juli.r 14, 2014 12:21 PM To: Cc: Polacheck, Lori; DeFrancis, Suzy; GAO Subject: RE: Following Up on GAOfRecl Cross Meeting GAO We appreciated the meeting as it addressed manv of our concerns. However, questions still remain as to the authority for GAO to research ARC corporate governance and decision-making processes as well as ARC programs that don?t involve federal funds. Before resuming the work needed to respond to 1 requests, we would appreciate first being informed as to GAO's views on its authority to conduct a review of this scope, including our non-federal programs. Thanks very much. Sincerely, David Frum Sent: Friday, Ju 11, 2014 5:45 PM To: Meltzer, David Cc: Polacheck, Lori; DeFrancis, Suzy; GAO Subject: RE: Following Up on Cross Meeting Mr. Meitzer? was surprised to see this issue raised in your response, as I thought that we had established the outlines ofa plan for moving forward at ourJune 19 meeting. Did something change between then and now? Sincerely, GAO From: Meltzer, David Sent: Frida Jul 11 2014 3:43 PM Tmm? Cc: Polacheck, Lori; DeFrancis, Suzy; Subject: RE: Following Up on Cross Meeting GAO Thanks for your email. l?m sorry for the delay but it has proven challenging getting everyone around the same table due to ongoing response efforts across the US. One issue on which would appreciate the Office?s views is the legal authority of the Office to research non?federally funded programs of the American Red Cross. Thanks very much for your consideration. Sincerely, David Meltzer From: GAO Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 12:58 PM To: Meltzer, David cc: Polacneck, Lori; Derrancls, Suzy; Subject: Following Up on Cross Meeting Mr. Meltzer? Following up on the productive meeting we had with you on June 19, I?m checking in to find out when we can expect to hear back from the Red Cross with regard to the topics we discussed at that meeting. Thanks for any status update you can provide. GAO Spicer, Scott From: GAO Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 4:00 PM To: A . Subject: FW: Document for September 2nd Meeting From: Polacneck. Lori Sent: Thursda Au List 28 2014 8:48 AM To: Cc: Meltzer, David Subject: RE: Document for September 2nd Meeting GAO Thank you for these questions and for your flexibility about conducting interviews by phone. When we talk on September 2, we are hoping to reach an understanding about the scope of "involved in Federal programs or activities the government carries out under law?. We beiieve reaching agreement on the scope will be a good first step in resuming the review. Sincerely, Lori Lori Polacheck Associate General Counsel and Privacy Officer American Red Cross 2025 Street. NW 1 Washington, DC 20006 American Red Cross _r This e-mail contains information from the Office of the General Counsel of the American Red Cross and may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by ?md delete this e-man- Thank vou- From= Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 3:17 PM To: Polacheck, Lori Cc: GAO Subject: Document for September 2nd Meeting Lori In preparation for the meeting on Tuesday, September 2nd at 3:00 pm, I have attached a document focused on our top priority information needs. We are hoping to have a constructive discussion of our information needs and priorities and how they relate to the objectives of our review and our statutory audit and access authority. As indicated in the document, we are willing to conduct interviews by phone as needed to allow for ?exibility in the use of Red Cross officials' time Thank you for your time and consideration. All the Best, Analyst Education, Workforce, and income Security US. Government Accountability Of?ce 441 Street, NW Washin on, DC 20548 2. List of All Materials GAO Requested that the Red Cross Did Not Provide 1. Examples of the Board of Governors' strategic oversight activities related to effectiveness and ef?ciency of disasteriservices 2. The Better Business BureauiWise Giving Alliance states that Red Cross meets this standard: Have a board golicy of assessing. no less than evng two years, the organization's gerformance and effectiveness and of determining future actions reguired to achieve its mission. Briefly describe or provide examples of how the Board of Governors assesses the performance and effectiveness of disaster assistance. 3. The Better Business Bureaulese Giving Alliance states that Red Cross meets this standard: Submit to the organization's governing body, for its aporova_l,_a written resort that outlines the results of the aforementioned and effectiveness assessment and recommendations for future actions. Provide examples of how the most recent such report addressed effectiveness of disaster services, such as key metrics, findings, or recommendations. 4. Provide examples of the types of issues related to fraud, waste. or abuse in disaster services that have been identi?ed through the Concern Connection Line (CCL) Hotline. We understand these calls are confidential, and are not asking for details of speci?c complaints. 5. Briefly describe chapter quality assurance activities 6. If applicable, provide examples of issues related to disaster service delivery identified through the chapter quality assurance process in recent years Audit Division assessments (asked for on separate occasions) - Audit Division assessments of how well Red Cross adheres to its policies and procedures during disasters. I For each case study please provide Red Cross After Action Reports or Assessments - Provide examples of issues related to disaster services that have been investigated by the internal audit division in recent years. BHJ - 8. Provide examples of the types of issues related to disaster services that have been investigated by the Investigations. Compliance 8. Ethics (lCdE) division. We are not asking for details of speci?c investigations. 9. Summarize the purpose, activities, and any known impacts of the Disaster Response Unit within the division. This unit was mentioned in the 2006 report on ?Red Cross Governance for the 21"1 Century? as a new initiative. 10. Provide examples of any emerging, aggregate trends the Ombudsman has identi?ed in recent years in the area of disaster services, which it has shared with Red Cross management. In particular, trends in the area of service delivery. 11. Provide examples of the types of oversight the Diversity advisory council has engaged in specifically related to the Red Cross?s disaster services, if any. 12. Describe or provide documentation regarding how Red Cross develops objective criteria for disbursing assistance during needs assessments) as required by the Internal Revenue Service. - 13. Document and Information Requests re: Board of Governors: . Meeting agendas - Meeting minutes - interviews with Board members - interview with the Board chair it Speci?c examples of when Red Cross management briefed the Board on disaster operations issues, including the oversight steps taken by the Board in these cases. 14. For each GAO case study (Hurricane Sandy, May 2013 Oklahoma tornadoes. and April 2014 floods in northern Fiorida), please provide the following interviews. as applicable. - lnterview(s) with one or more chapters that were involved in response and recovery efforts - nterview(s) with region(5) that were involved in response and recovery efforts tf 1' 10 3. List of All Red Cross staff that GAO contacted Jono Anzalone - Executive Director for Disaster Cycle Services - North Central US. Cherae Bishop . Senior Vice President, Government Relatio?n's Charles Blake, Jr. Division Disaster Executive Southwest and Rocky Mountains Anna Caldwell Assistant Corporate Secretary Suzy DeFrancis Chief Public Affairs Officer Luke Greeves Executive Director, International Management and Planning Jennifer Hawkins Corporate Secretary Lenard Liebe Division Disaster Director - Oklahoma and Arkansas Kanhong Lin I . Preparedness Lealereater New York Region Becky McCorry Division Disaster Director - FL, PR. USVI Gail McGovern President CEO Kelly Mckinney Regional Disaster OfficeriGreater New York Region David Meitzer General Counsel Amy Mintz Senior Director Emergency Management Coordination Jack Morgan Division Disaster Executive Southeast and Caribbean Gregg O'Ryon Vice President a Program Development 11 Russ Paulsen Executive Director, Community Preparedness anqi Resilience Lori Polacheck Associate'GeneraI Counsel Richard Reed Senior Vice President, Disaster Cycie Services Trevor Riggen Vice President, Disaster Cycle Services. Operations and Logistics Marvin Steele Senior Policy Adviser. Government Reiations 12 .v-i 4. List of all Red Cross of?cials that did not provide the material GAO requested During our audit of the Red Cross's disaster assistance, Red Cross had a liaison, Lori Polacheck, Associate General Counsel, who arranged interviews and coordinated responses to our document requests. In addition. GAO also discussed GAO access to requested information with Ms. Polacheck, David Meltzer, General Counsel, and Suzy DeFrancis, Chief Public Affairs Officer. We do not know which at the Red Cross ultimately made decisions about whether to provide GAO access to requested information. 13 Attachment M: FTE HAP Employee numbers HAP LoP FTEs January 2010 – December 2015 Feb/8/2016 Question The total number of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) staff who have worked on the Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) since its inception six years ago with the total divided in two parts – Haitian and non-Haitian staff. Response Since the start of the response and recovery program in 2010, a total of 748 Haitian and 170 nonHaitian individuals have worked for the American Red Cross on the program. On average, from January 2010 to date, 252 full time equivalent (FTE) paid staff positions have been dedicated each year to delivering relief assistance and recovery programming to the people of Haiti. On average, over the course of the Haiti Assistance Program, 210 or 83% of the FTEs are Haitian. These numbers do not include short term deployments or re-assignments during the relief phase of the HAP operation. Instead, these numbers reflect individuals specifically recruited, hired and retained for sustained or long-term assignments. 1 Attachment N: ARC code of business, ethics AMERICAN RED CROSS CODE OF BUSINESS ETHICS AND CONDUCT The American Red Cross is a not-for-profit charitable organization dedicated to providing services to those in need. The Red Cross has traditionally demanded and received the highest ethical performance from its employees and volunteers. In an effort to maintain the high standard of conduct expected and deserved by the American public and to enable the organization to continue to offer its services, the American Red Cross operates under the Code of Business Ethics and Conduct outlined below. All employees and volunteers are required to sign the Code of Business Ethics and Conduct form certifying that, in delivering Red Cross services and in all other Red Cross activities, they shall be mindful of the following standards:  Compliance Requirements. All employees and volunteers are required to comply with applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations and with American Red Cross corporate policies and regulations.  Actions Prohibited by the Code of Business Ethics and Conduct. No employee or volunteer shall engage in the following actions: a. Personal Use. Authorize the use of or use for the benefit or advantage of any person, the name, emblem, endorsement, services or property of the American Red Cross, except in conformance with American Red Cross policy. b. Financial Advantage. Accept or seek on behalf of or any other person, any financial advantage or gain of other than nominal value offered as a result of the employee’s or volunteer’s affiliation with the American Red Cross. c. Red Cross Affiliation. Publicly use any American Red Cross affiliation in connection with the promotion of partisan politics, religious matters or positions on any issue not in conformity with the official position of the American Red Cross. d. Confidentiality. Disclose any confidential American Red Cross information that is available solely as a result of the employee’s or volunteer's affiliation with the American Red Cross to any person not authorized to receive such information, or use to the disadvantage of the American Red Cross any such confidential information, without the express authorization of the American Red Cross. e. Improper Influence. Knowingly take any action or make any statement intended to influence the conduct of the American Red Cross in such a way as to confer any financial benefit on any person, corporation or entity in which the individual has a significant interest or affiliation. f. Conflict of Interest. Operate or act in a manner that creates a conflict or appears to create a conflict with the interests of the American Red Cross and any organization in which the individual has a personal, business or financial interest. In the event there is a conflict, the American Red Cross has a structured conflict of interest process. First, the individual shall disclose such conflict of interest to the chairman of the board or the chief executive officer of the individual’s Red Cross unit or the general counsel of the American Red Cross, as Page 1 of 3 Rev. October 2009 applicable. Next, a decision will be made about the conflict of interest, and, where required, the individual may be required to recuse or absent himself or herself during deliberations, decisions and/or voting in connection with the matter. g. Retaliation. Retaliate against any employee or volunteer who seeks advice from, raises a concern with or makes a complaint to a supervisor or other member of management, the ombudsman, the Concern Connection Line, the Biomedical Regulatory Hotline or any other whistleblower program, about fraud, waste, abuse, policy violations, discrimination, illegal conduct, unethical conduct, unsafe conduct or any other misconduct by the organization, its employees or volunteers. h. Contrary to the Best Interest of the Red Cross. Operate or act in any manner that is contrary to the best interest of the American Red Cross.  Ombudsman Program – Informal Dispute Resolution. The American Red Cross has an organizational ombudsman designated as the neutral or impartial dispute resolution practitioner whose major function is to provide confidential and informal assistance to the many constituents with concerns or complaints about the Red Cross. The constituents who seek the ombudsman’s services are internal stakeholders, such as employees and volunteers, and external stakeholders, such as Red Cross clients, donors, suppliers, vendors and the public at large. The ombudsman provides a voluntary, confidential and informal process to facilitate fair and equitable resolutions and explore a range of alternatives or options to resolve the problems. If a formal investigation is what the individual seeks, referrals to the whistleblower hotlines may be appropriate.  Investigations, Compliance and Ethics – Formal Dispute Resolution. Distinguishing from the actions of the ombudsman, the Office of the General Counsel and the Office of Investigations, Compliance and Ethics (IC&E) conduct formal investigations into allegations of fraud, waste, abuse, Red Cross policy violations, illegal or unethical conduct or other improprieties regarding the Red Cross. Usually, the allegations arise from whistleblower complaints of Red Cross employees and volunteers seeking formal review or investigations of their allegations of wrongdoing.  Whistleblower Hotline Programs. The American Red Cross encourages open communications. All employees and volunteers are encouraged to bring any concerns they have regarding the organization or its employees and volunteers to their direct supervisor. If individuals seek an informal and confidential resolution, the ombudsman may be the appropriate choice. If a formal IC&E investigation is sought, the hotlines described below are the appropriate choice. If an employee or volunteer suspects or knows about misappropriation, fraud, waste, abuse, Red Cross policy violations, illegal or unethical conduct, unsafe conduct or any other misconduct by the organization or its employees or volunteers, that individual should alert his or her supervisor or other member of local management. In those cases where an employee or volunteer is not comfortable telling his or her supervisor or local management, the employee or volunteer may contact the Concern Connection Line at 1-888-309-9679. For concerns about the collection, manufacturing, processing, distribution or utilization of blood or blood components (e.g., violations of FDA or OSHA regulations, falsification, quality failures, training, Biomedical Services computer and equipment issues), an employee or volunteer who is not comfortable with contacting his or her supervisor or local management may contact the Biomedical Regulatory Hotline at 1-800-741-4738. Page 2 of 3 Rev. October 2009 CERTIFICATION OF COMMITMENT TO THE CODE OF BUSINESS ETHICS AND CONDUCT I, ______________________________________________, certify that I have read and understand the Code of Business Ethics and Conduct of the American Red Cross and agree to comply with it, as well as applicable laws that impact the organization, at all times. I affirm that, except as listed below, I have no personal, business or financial interest that conflicts, or appears to conflict, with the best interests of the American Red Cross. I agree to discuss any conflicts listed below with the chairman of the board or the chief executive officer of my unit or the general counsel of the American Red Cross and to refrain from participating in any discussions, deliberations, decisions and/or voting related to the matter presenting the conflict until such time as it is determined by the Red Cross that the conflict is mitigated or otherwise resolved. Describe any potential conflicts: _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ At any time during the term of my affiliation with the American Red Cross, should an actual or potential conflict of interest arise between my personal, business or financial interests and the interests of the Red Cross, I agree to: (1) disclose promptly the actual or potential conflict to the chairman of the board or the chief executive officer of my Red Cross unit or the general counsel of the American Red Cross; and (2) until the Red Cross approves actions to mitigate or otherwise resolve the conflict, refrain from participating in any discussions, deliberations, decisions and/or voting related to the conflict of interest. Signature: ____________________________________________ Date: __________________ Print Name: __________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 Rev. October 2009 Attachment 0: May 2, 2016 GAO production 1. The email chain ends on August 1 and is from you to David Meltzer. Was there any response from him? We’d like the complete email chain, if possible. Response: There was no response from the Red Cross to GAO That was the end of the email chain. August 1 email. 2. Can you provide us with GAO’s original scope of review versus the final scope of review? Response: Our objectives for the review as specified at various points in time are listed below. At the initiation of the job on February 12, 2014, our objectives were:  How are the nature and extent of the American Red Cross's disaster-related activities determined?  What are the nature and extent of the oversight to which the organization is subject, and is it sufficient? When we reached initial internal agreement on the project scope and methodology on May 15, 2014, our objectives were:  How are the nature and extent of the Red Cross’s disaster-related services determined?  What is the nature and extent of the oversight to which the agency’s disasterrelated services are subject? As specified in the published GAO report, our final reporting objectives were:  What key factors affect the nature and extent of the Red Cross’s disaster-related services?  How does the Red Cross coordinate with the federal government on disaster assistance?  What external oversight exists of the Red Cross’s disaster services? While we had originally planned to cover both external oversight of the Red Cross and internal Red Cross oversight of its own disaster-related services, our published report focused only on the former. In addition, while Red Cross coordination with the federal government was a key component of our review from the beginning, we added this as an explicit third reporting objective for the published report. 1 3. I just want to be clear about ARC’s position as described in GAO’s notes: a. ARC would submit to GAO’s authority only when ARC received federal funds or acted as a “co-lead” under ESF-6? b. ARC would submit to GAO’s authority only when ARC received federal funds? Response: During the course of our work on the review requested by Rep. Bennie Thompson, the Red Cross questioned the nature and scope of GAO’s authority to undertake that review. As a result, GAO officials had discussions with Red Cross officials about the extent of the authority given to the Comptroller General by section 11 of The American National Red Cross Governance Modernization Act of 2007 (found at 36 U.S.C. § 300111), which provides that the Comptroller General is authorized to review the corporation’s involvement in any Federal program or activity the Government carries out under law. During those discussions, as reflected in the interview write-ups provided, Red Cross officials stated that they interpreted “involvement” to mean activities the Red Cross carried out using federal funds, or activities it carried out exclusively pursuant to its co-lead role under ESF-6. The Red Cross did not document its interpretation of the Modernization Act provision in writing so we cannot state with certainty that this is the Red Cross’s current and definitive interpretation. 4. As I read through your interview notes, there’s mention of an exchange of legal work, citations, etc. between GAO and RC providing respective positions. “The interviewees said that they would forward to GAO their specific interpretation of other legal provisions, such as the Stafford Act and the Modernization Act, in terms of GAO authority” (p. 15, second paragraph). “Red Cross was going to review the legal citations that GAO gave them about Red Cross’s involvement with the federal government” (p. 17, second paragraph). Would it be possible to provide those documents? The Red Cross did not provide GAO with any written documents containing legal citations or its specific interpretation of legal provisions. 2 Attachment P: May 10, 2016 ARC production Haiti Assistance Program Monitoring, Supervision, and Evaluation of Work Performed by Partners In order for American Red Cross to successfully execute activities at the scope and scale achieved in Haiti, work necessarily has to be implemented in tight coordination with dozens of partners. The monitoring, supervision, evaluation, and coordination with these organizations—which include Red Cross network partners, international organizations, international non-governmental organizations, and local organizations— occurs throughout the entire project management cycle: from planning to implementation and close-out for each and every project we fund in Haiti. To appropriately and effectively steward our donors’ funds, we actively engage with, and monitor the work performed by, our partners to ensure objectives are being met, collaboration and communication is taking place, and work is being satisfactorily performed by the partner to serve overall program aims and accountability requirements and advance our mission. We use these processes to identify implementation challenges, make recommendations for improvements or corrections to be undertaken by the partner or ourselves, then we work to ensure that required adjustments are made. When working with partners, the American Red Cross places great emphasis on selecting the right partners – those with experience, capacity, and a shared mission. We also plan our work in collaboration with these selected partners to ensure shared ownership and understanding of the project. Beyond this, we make every effort to oversee and monitor our partners’ work through close supervision and regular review. Contractually Required Monitoring, Supervision, and Evaluation of Partners We monitor, supervise and evaluate the work performed by our partners through a variety of provisions spelled out in our contracts including regular financial and project reports sent to us by our partners, monitoring visits performed by Red Cross staff and independent consultants, and beneficiary accountability processes like complaints hotlines and other feedback mechanisms. The terms of our grant agreements with our partners provide that we monitor, supervise and evaluate the performance of our partners through: 1. Active management by staff in Haiti who have the responsibility of coordinating, coaching, assessing, monitoring and evaluating the work being performed by partners; 2. Active management by staff in our Washington, DC headquarters who are responsible for activities in Haiti; 3. Routine and regular communications, meetings and coordination efforts with partners; 4. A group of four American Red Cross monitoring and evaluation (M&E) staff in Washington, DC exclusively focused on monitoring and evaluating projects in Haiti and elsewhere. In order to ensure independence, this group does not report to programmatic leadership. To date, this group has supported or conducted 38 evaluations of projects implemented in Haiti and dozens of highly technical surveys (including baselines, midlines and endlines to ensure we are measuring change in the populations we serve); 5. Quarterly reports produced by the partner describing: a. Objectives supported by the grant; b. Activities carried out to meet each objective; c. Results accomplished; d. Challenges encountered and how they were resolved or plans for resolving; and e. Main activities planned for the next reporting period; 1 6. A final project report produced by the partner describing: a. Activities undertaken; and b. Evaluation of the activities’ effectiveness in attaining the objectives of the project; 7. Quarterly and final financial reports produced by the partner: a. Describing how the grant funds were used; b. Including an accounting of actual expenditures as compared with the line items set forth in the budget; c. Reporting how grant funds were expended by expense category in the budget with the forecasted expenses for the reporting period (e.g., quarter); and d. Providing commentary on any material variance that is greater than 10% between forecasted and actual expenses; 8. Inventory reports produced by the partner providing an inventory of the project-funded nonexpendable assets with an acquisition or fair market value of US$1,000 or more with the following information for each asset a. Purchase date; b. Serial/registration number; c. Physical location; and d. Condition; 9. An asset disposal plan produced by the partner for approval by the Red Cross; 10. Requiring prior approval by the Red Cross before implementation of: a. Baseline, midline and endline surveys; b. Program reviews; and c. Evaluations; 11. Requiring partners to develop performance monitoring and accountability to beneficiary plans which need to be approved by the Red Cross; 12. Authorizing the Red Cross to conduct a mid-term and final evaluation via an external evaluator hired and managed by the Red Cross; 13. Requiring the partner to obtain an annual organization-wide audit by an independent Certified Public Accountant or appropriate counterpart with copies of the reports provided to the Red Cross; 14. Authorizing the Red Cross, during the grant term and for a period of one year thereafter, to review, audit, or cause to be audited, the records of the partner as they relate to the grant project.; 15. Authorizing the Red Cross to send its personnel to monitor the partner’s progress and accompany auditors retained by the partner; 16. Requiring the partner to give the Red Cross and its agents access to all financial and programmatic files, accounts, records, contracts and other documents related to the project; 17. Requiring the partner to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken if there are any audit findings related to their project and to notify the Red Cross; 18. Regular site visits by ARC to the partner’s project along with frequent coordination meetings with partners; and 19. Interviews with beneficiaries of partner implemented projects. Tools and Resources for Monitoring and Evaluating Partners For programs implemented by our partners, we follow standard M&E protocols used by the international NGO and humanitarian sector. Minimum standards like logical frameworks, indicator tracking tables, regular monitoring and reflection on data to improve program quality, collecting baseline and end line data on indicators to measure change over time, and conducting comprehensive 2 program evaluations are all core to the work we do with our partners. At a practical level, monitoring and evaluation of our partners’ work is: 1. Conducted by program and M&E staff on the ground, according to standard program design and planning and M&E tools and best practice; 2. Supervised by management in Haiti, who have the responsibility of affirming the quality, accuracy and relevance of data and findings, as well as acting on them; 3. Overseen by program staff in Washington DC headquarters office, who are responsible for overall grant management and compliance and general oversight of the full Haiti portfolio of programs; and 4. Supported by a group of four experts in Washington, DC exclusively focused on monitoring and evaluating our projects in Haiti and elsewhere. In order to ensure independence, this group does not report to Haiti program leadership. They provide expertise and technical support in program design and planning, survey design and sampling, research methodologies, and evaluation design and implementation. As of December 2015, this group has overseen 38 evaluations of projects implemented with American Red Cross funds in Haiti. Project evaluations are usually conducted by independent, external consultants. To date, 33 of the 38 evaluations of Red Cross projects have been conducted by independent consultants. This group is further charged with supporting effective learning from our work, to ensure that recommendations are acted on, lessons are not lost, improvements continue to be made, and future programs are better. Additional Compliance and Control Measures for Work Performed by Partners Further compliance and control measures include: 1. An Internal Audit Department that conducts audits of financial and operational controls in Red Cross operations, including the Haiti Assistance Program; 2. An Office of Investigations, Compliance, and Ethics which conducts investigations of allegations involving fraud, waste, and abuse by staff, volunteers and partners, including activities undertaken as part of the Haiti Assistance Program; 3. An independent audit firm, KPMG, annually audits Red Cross financial statements and has approved all financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Further, as required by our Congressional Charter, the U.S. Secretary of Defense reviews the report of the independent audit firm. Both KPMG’s report on the Red Cross’ Consolidated Financial Statements and the Report of the U.S. Army Audit Agency (which has the responsibility of performing the Secretary’s review) are available on our website: http://www.redcross.org/about-us/governance; 4. Regular program updates for Red Cross senior leadership; and 5. Quarterly and annual planning and review meetings to review progress and plan follow-up. 3 Attachment Q: April 26, 2016 email request to ARC Fm: To: Cc: W: Lamamt?ann Subject: RE: Follow up from last week"s ll Date: Tuadav, May 10, 2015 9:20:18 AM Attad?tments: . Josh, Attached is the qualitative description of the monitoring, supervision and evaluation of our Haiti partners? work that is captured in the $69 million. Please let the. know if you have any questions relation to the utterl'ied or any of the information is provided in this email suing. Regards, David From: Meltzer, David Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2015 8:56 AM To: Josh [Judiciary?Rep} Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy Subject: RE: Follow up from last week's call Josh. We are following up on our commitment to provide you with the number of individual staff members that have been involved in monitoring and supervising projects implemented by our partners. To date, we conservatively estimate that 230 individual sta?? members have been involved in monitoring and supervising projects implemented by our partners during the life of the Haiti Assistance Program. Of this amount, approximately 160 have been based in Haiti and 70 based outside of Haiti- We also committed to provide you with a couple of examples of evaluations of our partner projects. As of December 2015, 38 evaluations of projects partially or wholly implemented by American Red Cross partners have been performed during the life of the Haiti Assistance Program. Project evaluations measure to what extent objectives are being met. and work is being satisfactorily performed by the partner. as well as identifying implementation challenges and recommendations for improvements or corrections to be undertaken by the partner. Another objective of project evaluations is to provide a learning tool so successes can be replicated and deficiencies foreseen or avoided in the future. As we did with the Services to Armed Forces report, we are prepared to enable you to read project evaluations conducted by independent consultants on two of our most important recent projects implemented with partners- Please let me know if you want to read the reports and, if so, what times work best for Dawn to bring the reports to you to read as she did last week. As we have discussed, evaluation of our partners' work is essential to ensure that our donors' dollars are being spent appropriately, in a country with little infrastructure or government oversight and a high level of corruption. It is not administrative overhead. As I wrote earlier. we are preparing a qualitative description of the monitoring, supervision, and evaluation of our partners? work that has been performed by our staff that is captured in the $69 million. We will provide that to you in the near future. Regards. David From: Meitzer, David Sent: Wednesday, April 2016 8:26 PM To: Josh (Judiciarv-RED} Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy Subject: Re: Follow up from last week's call Josh. We are developing a table which will provide information on the number of staff who have monitored. evaluated or supervised our partners during the course of the Haiti Assistance Program. As discussed. we will divide the number into two sub-groups: 1. Staff based in Haiti: and 2. Staff based outside of Haiti. As agreed on the call. we will provide this information along with a few examples of the reports evaluating work performed by our partners. We are also preparing a document that will provide you with a qualitative description of the monitoring. ampervision. and evaluation of our partners? work that has been performed by our staffthat is captured in the $69 million. 1With respect to our expense tracking system. you are correct that our system does not speci?cally track costs incurred in monitoring. evaluating. or supervising work of our partners. Our systems do not track the time spent by our staff by individual project and. similarly. our systems do not track the costs of equipment (eg. cars and fuel) by individual project. We are unaware of any non-pro?t that has such a system. While USAJD reports a lump sum amount of expenditures for ?Program Management" costs which include ?oversight? and ?evaluations? among many other costs such as salaries. bene?ts. and administration such costs are "not broken down by sector or sub?sector. because efforts are cross?cutting'vi'w - Please let me know if you have any questions or want to discuss this further. David On A 26 2016 at 10:58 AM. Fl nn-Brown, Josh (Judiciary-Rep}- _wrote: David Following up from the call last week. We had discussed whether oversight and evaluation activities were a part of the $69 million in HAP program expenses. As I stated on the call. it is our understanding that ARC does not track those expenses and therefore ARC is unable to illustrate the degree to which oversight and evaluation actually occurred for HAP. As you know, we previously requested a categorical breakdown in the costs associated with the $69 million to provide for a more granular view. Please see attached. production pursuant to that request did not include oversight and evaluation costs. Speci?cally, in the attached document you stated that ARC does not track project oversight and evaluation costs. 0n the phone call last week when I brought that up. my takeaway was that you felt program oversight and evaluation costs were in fact captured within the $69 million and ARC would produce documents to substantiate. Please let me know if you will be providing those documents. Thank you. Josh ollow-Up to Yesterday?s Conference Call.pdf'> Attachment R: Copy of Grant Agreement American Red Green .i-p GRANT AGREEMENT This Grant Agreement ["Agreement"] is made by and between The American Red Cross, a charitable and nonpro?t corporation chartered by Congress, having its principal place of business at 2025 Street N.W., Washington, DC. 20006 ["Red Cross") and ENTER ORGANIZATION NAME, a charitable and nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of T81), and having its principal place of business at ADDRESS ("Grantee"). Preamble: On [anuary 12. 2010, a series of earthquakes with magnitude 6.5 to 7.3 struck Haiti in the highly populated area of Department Guest, 10 miles from Port?au-Prince. The Red Cross received overwhelming support from the American public in response to the earthquakes. With donated funds, working with a number of local and international organizations, the Red Cross will serve designated beneficiaries with short, medium and long term relief. ENTER ORGANIZATION NAME has requested a grant of funds in order to undertake a project in Haiti. In consideration of the foregoing, of the promises contained in this Agreement and of other good and valuable consideration, the Red Cross and Grantee (each, a "Party" and collectively, the "Parties"] intending to be legally bound. agree as follows: 1. PURPOSE OF RANT AND PLA OF PERFORMANCE l.l. Purpose of the Grant: Grantee has submitted a ENTER DATE AND TITLE OF PROPOSAL proposal (the ?Proposal?], a copy of which is attached hereto as Annex 1 and made an integral part hereof. The Proposal is for a project that will provide ENTER PROJECT DESCRIPTION [the "Project"]. The principal activities of the Project include: EXPLANATION OF PROJECT [the ?Project activities?]. 1.2. Place of Performance: The principal place of performance for Project Activities is Haiti. 2. GRANT AND DISBURSEMENTS 2.1. GRANT 2.1.1. Amount of Grant: The Red Cross agrees to provide Grantee with a grant of up to SPELL AMOUNT [referred to as the "Grant" or "Grant Funds?) to allow Grantee to recover costs associated with implementing the Project as prescribed in this Agreement. 2.1.2. Term of Grant: This Agreement will commence on ENTER DATE and expire on ENTER DATE unless otherwise terminated sooner or extended in accordance with this Agreement {the "Grant Term"]. Grantee may request that the Red Cross extend the Grant Term. Such requests must be submitted in writing to and received by the Red Cross prior to the end of the Grant Term. The Red Cross may approve or deny any such request at its sole discretion. Page I of 141 2.1.3. Terms and Conditions of Grant: Grantee agrees to comply with the following terms and conditions: 2.1.3.1. 2.1.3.2. 2.1.3.3. 2.1.3.4. 2.1.3.5. 2.1.3.6. 2.1.3.7. To use the Grant Funds solely to support the Project and the activities detailed in the Proposal and to repay any portion of the Grant not used for Project activities as prescribed in this Agreement. To use the Grant Funds in strict accordance with the budget submitted on ENTER DATE ("Budget"), attached hereto in Annex 2 and made an integral part hereof, for the purpose of carrying out this Project. To submit detailed Quarterly and Final Financial and Project Reports as set forth in Article 3.0. THE FOLLOWING THE GRANT IS COST REIMBURSEABLE FUNDS [which must include interest earnings on excess Grant Funds advanced as set forth in Paragraph 6.5 to the Red Cross in the manner prescribed by this Agreement] To return any unexpended Grant Funds and Grant Funds related to unauthorised uses set forth in Paragraph 5.5 To verify the licenses, degrees, or certi?cations that are required to perform the Project activities and to ensure Grantee maintains current and valid required licensures, permits or other authorizations required to perform the Project activities IF GRANTEE WILL WORK WITH CHILDREN UNDER 18, INSERT THIS AND THE NEXT To perform, and to verify having obtained satisfactory results for the following background checks at Grantee?s expense if Project activity involves staff (including, but not limited to paid, unpaid, or volunteer staff] having substantial direct or unsupervised contact with children under age 18: 2.1.3.611. 7 year criminal background check including all arrest and conviction histories with ?nal dispositions in the applicable district and circuit courts, based on the residences of jurisdiction for the individual over the past 7 years; 2.1.3.6.1.2. Sex offender registry check where available; and 2.1.3.613. lfapplicable, Social Security number verification and trace If unable to conduct background checks because records do not exist, to represent and warrant if Project activities involve staff (including, but not limited to paid, unpaid, or volunteer staff] having substantial direct or unsupervised contact with children under age 18, have not been arrested and/or convicted of a crime within the seven years preceding the Grant Term 2.2. DISBURSEMENTS 2.2.1. THE FOLLOWING Will-3N ADVANCES WILL BE ISSUED TD Initial Disbursement: The Red Cross will make an initial disbursement t0 Grantee to cover ?rst quarter cash requirements upon review and approval of the initial Quarterly Cash Forecast provided by Grantee pursuant to Article 3.0. Disbursement will be made via electronic transfer using the following bank information provided by Grantee: NAME OF BANK: ADDRESS: ABA NUMBER: Page 2 of 2.2.2. 2.2.3. SWIFT CODE Acct. No.: Bank Account Holder?s Name: Reference: THIS PARAGRAPH IF THE GRANT IS COST Subsequent Disbursements: Upon receipt and approval of the Quarterly Programmatic and Financial reports referenced in Article 3, and the satisfaction of the other conditions set forth in this Agreement, the American Red Cross will disburse funds. The Red Cross shall have. the right to, but shall not be obligated to, withhold an amount up to 10% of the total amount of the Grant Funds as "retainage" (as that term is used customarily in construction project finance] until it has received and approved the ?nal report ofthe Grantee on the Project. 3. REP RTIN AND MONITORING RE UIREMENTS it is the responsibility ofthe Grantee to keep the Red Cross informed as to all Project activities for which Grant Funds are expended by providing reports on a timely basis. Grantee must submit detailed Quarterly and Final Financial and Project Reports in the formats provided by the Red Cross, which can only be modi?ed by mutual written agreement by the Red Cross and Grantee and must contain a ?scal accounting ofGrant expenditures and a narrative describing the following: objectives supported by the Grant: activities carried out to meet each objective; results accomplished; any challenges encountered and how they were resolved or plans for resolving; and main activities planned for the next reporting period. Grantee also shall submit to Red Cross copies of reports/documents Receipt of reports when due are required before subsequent Grant Funds will be released. 3.1. PROJECT REPORTS: Project Reports describe the progress that has been made on the Project as outlined in the Proposal and in accordance with the Budget. 3.1.1. Ouarterlv Program Report: Grantee will prepare and submit a Quarteriy Program Report consisting of two parts, a narrative format and an indicator tracking format, as set forth in Annex 3 and Annex 4. respectively. This report must contain progress and ?ndings on the Project, as described in the Proposal, including activities undertaken during the period, in attaining the goals of the Project. This report will also indicate activities to be undertaken in the next quarter. It will include an account of the Project?s major activities and identify any problems encountered or changes made to the Project work plan. It should also summarize any substantive ?ndings and describe any lessons learned. This report shall contain a description and/or copies of any positive or negative publicity received that the Grantee is aware of. Page 3 of l4 3.1.2. Final Proiect Report: This report shall contain activities undertaken and an evaluation of their effectiveness in attaining the objectives of the Project. This must include enough detail to acquaint the reader with the Project without requiring the Grant Proposal be reread. This report must include a description or copies of all approved, communication and marketing materials drawn from the Project. This report must also indicate if all or part ofthe Project activities will he continued after the end of the Grant Term and if other funds or institutional funds will support such activities. 3.2. FINANCIAL REPORTS. The Financial Reports describe how the Grant Funds were used during the reporting period. All Financial Reports must include an accounting of actual expenditures as compared with the line items set forth in the Budget. Additional reports may be. requested by Red Cross during the Grant Term to itemize information in a budget category for purposes ofRed Cross donor stewardship reports. 3.2.1. Quarterly Financ_i_t_-11 Report. Grantee will prepare and submit :1 Quarterly Financial Report in the format set forth in Annex 5 attached hereto and made an integral part hereof, reporting how Grant Funds were expended by expense. category in the Budget with the fore-casted expenses for the quarter. Grantee will provide clear commentary on any material variance that is greater than 10% between forecasted and actual expenses. 3.2.2. Final Financial Report: Grantee will submit the Final Financial Report also in the format set forth in ?esj. This report is a basis for evaluating and identifying any unused Grant Funds, any additional Grant Funds owed to the Red Cross, potential unauthorized use of Grant Funds, and closing the Grant. The Final Financial Report must alsni include a status of final cash on hand as summarized in the stant'lard Quarterly Cash Forecast format set forth in Maia 'I?Hl'l IF GRANT l5 t'ltlS'l? [Nt'ji l-?l?NllF; and should re?ect any final interest {calculated as set forth Paragraph 6.5} earned on excess Grant Funds advanced from prior reporting periods]. 3.2.3. inventory Repti?: Grantee will provide an inventory of the projertrfumledj non? expendable assets with an accpiisition or fair market value or more. The Inventory Report must include the following information for each asset: purchase date, serial/registration number. physical location, and condition. The report must be accompanied by the asset disposal plan for approval by Red Cross. 3.2.4. For an financial matters. ilease contact 3.3. REPORTS SUBMISSION SCHEDULE 3.3.1. Quarterly Reports: Quarterly reports must be submitted no later than thirty [30] days after the end of each calendar quarter: Activity For: Uri January March Apri130 April lune july 30 Page -l of 3.3.2. 3.3.3. October 30 january 30 july - September October December Final Reports: The ?nal unaudited Financial, Project, and Inventory Reports [ifany] must be submitted no later than ninety [90] days Following the termination of Project activities or the expiration of the Grant Term or termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first. Delivery: All reports provided to the Red Cross under this Agreement shall be in writing, duly signed by the Grantee, and shall be delivered electronically [as a scanned digital document] to [ii] by registered or certi?ed air mail; or by a nationally recognized overnight delivery service, to the following address: American Red Cross 2025 Street N.W., Washington, DC. 20006, Attn: 3.4. EVALUATION ACTIVITIES 3.4.1. 3.4.2. 3.4.3. All baseline, midline and endline surveys, program reviews and evaluations and associated documents shall be subject to prior approval by Red Cross before implementation. The Red Cross reserves the right to conduct a mid-line and a ?nal evaluation via an external evaluator who will be hired and managed by the American Red Cross. Red Cross may, but shall not be obligated to, issue to Grantee a "Notice of Project Progress Meeting," to which Grantee shall send its senior Project management team members, and which shall be held in Red Cross?s administrative of?ces in Washington, DC. The agenda for the Project Progress meeting will be set in advance, and may include any issues related to the Project and the use of Grant Funds. Absent extraordinary circumstances, Red Cross will endeavor to hold a Project Progress Meeting prior to the declaration ofan Event ofDeFault under the Agreement. 3.5. SELECTION OF KEY PERSONNEL 3.5.1. 4. The Grantee shall obtain written approval from the Red Cross prior to selecting the following key personnel: GRANT AQQOUNTINQ RECORDS 4.1. Recordkeeping: Grantee must maintain accurate. complete and detailed accounts, records, and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred under this Grant so that Project expenses can be clearly identi?ed. Grantee's ?nancial system must have the ability to provide: BCCU rate, current. complete, disclosed ?nancial results (accrual basis); separate identification of source and use of funds; effective control over and accoontability for all funds, property and other assets; and comparison of outlays with budget amounts [budget versus actual]. 4.2. Documentation: All activity funded by this Grant must be supported by an original invoice, receipts, and other supporting documentation such as timesheets, vendor invoices, etc, in HCCD rdance with Grantee?s policies and procedures. Page 5 ul? l4 5. 4.3. Record Retention: All financial and programmatic records relating to the Project must be kept on ?le and reasonably accessible for a minimum of three full ?scal years from the date of submission of the Final Financial Report, the termination of the Agreement or expiration of the Grant Term, or such other period of time as required by law, rule or regulation. AUDIT REQUIREMENTS 5.1. 5.2. 5.3. 5 .4. 5.5. Annual Audit: Grantee must obtain an annual organization-wide audit by an independent Certi?ed Public Accountant, or appropriate counterpart. Copies of these reports will be provided to the Red Cross during the course ofthe Grant Term. Red Cross Audit: During the Grant Term and for a period ofone year thereafter, the Red Cross may, at its own expense, review, audit, or cause to be audited, the records of the Grantee insofar as they relate to the Grant Project. The Red Cross also may send its personnel to monitor Project progress and accompany auditors retained by Grantee. The Grantee will provide the Red Cross and its agents access to all ?nancial and programmatic ?les, accounts, records, contracts and other documents related to this Agreement upon thirty {30) days prior notice during the Grant Term and for three years after expiration or termination of the Term. Corrective Action: if there are any audit ?ndings related to the Project, the Grantee must ensure that appropriate corrective action is taken within six months and must notify the Red Cross of the contact person responsible for the corrective actions and the anticipated completion date. Disallowed Costs: Upon ?ndings of Disallowed Costs, the Red Cross will provide written notice of any such expenditure so disallowed, and the Grantee agrees to submit revised ?nancial reports accordingly. Unauthorized Use of Funds: The Grantee and all subcontractors involved with the implementation of the Project will not undertake any actions or incur any expenses or make any commitments which would be inconsistent with the purpose of the Project and/or not set forth in the Budget. The Grantee will recover and return to the Red Cross all expenditures determined to be unauthorized in accordance with the approved activity and Budget within thirty [3 0] days after notice from the Red Cross. FINANEJAL. ADMINISTRATIVE AND QE 6.1. Assignment and Sub-Grants: The Grantee may not assign the Grant. or subcontract the services funded by this Grant, except as speci?ed in the Preposal, without the express prior written consent of the Red Cross. Any attempted assignment without such consent will be null and void and ofno effect. Grantee assumes full responsibility and liability for all acts and omissions ofany and all Red Cross approved sub grantee[s) or subcontractor[s]. 6.2. Compliance: Grantee agrees to conduct all Project activities funded by this Agreement in full compliance with all applicable foreign, federal, state and local laws, rules. regulations, resolutions, orders, judgments, decrees and ordinances [collectively "Regulations"] including, but not limited to the following: Page ol? [4 6.2.1. Grantee will ensure that all recipients receive equitable services without regard to 6.2.2. 6.2.3. race, sex, education, ethnicity, socio-economic status, religion, ability/disability, sexual orientation, gender self-identi?cation, age, country of origin, ?rst language, marital status, citizenship. or immigration status. THE GRANTEE IS A US ENTITY, USE THIS AS PARAGRAPH is and will be in compliance with, and will cause its sub-grantees, sub-contractors, af?liates and agents to comply with, United States economic sanctions, import/export Regulations, anti-bribery Regulations, anti-terrorism Regulations and anti-money laundering Regulations. including but not limited to the USA PATRIOT Act, the Regulations administered by the United States Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control and Executive Order 13224. THE GRANTEE IS A NATIONAL OR OTHER NON US ENTITY. USE THIS AS PARAGRAPH As a condition of receiving American Red Cross Grant Funds, Grantee certi?es that it has not provided and will not knowingly provide, material support or resources to any individual or entity that it knows, or has reason to know, is or acts as an agent for an individual or entity that advocates, plans sponsors, engages in, or has engaged in terrorist activity. Such individuals and entities may be, but are not necessarily listed in the Annex to Executive Order 13224, or may be designated by the United States, under any ofthe following authorities: Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act [as amended 8 U.S.C. 1189}, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act [50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.], the National Emergencies Act [50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) or Section 213 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended by the USA PATRIOT Act ofBOOl [8 U.S.C. 1132]. THE GRANTEE IS THE UNITED NATIONS OR A UNITED NATIONS AGENCY, USE THIS AS PARAGRAPH Consistent with numerous United Nations Security Council Resolutions, including (1999], [2001], and [2001), the Red Cross and the Grantee are ?rmly committed to the international fight against terrorism and in particular, against the ?nancing of terrorism. It is the policy ofthe Red Cross to seek to ensure that none of its funds are used, directly or indirectly, to provide support to individual or entities associated with terrorism. In accordance with this policy, the Grantee undertakes to use all reasonable efforts to ensure that none ofthe Grant Funds provided under this Agreement are used to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism. Grantee covenants and agrees that it has not made, given, offered, promised or authorized, and shall not make, give, offer, promise or authorize, directly or indirectly, any payment. gift or thing of value to any government of?cial for the purpose of affecting or influencing any act or decision of any such government, department, agency, instrumentality or political party to obtain, retain or direct business to or for or benefit the Red Cross, and/or any sister society of the Red Cross in any way, and will not otherwise violate the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 197?, as amended, or any and all other similar applicable Regulations. Grantee af?rms that no government of?cial who has responsibility for any activities under this Agreement has any ownership interest, direct or indirect, in Grantee. In the event that there is a change in the information contained in this paragraph, Grantee agrees to notify the Red Cross immediately in writing. Any breach of the foregoing obligation shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and shall entitle the Red Cross to the return of all amounts paid to Grantee hereunder in addition to all other rights and Page 'i of l4 remedies that the Red Cross may have in law or equity. For the purposes of this Paragraph 6.2.3, "government official" means any officer or employee of any government, or any department, agency or instrumentality thereof, or any person acting in an official capacity for or on behalf of any such government, department, agency or instrumentality, or any official of any political party or any candidate for political office, and any reference to "government official" includes immediate family members of such person. 6.2.4. Grantee will include Maggi] 6.2.1 and Paragraph 6.2.2 in any and all sub- under this Agreement. 6.3. Budget Revision: Grantee is allowed to transfer funds between major budget categories. For any proposed transfer of funds between major budget categories greater than 20% of any of the relevant budget category/*s amount, formal a Jrovai must be ret uested from the no Red Cross may approve or deny any such request at its sole discretion by providing a written response to Grantee. All transfers of funds, regardless of size, must be explained in the quarterly financial reporting. 6.4 M) Will. Fif-f ISSUED ?I?ti THE GRANT t'it'JS'I' Grant Funds: If Grant Funds remain unspent after completion of the Project or the Grant Term, or should the Agreement be terminated prior to its expiration. the Grantee must contact Omair Ahmed, Director, International Finance, American Red Cross, 2025 Street N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006, phone: (202] 303-8915, email: omair.alnned@redcross.org who will direct speci?cs regarding the. return of all Grant Funds advanced, but not expended by the Grantee, to Red Cross within thirty [30) days after Grantee submits the Final Financial Report. If Grant Funds have not been expended by the end ofthe Grant Term, and Grantee wishes to use the remaining Grant Funds to continue work on the Project, Grantee must submit a formal, written request for a no-cost extension to the Grant Manager INSERT POC NAME AND EMAIL AT ARC. thirty days prior to expiration ofthe Grant Term. The Red Cross may approve or deny any such request at its sole discretion by providing a written response to Grantee. 6.5. Panatamen IF NI.) WILL BE ISSUED TO TI-IIE GRANTPF THE GlinN'l' IS GUST RFIIVI BIIRSAHI interest earnings on any excess Grant Funds at the end of a quarterly financial period shall by calculated by the Grantee as set forth in ?nite?, and such interest earnings will reduce the amount of cash to be advanced by the Red Cross on the subsequent quarterly cash requests made by the Grantee. Interest earned on any excess Grant Funds advanced as reported in the Final Financial Report shall be calculated and returned to the Red Cross with any other Grant Funds as set forth in Paragraph 243.&. 6.6. Procurement Procedures: Grantee must have procurement procedures to ensure against unnecessary. excessive or duplicative purchases, fraud, waste and abuse. 7. PUBLICITY AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT 0F SUPPORT 7.1. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Red Cross hereby grants to Grantee. and the Grantee hereby accepts, a limited and non-exclusive license to use Red Cross? trade Page 3 of 4 name, trademarks, service marks and logos [?Marks?] solely to indicate that funding for the Project was provided by the Red Cross. Grantee shall not sublicense, assign, or transfer the rights granted in this Agreement without the prior written consent of Red Cross. Grantee agrees to obtain Red Cross? prior written approval of each and every use of the Marks. Such requests should be sent to: POC NAME AND EMAIL AT ARC. Grantee acknowledges and agrees that the Marks are and shail remain the property of Red Cross and that the license granted under this Agreement does not constitute a transfer to the Grantee of any ownership rights in the Marks. Further, the Grantee agrees and acknowledges that Grantee's use of the Marks shall inure solely to the benefit of Red Cross. Grantee shall not use or reference the name or emblem of The American Red Cross, including issuing any press releases or otherwise making any public statement referring to this Grant or using the Red Cross name or emblem without the prior written consent ofthe Red Cross, except as permitted in this {tracing Grantee will include the Red Cross name and emblem on any anti all print or electronic communications materials that relate to the Project, subject to Red Cross approval as provided above. 7.2. Red Cross requests inclusion in all promotional materials related to this Agreement, including signhoards. brochures. and other materials. The American Red Cross logo should be equal in size to other logos. 7.3. At mutually agreed-upon milestones. Grantee shall identify and use its best efforts to make available five to ten beneficiaries of the program funded by the Grant Agreement for the purpose of being interviewed by the Red Cross and to have their progress documented for external communications. Grantee will, the extent possible. maintain the means to regularly contact such identified beneficiaries so that the Red Cross can follow-up with them at the agreed-upon milestones. Grantee shall provide a list of locations where Grantee is performing work funded under this Agreement so that the Red Cross can include that information on its response map. Grantee shall update this list upon request from the Red Cross. 7.4l Red Cross has the right to share any and all information and/or materials receivetl from ?The Grantee related to this Projeet with donors and the media, following review and approval of all information/?materials hy the Grantee. Grantee oar coordinate any public announcements or press releases with the Red Cross, and obtain prior written approval from Red Cross. In addition. Grantee shall not refuse any reasonable request by Red Cross for Grantee to promote Red Cross's role in funding the Project, whether through a Grantee- issued press release, shelter cluster maps or otherwise. This Agreement does not by direct reference or implication convey Red Cross endorsement of the Grantee?s services or activities. 8. AMENDMENTS Grantee must provide Red Cross with timely written notice of any material change in the purpose, scope, method of operation, objective or governance of the Project that are not in accordance with the ob'ectives of the Pro'ect as detailed in the Pro nose]. The written notice must be submitted to No such changes may be implemented unless and until approved in writing by Red Cross. This Agreement and referenced attachments may be modified or amended only by a written instrument duly executed by both the Grantee and Red Cross. l'age of l4 9. TERMINATI 9.1. For Convenience: Either Party may terminate this Agreement upon sixty [60] clays prior written notice to the other Party. Upon sending or receiving such a notice of termination. the Grantee must take immediate action to cease all expenditures ?nanced by this Agreement and to cancel all unliquidated obligations if possible. The Grantee may not enter into any additional obligations under this Agreement after sending or receiving such a notice of termination, other than those reasonably necessary to effectuate the close-out of this Agreement. if Red Cross terminates this Agreement under this Paragraph 9.1, it agrees to pay all documented, non-cancelable commitments that were made in good faith by the Grantee in accordance with the Proposal and the Budget prior to the notice of termination. Except as provided in this Paragraph 9.1, no further reimbursement will be made by Red Cross after the effective date of termination. Grantee agrees to repayment of all Grant Funds that have been advanced but not expended, and all disallowed costs, within forty-?ve [45) days after the effective date of termination. 9.2. For Cause: lf Grantee breaches the Agreement by failing to comply with its terms, the Red Cross may immediately terminate the Agreement and require immediate repayment Ofany unexpended Grant Funds. Red Cross shall have no obligation to make any further reimbursement after such a termination. 9.3. Disallowed Gosts: Red Cross retains the right to recoup all disallowed costs from Grantee after termination of this Agreement. 10. NQTICES All notices provided for in this Agreement shall be in writing, duly signed by the Party giving such notice, and include the name of the Project, the Agreement Number, and Grant Term. Notices shall be delivered, faxed, mailed by registered or certi?ed air mail or sent by a nationally recognized overnight delivery service, as follows: American Red Cross 2025 Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 USA Am: Harold W. Brooks, Senior Vice President, International Operations Copy to: Of?ce ofGeneral Counsel [at the same address] ENTER ORGANIZATION NAME, PDC AND ADDRESS All notices shall be deemed to be properly given or made upon the earliest to occur of actual delivery, [ii] in the event of notice by fax, con?rmation by fax answer back (followed by the mailing of the original of such notice], ?ve business days after being deposited in the mail or [iv] the next business day after being sent by overnight delivery service. 11. CONFIDENTIALITY For the purposes of the Grant, con?dential information includes the terms and conditions of this Grant, all data and all information, whether verbal or written, systems, techniques, formulas, information relating to Red Cross business, marketing strategies, proposals, pricing or accounting data and any other con?dential matter relating or pertaining to the services provided by Red Cross, Page [Hull-'1 released or gathered by Grantee related to the Project, including but not limited to ?nancial information and other documentation and all other information identi?ed as con?dential prior to disclosure ("Con?dential Information?). Grantee agrees it will only use Con?dential information solely for the purpose of providing services under this Grant. Grantee agrees it will not disclose, publish, reproduce, sell, transfer, or display in any form or otherwise disseminate Con?dential Information to any third party, other than as expressly authorized in writing or by electronic mail by a legal representative, or as required by law. The Red Cross reserves its right to seek injunctive reliefifGrantees violates this Article 11.0. Upon receipt of any request, subpoena, or other legal obligation to produce any Con?dential Information, Grantee may only release its own Con?dential Information and will notify the General Counsel in the Of?ce of General Counsel at the American Red Cross should Grantee receive a request, subpoena, or other legal obligation beyond the scope of Grantee's own Con?dential Information. Grantee will cooperate with Red Cross to limit the scope of the request, subpoena, or other legal obligation. Either Grantee or Red Cross may, in their discretion, collectively or individually, take appropriate legal or other action to oppose such disclosure. Con?dential Information that is ultimately required to be disclosed by law, including court order or government issued subpoena, shall not otherwise cease to be treated as Confidential Information. 12. CHQICE OF LAW AND The Parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve any dispute arising out of or relating to this Agreement by negotiation. Ifthe Parties are unable to resolve the dispute by negotiation, they may endeavor to resolve the dispute by mediation. If the dispute is not resolved by mediation, or if either or both Parties are unwilling to engage in mediation, then, subject to Article 11.0 GRANTEE IS NOT AN AMERICAN ENTITY OR DOES NOT HAVE AN ADDRESS THE US. INSERT THIS SENTENCE: all disputes arising out ofor in connection with this Agreement shall be ?nally settled under the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce by one or more arbitrators appointed in accordance with the said Rules] GRANTEE 15 AN AMERICAN ENTITY OR HAS AN ADDRESS IN THE US, USE THIS SENTENCE INSTEAD OF THE ONE PRIOR: the Parties agree to resolve such dispute by arbitration conducted in accordance with the American Arbitration Association] The place of arbitration shall be Washington, D.C. The arbitration panel shall consist of three arbitrators, one arbitrator appointed by each of the Parties, and the third arbitrator appointed by the two appointed arbitrators {the "Panel"]. The Panel may, at its discretion, provide for discovery by the Parties not to exceed a period of sixty [60] days from the date of ?ling of the notice ofarbitration. The costs and expenses of the arbitration, including arbitrators' fees but not including attorneys? fees, shall be split equally between the Parties. The Panel is not empowered to award punitive or exemplary damages. The arbitration shall be governed by the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. 1-16, and the Agreement will be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York, without giving effect to its conflict of law rules. The decision of the Panel shall be ?nal and binding on the Parties and judgment upon the Panel?s award may be entered by any court of competent jurisdiction. 13. INSQRANQE. INDEMNIFICA 1 AND LIMITATIQN QF LIABILITY 13.1. Insurance: Grantee shall obtain and maintain appropriate insurance in type and amount as is reasonable and customary for similar organizations providing similar services and activities in Haiti against liability for injury to persons or property arising from activities Page of l4 13.2. 13.3. relating to the Grant. Grantee will comply with any and all applicable laws and customs regarding compulsory auto liability and worker's compensation insurance, to the extent applicable to Grantee and its activities, and ensure that approved subagrantees or sub- contractors obtain and maintain appropriate insurance against liability for injury to persons or property arising from activities relating to the Grant and that its sub-grantees or subrcontractors comply with all compulsory insurance requirements of any country to the extent applicable to them and their activities. Grantee shall further maintain at its sole cost and expense the following insurance coverage for the duration of this Agreement and for not less than three years thereafter a Commercial General Liability insurance endorsed to include Products and Completed Operations Liability, Contractual Liability and Personal Advertising Injury Liability in an amount not less than $5,000,000 combined single limit for each occurrence and written on an occurrence form [not "claims made" form naming the Red Cross lndemnitees as additional insureds; a Crime Policy or a Fidelity Bond ofnot less than the amount ofthis Grant covering Employee Dishonesty, Depositors Forgery or Alternation and Computer and Funds Transfers Fraud naming Red Cross a Loss Payee as its interests may appear with respect to the Grant Funds, and; Workers' Compensation insurance for its US. employees whose work is associated with this Agreement with statutory limits for each relevant jurisdiction, and an Employers' Liability policy with at least the following limits, $1,000,000 per accident, $1,000,000 per disease and $1,000,000 per disease [each employee), and; Property "All Risk? Insurance written on a full replacement value basis for all property, goods and supplies purchased with funds provided under this Grant including coverage while in transit or in storage. The foregoing insurance amounts may be met by a combination of primary and excess insurance policies of the Grantee. Grantee will keep in force the insurance as required by this Agreement and any applicable regulations, with carriers currently rated by AM. Best at A10 or higher. Such policies will contain a worldwide coverage endorsement and will be written as primary policy coverage and not contributing with, or in excess ofany insurance coverage which the Red Cross may maintain. Grantee will provide Red Cross with certi?cates of insurance evidencing all of the above coverages and conditions [types and amounts] prior to commencing Agreement performance, and renewal certi?cates within ten days of expiration or non-renewal of the policies. GRANTEE SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR RISK OF LOSS OF ANY PROPERTY, GOODS OR SUPPLIES PURCHASED WITH FUNDS PROVIDED UNDER THIS GRANT AND TO ADEQUATELY INSURE SUCH PROPERTY, GOODS OR SUPPLIES AT ALL TIMES FROM THE TIME OF PURCHASE UNTIL FINAL DISTRIBUTION TO BENEFICIARIES. Indemni?cation: Grantee shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Red Cross, its of?cers, governors, agents, directors, employees, volunteers and their invitees (collectively the ?American Red Cross Indemnitees") in respect of any and ail claims and causes ofaction, including without limitation, settlement costs and any legal or other expenses for investigating or defending any actions or threatened actions arising from or in connection with the Grant or activities performed hereunder including but not limited to, breach of any obligation ofGrantee under the Grant; any failure ofGrantee to comply with applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances and any other cause of action or claim arising out of the services provided or activities and programs conducted by Grantee. This indemni?cation clause will survive expiration of the Grant Term and termination of this Agreement and must be included in all sub grants or subcontracts entered into to ful?ll purposes of this Grant. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE RED CROSS BE LIABLE FOR TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 9.0 OR OTHERWISE UNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT, FOR ANY LOST PROFITS, CONSEQUENTIAL, INDIRECT, EXEMPLARY, INCIDENTAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, DEATH, COSTS OF DELAY, ANY FAILURE OF DELIVERY, COSTS OF LOST OR DAMAGED Page l2 of I4 PROPERTY OR LIABILITIES TO THIRD PARTIES ARISING FROM ANY SOURCE WITH RESPECT TO THE ACTIVITIES OF GRANTEE RELATED TO THIS GRANT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE RED CROSS HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. THE LIABILITY OF THE RED CROSS ARISING UNDER THIS AGREEMENT OR FOR TERMINATION OF THIS AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 9.0 SHALL IN NO EVENT EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF MONEY, IF ANY, THAT RED CROSS WOULD BE OBLIGATED TO PAY TO GRANTEE PURSUANT TO THE EXPRESS PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 9.0. 14. FORCE MAIEURE ifat any time during the course ofthis Agreement it becomes impossible for a Party to perform any of its obligations for reasons of Force Majeure, that Party shall notify the other in writing of the existence of such Force Majeure. The Party giving notice is thereby relieved from such obligations as long as Force Majeure persists and will, upon the cessation of the Force Majeure Event, take all reasonable steps within its power to resume with the least possible delay compliance with its obligations. ?Force Maieure" Events shall include, without limitation, war, revolution, invasion, terrorism, strikes, insurrection. riots, mob violence, sabotage or other civil disorders, acts of God, limitations imposed by exchange control regulations or foreign investment regulations or similar regulations, laws, regulations, directives or rules of any government or governmental agency, any inordinate and unanticipated delays in regulatory review or governmental approval process that are within the sole control ofsuch government or governmental agency, and any delay or failure in manufacture, production or supply by third parties ofany goods or services. 15. MISCELLANEOUS 15.1. No Waiver. Failure of the Red Cross to enforce, or the delay by the Red Cross in enforcing, any of the terms and conditions ofthis Agreement shall not be deemed a continuing waiver or a modi?cation to this Agreement unless the waiver is expressly written and signed by the Red Cross and the Grantee. 15.2. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable by any court of ?nal jurisdiction, it is the intent ofthe Parties that all other provisions of this Agreement be interpreted to remain valid, enforceable, and binding on the Parties. 15.3. Complete Document. This Agreement, including all referenced attachments, and documents delivered or to be delivered pursuant to this Agreement contain or will contain the entire Agreement between the Parties and shall supersede all previous oral and written communications and all contemporaneous oral negotiations, commitments, and understandings. 15.4. Remedies. No provision ofthis Agreement is intended to limit the rights or remedies ofthe Red Cross, or the obligations of Grantee, under any other provisions of this Agreement or under relevant law. 15.5. If this agreement is executed in two languages, the English version prevails GRANTEE NAME AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS Insert signatory name Insert signatory name Insert signatory title Insert signatory title Page I3 ol' l-i Attachment S: ICE Org Chart Board of Governors American Red Cross Audit Risk Mgt. -- -- - -- Committee of Board of --I Governors President CEO General Counsel Chief lnt?l. Of?cer 1 Office of Investigations, Compliance Ethics Office of General Counsel International Services Attachment T: unc 1, 2016 ARC public production Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) Projects and Partnerships Project Name Implemented by Project Agreement Start Date End Date Status Emergency Relief Contribution to Food Distribution WFP $ 29,929,039.10 19-Jan-10 31-Dec-10 Closed Domestic Heater Meals ARC $ 14,224,831.00 2010 2010 Closed Contribution to IFRC Appeal Contribution to ICRC Appeal Hope for Haiti Now Fund IFRC ICRC ARC $ $ $ 6,535,937.00 3,612,064.00 1,605,528.00 2010 2010 2010 2012 Closed 2010 Closed 2011 Closed 1 Description Food rations for over 1 million people and associated distribution costs, primarily to young mothers and children through a partnership with the UN World Food Programme.  Contributions to the IFRC Earthquake Appeal covered the purchase of tarps/tents, hygiene kits, non-food items, shipping, transportation and general infrastructure costs to mount these distributions such as purchase of vehicles and generators. The American Red Cross also donated nearly 3 million packaged meals for distribution in the early days of the response. These funds also contributed to Base Camp set-up which was the main operational hub in Port-au-Prince in the relief and early recovery phases. Contributions to the IFRC Earthquake Appeal covered the purchase of tarps/tents, hygiene kits, non-food items, shipping, transportation and general infrastructure costs to mount these distributions such as purchase of vehicles and generators. These funds also contributed to Base Camp set-up which was the main operational hub in Port-au-Prince in the relief and early recovery phases. Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. Project Name Implemented by Project Agreement Start Date End Date Status Description 3-Feb-14 31-Dec-16 Active LAMIKA Component III - Physical Renewal Project works to improve public infrastructure services and increase the number of structurally safe houses, public spaces and public facilities in the Campeche neighborhood of Carrefour-Feuilles, Haiti. Shelter GC ARC $ $ 18,800,000.00 8,766,192.00 1-Nov-11 31-Dec-16 Active LAMIKA - Integrated Neighborhood Rehabilitation and Recovery MC IOM $ 2,734,474.00 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 1-Sep-13 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 30-Jun-16 Active WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 2 The primary goal of the LAMIKA program is to enhance community and household resilience through a sustainable and integrated approach that provides healthy, habitable, and improved homes and living conditions. The LAMIKA program, in accordance with the Haitian government's request for organizations to work in urban renewal, is being implemented in Carrefour-Feuilles, a poor residential neighborhood north of downtown Port-au-Prince which sustained extensive damage from the earthquake and is characterized by dense housing, poverty and limited access to safe infrastructure and services. The LAMIKA program conducts activities under three components in Social Engagement, Economic Strengthening and Physical Renewal to address needs across multiple sectors. Component I is implemented by the American Red Cross, Component II by Mercy Corps and Component III by Global Communities. The program targets 48,318 direct beneficiaries residing in 8 neighborhoods of Carrefour Feuilles. LAMIKA Component II - Economic Development and Livelihoods is a project that applies a market approach to enhance household economies, and increase opportunities for sustainable income and asset security through business and vocation skills training, improved access to markets and microfinance. As part of the initial LAMIKA assessment phase, this project with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) aimed to complement ongoing return and reconstruction efforts by expanding existing enumeration initiatives. Specifically, this project increased the coverage of IOM’s existing Overcoming Land Tenure-Related Barriers (OLTB) program, in order to clarify issues related to land ownership and tenancy to facilitate (re)construction in target communities. This project WRITTEN APPROVAL completed enumeration activities in the 7th communal section of the Port-Au-Prince commune where enumeration REQUIRED PRIOR TO partners such as the American Red Cross had planned housing interventions. This effort included processing and DISCLOSURE encoding data into IOM’s existing OLTB database, and the production of maps that best presented this data for reconstruction partners, particularly ARC. Project Name Kanaan Pi Djam: Component III, shelter components (Dynamic Community Development and Urban Reconstruction Program) Contribution to IFRC Appeal (Shelter component) Implemented by USAID IFRC Project Agreement $ $ 14,000,000.00 10,780,604.00 Start Date 19-Aug-13 2010 End Date 30-Jun-16 2014 Status Description Active The American Red Cross is partnering with USAID to implement an integrated program to support sustainable and responsible urban development in the West Department of Haiti. In accordance with the priorities of the Government of Haiti’s Construction, Housing and Public Works Unit (Unité de Construction de Logements et de Bâtiments PublicsUCLBP) and the National Housing and Habitat Policy, this partnership seeks to leverage, among others, the resources which residents themselves bring to their community. A focus point of these planned investments is Canaan, an emerging city north of the metropolitan area of Port-au-Prince which spontaneously developed following the 2010 earthquake. Over 100,000 people live in Canaan or are currently building in the area. The Government of Haiti estimates that Canaan residents have already invested over $100 million of their own resources in the area. The goal of this component of the program is to provide urban planning assistance, promote safer housing, build capacity of local entities to adopt safer and more sustainable construction, and to build expanded infrastructure services in the zone, including: increased water supply, new community spaces, paved footpaths and key roads, and the establishment of zoning and building regulations. Closed The support from the American Red Cross contributed to the transitional shelter component of the IFRC Shelter Program including the purchase and distribution of shelter tool kits, construction materials and supplies which included tarpaulins, plywood sheets, hurricane tarps, paint, sand, gravel, tools, subcontractor labor charges, shelter concrete blocks and latrines and their associated costs to mount the operation. The three projects specifically supported by the American Red Cross contribution include the construction of transitional shelter units in the Annex de la Mairie, La Piste and Saint Marc sites. Also, American Red Cross funding contributed to the cash vouchers project for t-shelter recipients to increase the purchasing power and equip earthquake affected families with critical household items. Ayiti Initiative on Reconstruction (REPAIR) PADF $ 10,754,622.00 15-Aug-11 31-Oct-12 Closed The Pan-American Development Foundation (PADF) Ayiti Initiative on Reconstruction (REPAIR) project repaired and rehabilitated 4,018 yellow-tagged, earthquake-damaged homes in Port-au-Prince benefitting 20,090 people. The REPAIR project worked through small local contractors from the areas where the yellow houses are located and trained more than 900 builders, masons and small contractors to use improved construction techniques and home repair methodologies. Houses repaired under the PADF program are tagged and certified as compliant with the Haitian Government’s yellow house repair guidelines. Disaster Response Activities ARC $ 8,483,597.00 2010 2011 Closed Directly implemented relief costs associated with the American Red Cross's response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the emergency shelter category. These costs include the purchase, transportation and distribution of relief supplies including tents, tarps, rope and mats. Transitional Shelter Project UNOPS $ 6,592,827.00 15-Aug-10 30-Nov-11 Closed UNOPS constructed 1,500 transitional homes (benefitting 7,500 people) each with a rainwater catchment system, and 606 latrines. Transitional Shelter Project HFH $ 6,403,043.00 1-Sep-10 31-Dec-11 Closed Habitat for Humanity built 1,500 upgradable t-shelters (benefitting 7,500 people) each with a structural foundation and a rain catchment system, plus 1,341 grey water systems, 409 hand washing stations, 375 latrines (designed for four families each), 10 new water points, 8 hand pumps and rehabilitated one well. Transitional Shelter Project ACTED $ 5,864,754.00 1-Jul-10 31-Dec-12 Closed ACTED constructed 1,700 transitional homes (benefitting 8,500 people) each with a rainwater catchment system, and 1,032 latrines. ACTED distributed mosquito nets and life straw filters to 1,677 households. Disaster Risk Reduction activities included participatory natural disaster vulnerability identification, and assessments and risks mapping at the community level. Hygiene promotion training consisted of training of Community Hygiene Promoters (CHP). Transitional Shelter Project HI $ 5,077,953.00 14-Aug-10 31-Dec-11 Closed Handicap International built 1,000 shelters (971 t-shelters built plus 29 t-shelters for classroom use). 599 latrines were built (567 latrines for shelters plus 32 latrines for classrooms). Among the 971 beneficiary households, 919 households benefited from WASH activities (latrines and hygiene promotion), 1,537 pupils benefited from 16 communitarian buildings (school classrooms) and 32 latrines. In total, 4,855 people benefitted from the t-shelters. 3 Project Name Relocation and Rental Subsidies CarrefourFeuilles Emergency Shelter Rubble Removal and Demolition Progressive Shelters Transitional Shelter Project Implemented by IFRC HFH Project Agreement $ $ 4,000,000.00 3,864,310.00 Start Date End Date Status 1-Sep-12 31-Dec-13 Closed This pledge covered 2,067 (10,335 people) households served by relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-auPrince. Closed With funding from the American Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity distributed 14,040 kits (benefitting approximately 70,200 people).The kits enabled beneficiaries to either construct a new shelter or make repairs to an existing shelter. Additional kits were pre-positioned for use in future disaster responses. As per Global Shelter Cluster strategy and per humanitarian specifications, each kit contained the following components: two 5-gallon buckets, two tarpaulins, rope, wire, nails, duct tape, a hammer, a pry bar, two chisels, pliers, 10 dust masks, leather work gloves, safety glasses, a hacksaw with two replacement blades, and a folding knife. 8-Mar-10 31-Mar-11 Description JP/HRO $ 2,984,511.00 1-Oct-12 30-Nov-14 Closed JP/HRO provided demolition and rubble removal services targeting homes and other buildings that were classified as “red” or requiring demolition, as per the Haitian Ministry of Public Works, Transport and Communications (MTPTC) standards. Through this project, more than 108,000 cubic meters of rubble were cleared (the equivalent of about 40 olympic-sized swimming pools of rubble).3,204 people received temporary employment through this project. Additionally, 238 households (1,190 people) received rubble removal services from their home, making their homes safer to inhabit. SpRC $ 2,881,250.00 1-Jan-11 30-Jun-12 Closed To meet the longer term housing needs of those displaced by the earthquake, the Spanish Red Cross upgraded 4,427 transitional shelters (benefitting 22,135 people) into permanent homes and constructed 1,500 latrines. Community members in Leogane were involved in the construction process, learning skills they could apply to future jobs.  HAVEN $ 2,686,164.00 1-Jul-10 31-Jul-11 Closed Haven constructed 499 homes (benefiting 2,495 people) each with rainwater harvesting units, and 189 latrines. The project also included hygiene promotion activities. HRC Institutional Asset Development Program ARC $ 2,500,000.00 1-Nov-14 31-Dec-16 Active After the 2010 earthquake, the Haitian Red Cross suffered significant damage to physical assets that hosted activities of many of its core functions. This project will support Haitian Red Cross physical asset development (of 3 to 4 key buildings) in coordination with ongoing organizational development (OD) programs supporting comprehensive HRC institutional strengthening. Relocation and Rental Subsidies of Additional Camps IFRC $ 2,400,000.00 1-Jan-13 31-Mar-14 Closed This pledge covered 1,231 households (6,155 people) served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-auPrince. This project with CARE seeks to contribute to the rehabilitation of urban housing and the closure of camps by helping homeowners construct safe rental accommodation, providing camp residents with safer housing, improved access to enhanced sanitation facilities and livelihoods opportunities, and better security to people currently living in damaged structures. To date, 117 households (approximately 585 people) have benefited from a settlement or relocation grant, 272 households (approximately 1,360 people) have benefited from a relocation program, 325 people have been trained in shelter activities, 387 people have been trained on income generating activities, 275 households (approximately 1,375 people) have received livelihoods grants, and 176 badly damaged homes have been repaired (benefitting approximately 880 people). From Camps to Secure Housing CARE $ 2,118,089.00 1-Dec-13 31-Dec-15 In close-out process Relocation and Rental Subsidies Mais Gate IFRC $ 2,000,000.00 1-Nov-11 28-Feb-13 Closed At a Red Cross Red Crescent Movement level, of the 13,000 families (65,000 beneficiaries) were targeted for relocation assistance, and the American Red Cross funded the relocation of 5,347 of these families (26,735 people). This pledge covered 2049 HHs served by the relocation and rental subsidies program in Port-au-Prince (10,245 people). Closed Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. Hope for Haiti Now Fund ARC $ 1,601,659.00 2010 2011 4 Project Name Camp Autonomization Project From Camp Transformation to Urban Revitalization (CATUR) Progressive Shelters Community Investment Fund (CIF)Balance Implemented by FRC Project Agreement $ 1,529,698.00 Start Date 15-Mar-14 End Date 30-Jun-15 Status Description Closed In order to reduce camp residents' dependency on humanitarian assistance and decrease displaced households' density in long term camps, this project through the French Red Cross seeks to improve the resilience of the population in several camps by increasing self-management and access to services as well as expanding livelihood opportunities for internally displaced people and their surrounding neighborhoods. To date, this project has reached more than 10,300 people with hygiene promotion, trained 486 people on violence prevention, and trained 147 people on income generating activities. This project through UN-HABITAT is assisting the government bodies (UCLBP and relevant ministries) and municipal authorities build consensus regarding all camp exit strategies. The project seeks to formalize 2 or 3 selected camps, with a target of reaching 1,500 households, through urban integration with the surrounding neighborhood and through provision of support which could include housing support, rental subsidies, access to basic services such as road, water and sanitation networks, or a combination of these options. UN-HABITAT $ 1,500,141.00 1-Apr-14 31-Mar-16 In close-out process SRC $ 802,697.00 1-Jul-11 30-Sep-12 Closed Through the American Red Cross partnership with the Swiss Red Cross, 599 homes (benefitting 2,995 people) were upgraded. All shelters were provided with a 400 gallon water tank for rain catchment. Active The Community Investment Fund (CIF) is a $1.5M financial commitment to enhance engagement with and support to smaller, local organizations. It is designed to address small requests for funding and/or the identification of critical activities which could be effectively implemented by local organizations. To date the American Red Cross has awarded a total of twelve CIF grants to the following partners: Global Therapy Group (2), Maison L’Arc-en-Ciel (2), St. Boniface Foundation, SOIL, HELP (2), Viva Rio, PSST, YWCA, Grace International. ARC $ 331,938.00 1-May-13 30-Jun-17 Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Contribution to ICRC Appeal ICRC $ 236,988.00 2010 2010 Closed Shelter Paint Kits - Housing Improvements FRC $ 201,591.00 1-Apr-11 30-Sep-11 Closed The French Red Cross improved the sustainability of transitional homes by giving 1,425 vulnerable displaced families (7,125 people) vouchers valued at 6,000 GDES (roughly US$150) to be used to purchase a paint kit. Painting the homes helps them better withstand inclement weather, thus making them more durable. Miron Relocation (Quick Action Fund) ARC $ 50,980.00 1-Jul-11 31-Mar-12 Closed From a request from the Government of Haiti, the project aimed to relocate IDP families situated in a dangerous ravine through a rental subsidy program. A total of 103 families (515 people) were relocated in December, 2011. This is one of five QAFs. Permanent Multi-Family Housing Units FULLER $ 48,000.00 18-Jun-12 29-Jul-12 Closed The American Red Cross contributed funds to support the Fuller Center's effort to help earthquake victims improve their own lives by providing shelter in healthy, holistic communities. Specific objectives included creating permanent multifamily housing units, fostering a sustainable community environment and providing industry and business opportunities for community members. Six housing units were built benefiting a total of 30 people. GTG $ 47,838.00 7-Nov-13 31-Jan-14 Closed The goal of this project through Global Therapy Group was to provide disabled individuals access to appropriate rehabilitation services, improving their functional ability and their integration into all aspects of Haitian life. Funding covered the construction of one physical therapy rehabilitation clinic in Port-au-Prince. This is one of twelve CIF grants. Construction of Rehabilitation Clinic- Phase I (Community Investment Fund) 5 Project Name Protection Related Construction for Maison L'ARC-En-Ciel WASH Facilities Support- Phase II (Community Investment Fund) Implemented by MAEC GTG Project Agreement $ $ 30,000.00 26,150.00 Start Date 15-Jan-16 15-Jun-15 End Date Status 14-Apr-16 In close-out process 14-Jan-16 In close-out process Description American Red Cross, through another CIF grant, is funding La Maison L'Arc en Ciel's (MAEC) home for children affected by HIV. The goal of this second CIF grant project is to support MAEC in securing its property around the home from aggressive and threatening land usurpers. This funding covered a portion of the costs to construct a stone wall around the perimeter of the property. This is one of twelve CIF grants. Global Therapy Group was created in response to the dire need for rehabilitation services in Haiti following the January earthquake in 2010. GTG is dedicated to providing sustainable rehabilitation and training to those in need throughout the world. Phase I of this CIF funded the construction of a small therapy clinic for physical and occupational therapy in PaP. The clinic was inaugurated in June 2014. This Phase II grant will support the installation of sanitation facilities at the clinic and provide training and education in effective WASH interventions for patients and their families. Target Direct Beneficiaries: 400. This is one of eight CIFs. Although this is a Water & Sanitation project, this grant is a draw-down from the CIF-Balance line under the Shelter Sector, hence the project is listed under Shelter. This is one of twelve CIF grants Health (Excluding Cholera) Gender Based Violence Prevention Project IRC St. Michel Hospital Reconstruction in Jacmel CRC Operational Support for Bernard Mevs Hospital Mirebalais Teaching Hospital Construction Haiti HIV/AIDS Prevention (HHAP) Medishare PIH ARC in Partnership with HRC WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE $ $ $ $ 10,000,000.00 8,673,672.00 5,500,000.00 4,271,114.00 WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE 1-Aug-12 31-Mar-16 1-Oct-10 11-Nov-11 1-Jan-11 The goal of this project is to reduce the incidence and mitigate the consequences of gender-based violence (GBV) in Portau-Prince by addressing the needs of survivors and by empowering women and girls to participate more actively in WRITTEN APPROVAL Haitian society. This partnership  with the International Rescue Committee (IRC) is increasing the capacity of local and REQUIRED PRIOR TO community-based organizations that already provide valuable services, conducts ongoing needs assessments and DISCLOSURE trainings with these organizations, and develops an adolescent girls program. The program is also helping create financial opportunities for women and to promote women's decision-making ability through empowerment and dialogue both within the home and community. The project has directly reached 8,500 people that participated in the trainings. In close-out process 31-Dec-12 Closed 31-Dec-12 Closed 30-Jun-15 Closed 6 The American Red Cross is supporting the Canadian Red Cross to improve access to health services in the South-East Department of Haiti by contributing significant funds required for the reconstruction of St. Michel Hospital in Jacmel. The hospital is the only hospital in the South-East Department. The target population to be reached is 560,000. The American Red Cross supported critical operating expenses, payroll and administrative fees for the Bernard Mevs Hospital Project Medishare Critical Care Trauma and Rehabilitation Program in Port-au-Prince. The hospital operates 24/7 for the general public, providing the only critical care and trauma services for all of Haiti. ARC supported the hospital for 27 months from October 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012, employing over 200 Haitian staff (40 Haitian nurses, 22 Haitian physicians and 150 allied healthcare professionals and Haitian support staff), supported by 10 full-time international mentors and 50 volunteers that provided specialized training. The American Red Cross supported Partners in Health (PIH) in the construction, equipping and opening of a national state of the art teaching hospital in Mirebalais. The direct number of people anticipated to be served by project is 160,000 (catchment area for primary/secondary care) and the indirect number of people anticipated to be served by the project is 3.3 million people (catchment area for tertiary care).The hospital has more than 300 beds. This project co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross aimed to reduce the incidence of HIV among the most at-risk populations and in settings characterized by high-risk behaviors in 12 locations in Haiti. The project reached 333,010 people. Project Name Field Hospital Support in Carrefour Post-Earthquake Health and Hygiene Promotion in Camps Program (Part 2) Operational Support for Haiti's University Hospital Enhanced Health Service Delivery Program (Community Health Volunteer Network) Strengthening Immunizations Services through Measles Control Implemented by GRC ARC PIH ARC in partnership with HRC UNF Project Agreement $ $ $ $ $ 3,606,927.00 2,841,024.00 2,558,386.00 2,540,000.00 2,000,000.00 Start Date 31-Aug-10 1-May-10 12-Jan-10 1-Nov-14 2-Mar-12 End Date 31-Dec-13 30-Nov-12 Status Description Closed The American Red Cross supported the German Red Cross Society for the operation of a field hospital located in Carrefour, just outside of Port-au-Prince. The field hospital opened immediately after the earthquake and continued to provide free medical services through the end of December 2010, treating over 70,000 patients. The hospital provided both fixed and mobile health services, as well as training for volunteers to provide psychosocial support and community health and hygiene promotion. In addition to supporting the operation of the hospital and the salaries of the staff, the American Red Cross also provided support to rehabilitate the soccer field that housed the hospital once the field hospital was closed. Closed 28-Feb-11 Closed 30-Apr-17 Active 31-Dec-12 Closed 7 The American Red Cross Post-Earthquake Health and Hygiene Promotion Program followed a community-based approach to providing first aid and promoting hygiene, health, disease prevention, and safety in the camps. Program activities included hygiene promotion, condom distribution, and education on preventing cholera, malaria, HIV, and sexual and gender-based violence. The program also conducted disease mitigation activities in the camps. In most cases, this program worked in the same locations as the Haiti Emergency Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Program, complementing disaster risk reduction work with health and hygiene promotion services to camp communities. 337,392 people were reached (counting first visits only), 1,616,361 condoms were distributed, 229,151 benefited from hand-washing activities, 35,251 ORS sachets were distributed, 2,268,941 bars of soap and 9,550,085 Aquatabs were distributed. In the aftermath of the earthquake, the American Red Cross, through Partners in Health, provided operational support for Haiti's University Hospital (HUEH), the largest public hospital in Haiti. For the months between July 2010 and February 2011, PIH disbursed $3,284,914 to HUEH to pay supplementary compensation to its 1,440 Haitian staff. The American Red Cross reimbursed $2,077,266 of these costs (for the months July 2010 and November 2010 – February 2011), and provided nearly $500,000 for equipment and supply expenses, and support for other services for the hospital. This program is co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross and seeks to contribute to building resilience in targeted communities in Haiti through improved access to primary health services and availability of trained personnel in 6 geographical departments of Haiti: North, North-East, North-West, West, South and South-East departments. The project, coordinated closely with Government of Haiti's Ministry of Health, will target training and deployment of Polyvalent Community Health Agents (ASCPs) and Haitian Red Cross volunteers – Health (HRCV-H). The project will train and support the deployment of 40 ASCPs in collaboration with MSP, supported by the deployment of 320 (HRCV-Hs) – an average ratio of 1:8 of ASCP to HRCV-H covering a specific geographic area. The total number of people anticipated to be served by the project is 40,000. The American Red Cross supported a rapid vaccination in camps post-earthquake in Haiti in 2010 and the multi-agency coordinated measles vaccination campaign in April 2012 led by the United Nation's Foundation as well as associated social mobilization activities carried out by the Haitian Red Cross. The national coverage reached through the 2012 campaign was 92.4% (n=2,963,911 children vaccinated) for OPV and 94.6% (n= 3,069,396 children vaccinated) for MR vaccine. Additionally, 1.2 million units of vitamin A and 1.3 million units of albendozale (antiparasitic drug) were administered. Rapid Monitoring Coverage following the campaign conducted in all departments indicated that national coverage reached was more than 95%. Project Name Implemented by Project Agreement Start Date End Date Status Description Contribution to IFRC Appeal (Health Component) IFRC $ 1,954,319.00 2010 2012 Closed American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported provision of preventive, community-level and curative basic health services, hygiene promotion, HIV awareness-raising and psychosocial support to the affected communities as follows: health assessments (access and availability of health services, prevention, health needs and risk of communicable diseases and epidemics), provision of reproductive health kits, medical and surgical supplies, health information, education and support, training of volunteers and staff, reinforcement of HRC capacity to deliver planned HIV program activities with a special emphasis on reaching most vulnerable populations, and vector control. Prosthetics Clinic Construction ICRC $ 1,366,340.00 1-May-10 31-Dec-12 Closed Injuries from the earthquake resulted in the loss of limbs for more than 5,000 survivors. With support from the American Red Cross, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) rebuilt a prosthetic and physical rehabilitation center, Klinik Kay Kapab, run by the Haitian NGO Healing Hands for Haiti. The ICRC also provided technical assistance for the center to be able to create prosthetic devices for 1,000 people and provide rehabilitation services for 3,000 people. Haiti Measles and Rubella Initiative UNF $ 1,050,000.00 23-Jun-14 22-Jun-15 Closed Support for the forthcoming Haiti Measles & Rubella vaccination campaign to reduce measles mortality and to expand implementation of supplementary immunization activities (SIAs) for measles vaccinations in Haiti, with the goal of reaching 1,050,000 children under the age of 5. Vaccinations have been procured by the United Nation’s Foundation while the Haitian Red Cross will carry out the social mobilization component of the program. The campaign was initially scheduled to take place in May 2015, but has now been postponed to 2016. Blood Services Augmentation ARC $ 741,745.00 15-Jan-10 31-Mar-11 Closed In the immediate aftermath of the earthquake, the American Red Cross Biomedical Services Department purchased and transported 4,265 units of blood to supplement the Haitian Red Cross's diminished capacity to collect and process blood. Closed The American Red Cross supported a rapid vaccination in camps post-earthquake in Haiti in 2010 and the multi-agency coordinated measles vaccination campaign in April 2012 led by the United Nation's Foundation as well as associated social mobilization activities carried out by the Haitian Red Cross. The national coverage reached through the 2012 campaign was 92.4% (n=2,963,911 children vaccinated) for OPV and 94.6% (n= 3,069,396 children vaccinated) for MR vaccine. Additionally, 1.2 million units of vitamin A and 1.3 million units of albendozale (antiparasitic drug) were administered. Rapid Monitoring Coverage following the campaign conducted in all departments indicated that national coverage reached was more than 95%. Operational Support for Measles Campaign Contribution to ICRC Appeal Haiti Measles and Rubella Initiative Social Engagement UNF ICRC HRC $ $ $ 374,500.00 369,903.00 357,369.00 2-Feb-10 2010 15-Nov-14 31-Dec-10 2010 Closed 30-Jun-16 Active 8 Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Support for the forthcoming Haiti Measles & Rubella vaccination campaign to reduce measles mortality and to expand implementation of supplementary immunization activities (SIAs) for measles vaccinations in Haiti, with the goal of reaching 1,050,000 children under the age of 5. Vaccinations have been procured by the United Nation’s Foundation while the Haitian Red Cross will carry out the social mobilization component of the program. The campaign was initially scheduled to take place in May 2015, but has now been postponed to 2016. Project Name Hope for Haiti Now Fund Community Support to Children Affected by HIV (Community Investment Fund) Disaster Response Activities Caribbean Domestic Violence & Gender Equality Conference Villa Clinic Support (Community Investment Fund) Implemented by ARC Project Agreement $ 306,035.00 Start Date 2010 End Date 2011 Status Description Closed Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. MAEC $ 225,000.00 1-Aug-14 14-Aug-16 Active Maison-L'Arc-en-Ciel (MAEC) is an organization dedicated to working with vulnerable children affected by HIV/AIDS. The goal of this project is to be instrumental in the survival and vulnerability reduction of orphan children, youth and young adults affected by or infected with HIV/AIDS through reintegration of young people of age 18 and above, admission of new residents, and psycho-social and medical services. This project serves 80 to 100 people at a time, including at-risk children and youth and their families or foster homes. This is one of twelve CIF grants. ARC $ 180,398.00 2010 2011 Closed Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the emergency health category. These costs include purchase, transportation and distribution of first-aid supplies. ARC in partnership with HRC $ 140,000.00 8-Oct-14 31-Dec-16 Active The project goal is to contribute to raising awareness and strengthening the systematic response to domestic violence and gender equality in Haiti. The conference is tentatively planned for December 2016. St. Boniface Foundation $ 99,547.00 31-Jan-14 31-Jul-14 Closed Via the St. Boniface Foundation, this project provided improved health care to a large population center whose clinic was destroyed in the earthquake. The construction of the clinic was funded by the Spanish Red Cross while funding from the American Red Cross was utilized to outfit the clinic with essential medical equipment. This is one of twelve CIF grants. 9 Project Name Response to Chikungunya Outbreak (Quick Action Fund) Measles vaccinations 2nd round Implemented by HRC HRC Project Agreement $ $ 86,712.00 82,785.00 Start Date 9-Jul-14 15-Oct-12 End Date Status 8-Jan-15 14-Feb-13 Description Closed In December 2013, the first case of Chikungunya was reported in the Caribbean and reached Haiti in early 2014. The objective of this Quick Action Fund was to contribute towards eliminating the spread of this disease. Project objectives and activities included enhancing the capacity of the Haitian Ministry of Health to combat Chikungunya, and distributing insecticide mosquito nets, insecticide sprayers, foggers, protective wear and larva killing substances. This is one of five QAFs. Closed The American Red Cross supported a rapid vaccination in camps post-earthquake in Haiti in 2010 and the multi-agency coordinated measles vaccination campaign in April 2012 led by the United Nation's Foundation as well as associated social mobilization activities carried out by the Haitian Red Cross. The national coverage reached through the 2012 campaign was 92.4% (n=2,963,911 children vaccinated) for OPV and 94.6% (n= 3,069,396 children vaccinated) for MR vaccine. Additionally, 1.2 million units of vitamin A and 1.3 million units of albendozale (antiparasitic drug) were administered. Rapid Monitoring Coverage following the campaign conducted in all departments indicated that national coverage reached was more than 95%. Blood Supply and Restocking of Blood Testing Kits (Quick Action Fund) HRC $ 48,450.00 10-Feb-15 30-Apr-15 Closed Mobile Medical Services HOPE $ 9,041.00 2-Jun-12 31-Dec-12 Closed WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE On February 5, 2015 when Haiti’s automated blood testing equipment at the National Blood Transfusion Center stopped working, the Haitian Red Cross contacted the American Red Cross to request support to fill the gap in its nation’s blood supply while repairs of the equipment were completed. This component of the project included the purchase of manual blood testing kits. Through funding provided by the Belizean Grove Foundation, the American Red Cross in partnership with HOPE, helped provide mobile medical services to 3,200 individuals. Cholera PAHO Supplies Cholera Project WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE PAHO ARC $ 3,213,362.00 1-Jan-11 30-Nov-12 Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) purchased, shipped and stored 1.4 million solutions of Oral Rehydration Salts, 480,000 bags of Ringer Lactate and a variety of other life-saving medicines and medical supplies during the critical WRITTEN APPROVAL early stages of the response. This partnership also enabled PAHO to purchase logistical equipment for their warehouse, REQUIRED PRIOR TO implement an online information management system to track stock and medicines available in their warehouse, produce DISCLOSURE cholera beds and train Ministry of Health personnel for the transition of the cholera Alert and Response System to the Haitian government. Closed 10 Cholera response and prevention activities directly implemented by the American Red Cross focused on improving awareness about proper hand-washing and household water treatment, as well as distributing oral rehydration salts (ORS), soap, water purification tablets, and other hygiene commodities. The American Red Cross shipped supplies to affected communities, mobilized health teams and volunteers, helped establish treatment facilities, distributed clean water to thousands of people, launched nationwide public education campaigns using cellphones and weekly radio shows to reach millions of people with prevention messages. Project Name Contribution to IFRC Hispaniola Cholera Appeal Cholera Prevention and Treatment Efforts Cholera Programming in Leogane Implemented by IFRC Project Agreement $ 2,196,767.00 Start Date 8-Nov-10 30-Nov-11 End Date 30-Sep-11 28-Feb-12 Status Description Closed Contributions to the 2010 IFRC Hispaniola Cholera Appeal were specifically earmarked to support immediate needs related to the cholera outbreak in Haiti including the following: Procurement and distribution of soap, oral rehydration salts (ORS), chlorine, cots, protective equipment, cholera kits and other specialized equipment, family hygiene kits and kitchen parcels, training of volunteers in epidemic surveillance and control and hygiene promotion messaging, production and dissemination of communication materials, radio and SMS cholera messaging campaigns, pre-positioning of medical supplies, establishment and maintenance of hand washing points and oral rehydration points, construction of latrines and showers, set-up of Cholera Treatment Centers (CTUs), case management, provision of clean water, periodic microbiological water testing, excreta disposal, solid waste disposal, associated costs to second a Delegate to a Cholera Emergency Response Team as well as a seconded Delegate to mount an Information Management database. IMC $ 1,959,469.00 15-Jan-11 14-Jan-12 Closed International Medical Corps established Oral Rehydration Posts and Mobile Medical Units, provided needed staff and supplies, trained volunteers to conduct health and hygiene promotion, constructed and rehabilitated latrines and bathing facilities, provided chlorinated water supplies and trained community members on the proper preparation of chlorine solution, established water kiosks, and provided small grants to local organizations to assist them with community-based cholera response projects. 1,189,784 beneficiaries were reached through this project. SAVE $ 1,499,999.00 15-Jan-11 14-Sep-11 Closed Save the Children set up two Cholera Treatment Units and eleven Oral Rehydration Points in rural areas of Leogane, and reached people with health and hygiene promotion activities. The project also distributed relief supplies such as soap and aquatabs. This project reached 37,893 with hygiene promotion and cholera support. Health Service Delivery Project HOPE $ 1,297,152.00 1-Apr-11 30-Jun-16 Active The project was initially designed to address the cholera outbreak in the North department. As cholera transitioned to an endemic phase, the American Red Cross has supported HOPE to integrate cholera treatment and prevention programs into their innovative community health model known as “Sante Nan Lokou”. The activities include treatment and prevention activities at the hospital, Cholera Treatment Center (CTC) and community level, including extensive hygiene education and WASH infrastructure improvement. To date, this project has reached 20,994 people with hygiene promotion and 8,544 with cholera support. Cholera Response and Treatment Efforts CARE $ 1,249,137.00 1-Feb-11 31-Oct-11 Closed CARE established Oral Rehydration Points, supported schools with cholera prevention activities, facilitated cholera case management training, ensured water and sanitation support to eight health facilities and prevented the spread of cholera through education and the distribution of critical relief supplies. The project reached 517,326 people.  Closed The American Red Cross supported a campaign conducted by Partners in Health and the Haitian organization, GHESKIO, with support from the Haitian Ministry of Health, to reduce cholera deaths in Haiti by introducing the oral cholera vaccination to the country. This pilot project vaccinated 90,000 Haitians against cholera. The pilot was conducted in both an urban area—the Cite de Dieu slum in Port-au-Prince—and a rural area—Bocozel—in the Artibonite river valley. Oral Cholera Vaccination PIH $ 1,025,000.00 6-Feb-12 15-Jan-13 11 Project Name Cholera Prevention and Response Program Cholera Prevention and Treatment Efforts Implemented by FRC FRC Project Agreement $ $ 1,000,002.00 989,841.00 Start Date 23-Jun-14 21-Oct-10 End Date 31-Mar-16 21-Jul-11 Status Description In close-out process This project through the French Red Cross targets 18 communal sections total, with 14 in the West and 4 in Lower Artibonite departments. The project is strengthening the capacities of HRC in support of the efforts of MSPP in prevention, response and communication related to the cholera epidemic. The activities include conducting hygiene promotion activities through HRC volunteers in cholera persistence areas, enhancing the capacities of HRC volunteers at local and regional level by providing materials and adapted trainings, rehabilitation, repairs and installation of water systems and hand washing stations and coordination and epidemiological information sharing between MSPP, DINEPA and HRC. To date, this project has reached 23,690 students and teachers with hygiene promotion activities and sensitized more than 50,000 people to cholera prevention and response. Closed French Red Cross supported hygiene promotion programs, an ambulance service, the creation of camp hygiene and sanitation committees, disinfection of latrines and public places, cleaning drainage systems, installing and managing Oral Rehydration Posts, chlorinating local water supplies, and distributing soap, chlorine, waste bins and water drums. The French Red Cross also set up a number of Cholera Treatment Units in Port-au-Prince and rehabilitated three primary healthcare centers in Petit Goave. This project reached 403,661 people.  Cholera Prevention and Response Program Oxfam GB $ 525,734.00 23-Jun-14 23-Jun-15 Closed As the lead organization in the North and Northeast departments for coordinating cholera prevention and response, Oxfam (GB) targeted 6 localities in 3 communes in the North and 4 localities in 4 communes in the Northeast. The activities included facilitating the inclusion of HRC in cholera response activities through coordination and cluster meetings with key WASH/Health actors, training of 210 HRC team members including volunteers in cholera prevention and response, constructing and rehabilitating 5 WASH facilities in health centers with cholera treatment center, rehabilitating 7 water systems and implementing mass media activities to promote safe sanitation, appropriate domestic water management, food handling and hygiene practices. 6 water systems have been rehabilitated, benefitting 46,936 people. Cholera Prevention and Response Program HRC $ 503,958.00 1-Oct-14 31-Mar-16 Active The Haitian Red Cross is contributing to the elimination of cholera in the Greater North through sensitization campaigns and distribution of hygiene products. In addition, HRC is carrying out key coordination responsibilities with MSPP on behalf of all Movement partners. Cholera Prevention and Response Program NoRC $ 500,000.00 23-Jun-14 31-Dec-15 Closed The goal of this project through the Norwegian Red Cross is to contribute to the elimination of cholera in Grande Goave and Petit Goave in the West department. The activities include repairs and rehabilitation of water systems and sanitation facilities, hygiene and health promotion activities; community-based disease surveillance and response to acute watery diarrhea spikes in communities. To date, this project has reached 24,237 people with hygiene promotion activities. Closed Save the Children managed Cholera Treatment Units (CTUs), transitioned the CTUs to Oral Rehydration Points (ORPs) with a referral system to CTUs, and conducted cholera prevention-focused hygiene promotion activities in Port-auPrince.  The American Red Cross worked together with the US Agency for International Development's Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) to fund this program. This project reached 117,393 with hygiene promotion and cholera support. In close-out process The American Red Cross' contribution is part of a larger US$2.7M program being implemented by the Swiss Red Cross in Cormier communal section in the West Department. Activities include setting up and operating a WASH training center in Cormier, constructing a community solar water kiosk in the WASH training center, establishing and training community WASH trainers and the training center management committee, providing training and technical support for household representatives on management and maintenance of community and individual water/sanitation and water treatment and hygiene. Cholera Programming in Port-au-Prince Cholera Prevention and Response Program SAVE SRC $ $ 315,002.00 299,663.00 15-Mar-11 23-Jun-14 31-May-11 29-Feb-16 12 Project Name Cholera Response Supply Shipment Cholera Handover Project Medishare Cholera Outbreak Response Implemented by PIH Project Agreement $ 136,400.00 Start Date End Date Status Description 2-Nov-10 2-Nov-10 Closed Associated costs with shipment of cholera response supplies through Partners in Health. HRC $ 95,934.00 30-Sep-13 30-Apr-14 Closed This project was part of the closeout plan for the American Red Cross directly implemented Cholera Project. The Haitian Red Cross continued the work in the two project areas by providing surveillance, training and referral services to communities. As part of this project, HRC implemented the following activities: Hygiene and sanitation education and promotion, community engagement and capacity building to address cholera, disease control, and surveillance in collaboration with local health system. Medishare $ 45,081.00 28-Oct-10 28-Oct-10 Closed The American Red Cross funded the shipment of 53,310 lbs. of relief items by air through Medishare at the request of the Haitian Ministry of Health to respond to the cholera outbreak. Water & Sanitation Latrine Desludging Project Improving Water Sanitation Services IRC WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE This project protected camp residents from cholera and other water-borne diseases. International Rescue Committee (IRC) worked in conjunction with DINEPA and UNICEF to remove waste from latrines in the most vulnerable IDP camps WRITTEN APPROVAL to extend their viability, directly supporting the DINEPA Strategy for Cholera Prevention Action in the camps. The number REQUIRED PRIOR TO of camps this project worked in fluctuated as the Government of Haiti's plans for each area shifted. Overall this project DISCLOSURE directly served displaced populations of about 42,000 when they were in the highest number of camps, to about 25,000 at the lowest number of camps. IRC WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE The earthquake damaged much of Port-au-Prince’s already limited water and sanitation infrastructure, increasing health WRITTEN APPROVAL concerns for residents living in crowded camps where disease can travel quickly. In partnership with the International REQUIRED PRIOR TO Rescue Committee, the American Red Cross helped to address these concerns by providing safe water, clean latrines, DISCLOSURE hygiene promotion, trash collection and drainage interventions such as ditch digging and canal clearing. This project reached 58,850 beneficiaries in camps and neighboring communities of Port-au-Prince. Contribution to IFRC Appeal (Water and Sanitation component) IFRC $ 18,132,677.00 2010 2014 Closed To stem the risk of waterborne and water related diseases American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported the following: provision of safe water, adequate sanitation and hygiene promotion, coordination of Movement water and sanitation activities, deployment of Water and Sanitation Emergency Relief Unit (ERU), provision of water through the ERU Water and Sanitation deployment, rapid emergency needs and capacity assessments, periodic microbiological water testing, distribution of water and sanitation relief supplies (household water, treatment, jerry cans, buckets, etc.) and training on use of items, mobilization of HRC volunteers to carry out hygiene promotion activities during distributions, contribution toward the construction of first liquid waste treatment center in the country (Mont-a-Cabrit), reestablishment of water supply where possible through rehabilitation of water supply infrastructure, construction and rehabilitation of sanitation infrastructure, vector control and prevention measures, waste disposal measures, drainage measures, training of community-based HRC volunteers on participatory hygiene, provision of printed communication materials (posters, flyers, manuals, educational materials, etc.) and other supplies to be used in the hygiene promotion activities. Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Management CRS $ 3,185,506.00 31-Oct-11 30-Apr-14 Closed When the earthquake struck, it all but halted already limited sanitation services such as trash pickup and sewage disposal, leaving waste piled up in market areas and camps. The aim of this program through Catholic Relief Services was to improve hygiene and solid waste disposal in Metropolitan Port-au-Prince. This project served 248,745 people over a period of 34 months. 13 Project Name Improving Water and Sanitation Services Hope for Haiti Now Fund Improving Water Sanitation Services Implemented by American Refugee Committee ARC IMC Project Agreement $ $ $ 2,762,180.00 1,961,430.00 1,573,723.00 Start Date 1-Nov-10 2010 15-Dec-10 End Date 31-Jan-12 2011 15-Jan-12 Status Description Closed American Refugee Committee provided safe water, clean latrines, bathing facilities and hand washing stations in addition to hygiene promotion and drainage activities such as ditch digging and canal clearing. This project aimed to reduce risk of waterborne and vector-borne disease in spontaneous settlements and their peripheries in Port-au-Prince (PAP), and in areas where American Red Cross partners constructed transitional shelters. Services included hygiene promotion and improvements to basic water supply, increased access to safe water and latrines, excreta disposal, drainage, and trash collection.113,138 people were reached with hygiene promotion, and 11,280 people are benefitting from new or rehabilitated water systems or sanitation facilities. Closed Hope for Haiti Now is a charitable services fund of the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF). The American Red Cross received $5,474,652 from the January 22, 2010 fundraising concert produced by MTV Networks. The funds were spent across the following sectors: Relief $1,605,528, Shelter $1,601,659, Health $306,035, Water & Sanitation $1,961,430 to meet immediate emergency needs, specifically for the procurement and associated distribution costs to provide earthquake affected families with relief supplies such as: mosquito nets, sleeping mats, tarpaulin, blankets, family tents, jerry cans, buckets, hygiene kits as well as guidance on the use of shelter materials to complement the distributions. Closed The earthquake damaged much of Port-au-Prince's already limited water and sanitation infrastructure, increasing health concerns for residents living in crowded camps where disease can travel quickly. The American Red Cross partnered with the International Medical Corps to address these concerns by improving access to safe water, clean latrines and bathing facilities. Additional activities included hygiene promotion, trash collection and drainage projects such as canal clearing. This project reached 35,656 people directly in the Port-au-Prince metropolitan area. WatSan Project ARC $ 1,459,110.00 1-Jan-11 30-Sep-12 Closed This project reduced risk of waterborne and vector-borne disease in spontaneous settlements and their peripheries in Port-au-Prince (PAP), and in areas in which t-shelters were constructed by ARC partners, through hygiene promotion and improvements to basic water supply, excreta disposal, drainage, and trash collection. Achievements included improved access to safe water and sanitation in camps for 41,031 direct beneficiaries, of which 8,000 people had access to safe latrines and 15,050 who had access to showers in camps. Ten temporary water systems were installed in eight different localities, 1,609 cubic meter of safe water was distributed in 5 camps. A total of 301 individual cabins and shower were constructed in 20 sites and another 14 were rehabilitated in two other sites, distribution of 20 solid waste containers in one site, construction and rehabilitation of four communal hand wash stations, construction of 92 meter of drainage, construction and rehabilitation of 29 urinals, four water systems, 20 rainwater harvesting systems, 10 camps received cleaning materials for latrine maintenance, a total of 75 Camp Management Committee and WASH Committee members were trained in construction, operation and maintenance of WASH facilities. Out of those, 36 were also trained in leadership, organizational skills and conflict management. Disaster Response Activities ARC $ 1,013,304.00 2010 2011 Closed Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the emergency water & sanitation category. These costs include purchase, transportation and distribution of hygiene kits, buckets and jerry cans. 14 Project Name EkoLakay Social Business Pilot in Port-auPrince Construction of Septic Tanks in Support of 16/6 Program Improving Drainage in Place-de-la-Paix Provision of Sanitation Services (Community Investment Fund) Contribution to ICRC Appeal Implemented by SOIL Project Agreement $ 600,000.00 Start Date 10-Nov-14 End Date 9-Nov-16 Status Description Active The American Red Cross initially partnered with SOIL as a Community Investment Fund (CIF) grantee supporting the scale up of SOIL’s social business model pilot for sustainably providing household sanitation services in northern Haiti (see line 103 for more details). Following successful completion of the project, the partnership was expanded to Port-auPrince. This current project aims to design and implement a sustainable sanitation service providing dignified sanitation access in impoverished communities in Port-au-Prince that can be scaled-up at minimal expense and has the potential to be sustained long term without external grant funding. Activities include: Latrine construction, upgrading composting waste treatment facility in Truitier Solid Waste Treatment Center, evaluate and improve the potential for independent entrepreneurs to profitably provide sustained service to EkoLakay toilets, and conduct a robust test of a potential private sector solution to Haiti’s sanitation crisis. The project aims to reach 2,200 people as entrepreneurs or beneficiaries of improved sanitation services. UNOPS $ 376,344.00 4-Apr-14 3-Jan-15 Closed Following a request from UCLBP, the American Red Cross supported the UNOPS’s 16/6 initiative. The 16 Neighborhoods/6 Camps project (16/6) was a government-prioritized initiative to provide an integrated response to the closing of six camps and the resettlement of displaced people. The project aimed to improve the options and quality of life of people returning to their neighborhoods of origin by addressing urgent physical infrastructure and social problems, as identified by the affected communities. Financed by the Haiti Reconstruction Fund, the 16/6 project it was implemented jointly by the Government of Haiti, the International Organization for Migration (IOM), UNDP, the International Labour Organization (ILO) and UNOPS. The ARC-funded portion of the project constructed 350 septic tanks connected to each house constructed under the 16/6 Program, benefitting 1,750 people. CONCERN $ 111,107.00 1-Jun-10 30-May-11 Closed The camps that housed many Haitians were often located on marginal land that is prone to flooding. The American Red Cross partnered with Concern Worldwide to address this problem by improving drainage at Place-de-la-Paix camp. Project activities included clearing canals and drainage ditches, relocating shelters, and constructing and backfilling drains with gravel. An estimated 16,000 people benefited from this project. Closed This project focused on the scale-up of SOIL’s pilot model for sustainably providing household sanitation services in Northern Haiti.  Activities included expanding the capacity of a composting waste treatment facility and improving facility operations and efficiency, constructing and installing more than 200 household or communal toilets, and converting an existing structure on the SOIL farm into a small Training Center to host workshops and trainings for project beneficiaries on topics such as the use of maintenance of ecological sanitation toilets and hygiene.  This project reached a total of 2,078 toilet users exceeding the initial target of 1480 by 598 people. A total of 3,484 people participated in SOIL trainings and educational events in Cap-Haitien and expansions and improvements to SOIL’s waste treatment facility will now enable SOIL to serve a minimum of 1,000 EkoLakay toilets by the end of 2015. This is one of twelve CIF grants. SOIL ICRC $ $ 101,700.00 28,632.00 20-Feb-14 2010 17-Nov-14 2010 Closed 15 Contributions to the ICRC Earthquake Appeal totaled $4,169,518, distributed across various sectors as follows: Relief $3,612,064, Shelter $236,988, Health $369,903, Water and Sanitation $28,632. Contributions supported immediate emergency needs including the following: the mobilization table and associated expenses such as shipping, transportation (chartered aircraft) and distribution costs, food rations, restoring family links including the establishment of a telephone hotline, capacity building and equipping of HRC volunteers, distribution of relief supplies including non-food items, emergency shelter materials, dressing kits for hospitals, emergency medical and surgical supplies for the treatment of wounded people, provision of first-aid and primary health care services, provision of clean water in camps and shantytowns, supporting the National Water Board to repair water points and sanitation facilities. Project Name Implemented by Project Agreement Start Date End Date Status Description Livelihoods Host Family Support WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE IOM WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE WRITTEN APPROVAL REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCLOSURE Following the January 2010 earthquake, many displaced survivors left Port-au-Prince for other areas of Haiti, often overwhelming local services in these regions and depleting the already overstretched resources of their host families. To help reduce the burden faced by areas hosting displaced Haitians, the American Red Cross partnered with the WRITTEN APPROVAL International Organization for Migration (IOM) to help 20,719 people through a work program which, by supporting REQUIRED PRIOR TO livelihoods, reduced pressure on host community resources. Activities included building or rehabilitating small water canals, conducting soil stabilization and expanding access to water in general. The project also distributed basic DISCLOSURE household goods and/or shelter kits to 7,500 host families and provided additional indirect community benefits from disaster risk reduction and mitigation projects. IOM trained health promoters to educate people in host family communities about cholera prevention. FONKOZE $ 8,227,141.00 1-Mar-10 31-Dec-11 Closed The American Red Cross partnered with Fonkoze, Haiti's largest microfinance institute, to provide microfinance grants and loans to reach 255,460 people, including female heads-of-households, business owners and families hosting displaced Haitians.  MC $ 4,850,155.00 1-Jul-10 30-Jun-11 Closed Mercy Corps provided support to host families and reached a total of 82,963 beneficiaries by providing vouchers to purchase basic household goods from local vendors. Some of these people also benefitted from income generating activities, and the program also included hygiene promotion and disaster preparedness education. Economic Strengthening and Livelihoods Improvement CECI $ 2,999,837.00 1-Dec-14 30-Nov-17 Active The American Red Cross is funding the Centre for International Studies and Cooperation (CECI) to carry out a project that seeks to develop and strengthen livelihoods opportunities of 1000 women and men, primarily youth in CarrefourFeuilles through vocational training and micro-enterprise development. Kanaan Pi Djam: Component II, livelihoods components (Dynamic Community Development and Urban Reconstruction Program) USAID $ 2,500,000.00 19-Aug-13 30-Jun-16 Active This component of the American Red Cross / USAID partnership seeks to enhance employable skills and income generation, increase the number of women and men in Canaan able to secure stable employment and increase income generation viability of Canaan-based small and medium enterprises. This program will target people living in Canaan, an area of over 100,000 residents. Livelihoods and Host Family Support Host Family Voucher Support Economic Strengthening and Livelihoods Improvement in the Northwest PADF $ 2,350,000.00 1-Nov-14 30-Jun-17 Active This partnership with the Pan American Development Fund (PADF) seeks to enhance food security and contribute to more sustainable and resilient livelihoods for rural women and men in the Northwest Department of Haiti. The project seeks to train 880 farmers in various agricultural practices and productions, establish 1200 bio-intensive gardens, train 100 farmers on disaster resilient agriculture techniques, distribute 500 livestock packages to farmers, train 500 breeders/farmers in livestock methods, and establish 4 agricultural processing centers. School Voucher Project DRC $ 1,500,928.00 1-Nov-10 31-Aug-11 Closed The Danish Red Cross helped displaced families in Les Cayes arrondissement by providing vouchers to cover school fees for 1,850 children as well as livelihoods grants for 2,000 families who host displaced children. Cash for Work MC $ 1,200,968.00 1-Jul-10 30-Jun-11 Closed Mercy Corps employed 8,700 people to complete small cash-for-work projects that removed rubble, dug drainage canals, recycled rubble to make building materials, cleaned up debris and renovated roads. 16 Project Name Creating Opportunities for Youth in Cite Soleil and Martissant School Voucher Project Cash Transfer Pilot Project Restoring Family Links through HRC Creating Opportunities for Youth in Cite Soleil and Martissant Neighborhoods of Portau-Prince Haiti Livelihood Opportunities for Youth in Cite Soleil and Martissant Project Implemented by ARC in partnership with various partners ARC ARC ARC in partnership with HRC AVSI IDEJEN Project Agreement $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,188,339.46 1,162,644.00 588,046.00 350,000.00 199,989.00 195,807.00 Start Date 1-Dec-14 1-Dec-10 2010 1-Nov-15 1-Oct-15 1-Oct-15 End Date 31-May-17 1-Dec-11 2011 31-Oct-16 31-Mar-17 30-Sep-16 17 Status Description Active The aim of this program is to increase opportunities for growth and skills development for young women and men in Cite Soleil and Martissant, two densely populated and highly vulnerable communities, to enhance their physical, mental and economic well-being and prepare them to be agents of change in their communities. The program aims to reach 5,000 to 8,000 youth over a period of 2.5 years. This program will be co-implemented by the American Red Cross in collaboration with several partners. Grants are currently in the review and approval process. Closed After the earthquake, many Haitians lost their primary source of income and were left without the means to meet basic needs, including sending their children to school. The American Red Cross helped displaced families in three camps in the Croix Deprez neighborhood by directly paying second and third trimester school fees as well as providing grants for displaced families to cover education-related expenses like uniforms, transportation and lunch money. This project reached 2,727 children. Closed Because the needs of families differ, the American Red Cross committed to providing some families with the financial assistance necessary to choose what local goods and services they needed most. The American Red Cross piloted an innovative cash transfer program to give small cash grants to more than 1,800 families in camps through text messaging to cell phones. Efforts focused on helping families relocate from areas at high risk of flooding. Active The Haitian Red Cross (HRC), in collaboration with the Dominican Red Cross, seeks to re-establish a permanent restoring family links (RFL) program that will benefit both national societies (through capacity building and closer cooperation), as well as the individuals they endeavor to assist. With the support of the American Red Cross, HRC's Capacity to provide RFL Services will be strengthened at the national level. The project aims to reach a larger number of persons with a special emphasis on reinforcing RFL services at the Haitian / Dominican Republic border points. The priority target group being those families facing problems with their legal immigration status and risk of an expulsion from the Dominican Republic. Active Improving Livelihoods Opportunities for Youth in Cité Soleil and Martissant aims to expand opportunities for personal development, improve production skills, and increase economic growth for youth. To work towards that goal, the project strengthens handicraft production capacity and income generating activities through a community development approach with vulnerable youth (street children, youth in conflict with law, youth attached and engaged in armed gangs) in Cité Soleil and Martissant. The project also strengthens the organizational capacity of community-based organizations to deliver quality services to youth in the area. This project targets 1,060 youth. Active This project is designed to improve the economic status and resilience of young people and their families living in deprived areas of Cité Soleil and Martissant. The objectives of the project will be to provide basic education, life skills education and technical skills to a group of marginalized out-of-school youth in two Port-au-Prince slum areas; reinforce the capacity of 4 Community based organizations to address programming needs of out-of-school youth; provide accompaniment support to out of school youth to help them find economic opportunities; advocate for and develop partnerships with the public and private sectors to provide economic opportunities; and establish a task force which could address vulnerable and impoverished youth and engage them in the rebuilding process of Haiti. IDEJEN will work directly with approximately 240 youth. Project Name FOKAL Youth Project: Citoyennete a Martissant Implemented by FOKAL Project Agreement $ 190,495.00 Start Date 1-Feb-16 End Date 31-Jul-17 Status Description Active This project aims to address the question of civic education, in order to convey a better knowledge and understanding of civic, health and educational issues. It also offers youth the tools they need to build their own conscious, organic and reflective vision of the obstacles they face. The main objectives of the project are to train young people of Martissant on human rights and civics; to empower young people of Martissant with professional tools; and to empower local NGO’s to enhance life skills for better psychological and physical health. FOKAL will work directly with 705 youth. HELP IT Project: Building Capacity Through Computer Literacy (Community Investment Fund) HELP $ 125,000.00 1-Sep-15 31-Aug-16 Active The purpose of this project is to provide computer literacy to Haitian youth to help them succeed in school and prepare for the labor market. HELP wills do this by installing an updated computer lab to increase HELP’s capacity and improve computer access for university students; University students will gain employable skills thorough IT training and specialized open source programming training, and young students in underserved areas of Port-au-Prince will receive increased access to technology and basic IT training from qualified university students. The project will reach 1,244 youth. This is one of twelve CIF grants. Youth Education and Leadership-Phase I (Community Investment Fund) HELP $ 117,256.00 20-Feb-14 19-Feb-15 Closed HELP is the largest university scholarship program in Haiti. Through American Red Cross funding, HELP supported 167 straight-A students from all over Haiti to access university and also connect students with employment opportunities. This is one of twelve CIF grants. Investing in Human Capital in Martissant and Cite Soleil HELP $ 106,193.00 25-Jan-16 24-Feb-17 Active HELP scholarship students will conduct service projects in the underserved neighborhoods near Port au Prince: Cite Soleil and Martissant. Through this outreach the aim of this project is to invest in the human capital that already exists in these two communities. HELP students will conduct motivational speaking, mentorships and academic support in order to enhance the services offered to approximately 200 high school students in the two target neighborhoods. Closed Viva Rio is a Brazilian community-based non-profit organization, which began work in Haiti in 2004 following an invitation from the United Nations. What began as a simple consultancy in Haiti has become today an efficient operation working with youth in some of the toughest neighborhoods in the Haitian capital. With support from the American Red Cross, Viva Rio is seeking to strengthen youth leadership and decrease violence through sports (capoeira) in the Carrefour-Feuilles Neighborhood. This is one of twelve CIF grants. Gigando Pela Paz (Community Investment Fund) VIVA RIO $ 101,053.00 24-Jun-14 15-Jun-15 18 Project Name Haiti Empowerment Program - Carrefour Sustainable Income Project Contribution to IFRC Appeal (Livelihoods component) Implemented by GRACE IFRC Project Agreement $ $ 99,980.00 99,110.00 Start Date 1-Feb-16 2010 End Date Status 31-Jan-17 2012 Description Active This program seeks to increase the income of growing small business (GSBs) for residents of Carrefour through the holistic approach of education, training, guidance, and support. A criteria of the 120 program participants in Carrefour is to achieve economic independence through sustainable income through the growth and formalization of mostly small growing production-based enterprises with a consistent annual income. This one-year program will emphasize business fundamentals and personal finance, setting expectations for income sustainability and income creation while providing a “global village” support system for their financial counselor/manager and training courses. This is one of twelve CIF grants. Closed American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported delivery of livelihood substitution activities such as cashfor-work for debris clearing, delivery of livelihoods / income substitution activities such as unconditional cash grants, support for community-led livelihood restoration activities through the provision of productive assets, tools, waste removal, and quick impact projects providing short-term livelihoods opportunities. Improved Food Security and Resiliency for People in Dumas/Fort Liberte (Community Investment Fund) PSST $ 97,600.00 2-Mar-15 31-May-16 Active The PSST project Improved food security and resiliency for people at Dumas/Fort-Liberté will work in Fort Liberte, especially in one communal section called Dumas where the food insecurity is very high. The project includes activities that address the strengthening of agriculture, food security, environment, training for young people and farmers, education and building capacity of farmers. Target Direct Beneficiaries: 100 Households (500 individuals), Target Indirect Beneficiaries: 6,610. Although this is a Livelihoods project, this grant is a draw down from the CIF-Balance line under the Shelter Sector, hence the project is listed under Shelter. This is one of twelve CIF grants. Empowering Young Women to Lead Transformative Change YWCA $ 96,938.00 1-Aug-15 31-Jul-16 Active This project aims to address social taboos, educate, and strengthen the capacities of vulnerable young women 18 to 25 years old. A total of 240 young women will benefit directly from weekly Leadership Academy trainings and an additional 15 will receive training from the Institut de Développement Personnel et Organisationnel S.A. (IDEO), an implementing partner. This is one of twelve CIF grants. Discovering Young Entrepeneurs in Martissant: "Let's Get Together" FEA $ 95,235.00 1-Jan-16 30-Jun-17 Active This project aims to help youth start or grow their own enterprises. Youth will receive training in entrepreneurship, mentoring and coaching in accessing business development services. The Entrepreneurial Institute of the Foundation Etre Ayisyen (FEA) will provide management oversight and administration, along with the overall portfolio of program activities including recruiting participants and administering local training. The program model has been proven successful in identifying young people with appropriate drive and interest, offering them comprehensive technical and life skills training as well as practical experience and support in starting their own small businesses. FEA plans to reach 900 youth. Disaster Response Activities ARC $ 13,007.00 2010 2011 Closed Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the livelihoods category. Disaster Preparedness HRC Institutional Change & Development Program HRC $ 9,000,000.00 2010 30-Jun-19 Active The aftermath of the devastating January 2010 earthquake significantly impacted the Haitian Red Cross' infrastructure and operations. As part of the American Red Cross strategy and as the earthquake recovery efforts scale down and partners begin to exit, the goal of this program is to help the Haitian Red Cross in its organizational development as auxiliary to GoH for disaster response, to facilitate Haitian Red Cross's proper planning and institutional development and to strengthen the Haitian Red Cross' central/HQ and Regional Branch capacity development planning for future years. ARC $ 7,111,039.00 1-Dec-12 19-Nov-16 Active The overall goal of “Gran No Pi Djamn” Program is for targeted communities in the North of Haiti to have increased resilience, stronger capacity, and reduced exposure to external shocks. A key component of this integrated program is to 19 Project Name Gran No Pi Djanm Program Implemented by Project Agreement Start Date End Date Status HRC $ 4,437,666.00 1-May-13 31-May-16 Active PADF $ 1,506,587.00 2-Feb-15 2-May-16 Active Haiti Outreach CECI $ $ 444,742.00 149,966.00 1-Dec-15 20-Oct-15 31-Aug-16 19-Nov-16 20 Description build the capacity of the Haitian Red Cross in three departments (Northeast, North and Northwest) through a multisectoral approach. The program targets 10 communal sections in the Greater North. This program is co-implemented by the American Red Cross and the Haitian Red Cross in partnership with the Pan American Development Fund (PADF). American Red Cross is responsible for overall implementation of Gran No Pi Djam as well as capacity building for the Haitian Red Cross and local line ministries to implement programs and to work towards achieving their strategic objectives. HRC focuses on community mobilization, training and behavior change to build more resilient communities and households. PADF is responsible for upgrading up to 19 evacuation shelters. Active This project complements the work of Gran No Pi Djam and is an extension of an ongoing Haiti Outreach program called the 100 Well Project in the Northeast Department of Haiti. The project aims to conduct sanitation and hygiene education, train two volunteer sanitation teachers that will carry on with continuous sanitation and hygiene education, and promote the creation of latrines for each household in the communities served. The goal is to reach approximately 9,000 people in these communities through access to potable water, sanitation education and latrines. Active This project complements the work of Gran No Pi Djam and provides technical assistance, resources, strategy and methodologies to support select farmers in the Northern and Northeastern Departments to enhance their livelihood resilience and improve their opportunities for income-generation. It increases the capacity of Communal Agricultural Office (BAC), Haitian Red Cross (HRC) and Rural Producer Organizations to support extension training of farmers in appropriate value chains in target communal sections; increases farmers' resilience through improved knowledge, practices and assets for disaster resistant agriculture techniques (ginger, root crops); and enhances incomes in targeted communities and households - in particular young women - through transformation and commercialization of yam, cassava, sweet potato and/or ginger. This project works directly with 150 farmers. Project Name Contribution to IFRC Appeal (Disaster Preparedness component) Kanaan Pi Djam: Component I, Social Engagement Implemented by IFRC ARC Project Agreement $ $ 4,393,956.00 4,300,000.00 Start Date 2010 1-Dec-14 End Date 2014 31-May-16 Status Description Closed American Red Cross contributions to the IFRC Appeal supported: establishment of early warning systems, community emergency evacuation and contingency plans, community emergency response teams, pre-positioning of emergency stocks, procurement and distribution of emergency equipment kits, training of volunteers and regional and local Red Cross committees in disaster preparedness. Also, the American Red Cross contributed to the purchase of relief supplies for Sandy affected individuals. In addition, as a learning organization, ARC contributed to two Movement-wide learning events. Active Canaan is an emerging city north of the metropolitan area of Port-au-Prince, Haiti, which spontaneously developed following the 2010 earthquake. Over 100,000 people live in Canaan or are currently building in the area. The Government of Haiti estimates that Canaan residents have already invested over $100 million of their own resources in the area. The overall program goal is to mobilize and organize the communities within Canaan to improve their resilience. This will be accomplished through three programmatic components: Social engagement, disaster risk reduction, and environmental engagement. This directly implemented program will complement the American Red Cross's partnership with USAID. This project reduced the risks faced by camp residents through a community-based approach. Disaster preparedness activities included establishing and training resident disaster response committees, developing preparedness plans and installing early warning systems in camps, while mitigation activities included digging ditches, installing drainage systems and reinforcing embankments. In most cases, this program worked in the same camps as the American Red Cross implemented Post-Earthquake Health Promotion Program (PEHP), thus providing comprehensive services to camp communities. Haiti Emergency Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Project ARC $ 2,927,504.00 15-Mar-10 28-Feb-13 Closed Quick Action Fund (QAF)- Balance ARC $ 451,072.00 1-Dec-14 30-Jun-16 Active The Quick Action Fund (QAF) represents a $1M financial commitment made by the American Red Cross, specifically to quickly respond to sudden humanitarian emergency needs in Haiti. To date five QAFs have been funded from the commitment. Closed The goal of the Haiti Green Recovery Partnership was to mainstream environmental sustainability in American Red Cross implemented projects and to reduce risk and vulnerability for project beneficiaries by minimizing, mitigating or eliminating environmental degradation. The technical assistance from World Wildlife Fund supported and enhanced consideration and inclusion of environmental components in the American Red Cross' integrated programming approach for both LAMIKA and Gran No Pi Djamn. Haiti Green Recovery Partnership Earthquake Recovery Learning Conference Kouri Di Vwazan'w ("KDV" - Tell your Neighbor) WWF $ 155,258.00 10-Oct-12 30-Sep-14 ARC in partnership with HRC $ 150,000.00 1-Dec-14 31-May-16 Active HRC $ 147,266.00 1-Dec-14 31-May-16 Active 21 As learning organizations, the goal of the HRC/ARC Earthquake Recovery Learning Conference (date TBD) is to collectively reflect on the Haiti earthquake recovery efforts with key stakeholders and define how lessons learned from the Haiti operation can contribute to humanitarian and organizational learning and programmatic and operational improvements for future responses. The KDV project contributed to disaster-risk reduction of the Haitian population through the strengthening of the Haitian Red Cross' chapter capacities. More specifically the project sought to strengthen chapter capacities through continued training of DRR regional focal points, KDV instructors and volunteers and conducting awareness and education campaigns at community level. Project Name Implemented by Project Agreement Start Date End Date Status Description HRC Response to Migration HRC $ 100,000.00 15-Jul-15 31-Dec-15 Closed The main goal of this project is to strengthen HRC's response systems at 4-6 border points with the Dominican Republic by mobilizing a network of volunteers trained in Restoring Family Links, health and water and sanitation. The project aims to reach approximately 5,000 people. Disaster Response Activities ARC $ 89,649.00 2010 2011 Closed Directly implemented relief costs associated with ARC’s response in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in the disaster preparedness sector. HRC West Branch Support HRC $ 43,300.00 1-Mar-16 31-Dec-16 Active The goal of this project is to enhance the Haitian Red Cross' West Branch management capacities through a mentoring approach to encourage a learning by doing process. Focus will be on delivering services related to health and DRR to the communities of Carrefour Feuilles. The project will serve approximately 52,999 persons from neighborhoods in the area. Other collaborators will include the Civil Protection Direction (DPC) and Ministry of Health (MSPP). Closed In order to reduce future risk and vulnerability and maximize American Red Cross Haiti Assistance Program long term outcomes for shelter, water and sanitation, livelihoods and disaster risk reduction programs, World Wildlife Fund conducted an in country situational analysis to identify specific ARC and external partner needs and finalize a project design and strategy to be jointly implemented by WWF and ARC. Closed In September 2013, the Constitutional Court of the Dominican Republic ruled that many Dominicans of Haitian descent and officially registered as Dominican citizens at birth no longer met the criteria for Dominican nationality. As a result, a great number of people were repatriated into Haiti at the Haitian/Dominican border. This Quick Action Fund assisted the Haitian Red Cross to scale-up operations at the border to provide timely assistance to the influx of returnees and/or the displaced by supporting the Haitian government in the provision of medical care, psychosocial support, provision of clean water and essential non-food items. This is one of five QAFs. Environmental Scoping Analysis Returnee Support at the Haitian / Dominican Border (Quick Action Fund) WWF HRC $ $ 34,210.00 25,450.00 11-Apr-11 6-Jan-14 18-Jun-11 15-May-14 Program Costs ARC $ 69,574,880.00 n/a n/a n/a Per the Financial Accounting Standards Board, program costs result in goods and services being distributed to beneficiaries that  fulfill the purposes or mission for which the Not For Profit (NFP) exists - in this case, disaster relief and recovery in Haiti.  These costs ensure delivery of assistance and all services provided in Haiti: shelter, water and sanitation, livelihoods, disaster risk reduction, health and cholera prevention;  and include things like: i) salaries, wages and benefits for staff working on our Haiti Assistance Program in the field and at headquarters; ii) travel and maintenance costs for all staff working in Haiti or traveling related to the program; iii) oversight of grants awarded to local NGO or Red Cross member society to support disaster response; iv) accountability, monitoring and evaluation. Contingency ARC $ 10,424,667.58 n/a n/a n/a Contingency costs represent the committed funds for the American Red Cross to cover itself from any liabilities against any work it has funded as a part of the Haiti Assistance Program. The fund is also used to cover any potential budget shortfalls. All funds are committed to be programmed once the American Red Cross has reasonable confidence that its potential liabilities are limited. MG&F Grand Total ARC $ 43,877,059.00 $ 487,640,522.14 n/a n/a n/a 22 Expenses incurred by the American Red Cross in undertaking management, general and fundraising activities as such activities are defined by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). Such expenses do not include expenses incurred by the American Red Cross in undertaking activities that result in goods and services being distributed that fulfill the purposes or mission for which the American Red Cross exists. According to FASB, examples of MG&F activities include record keeping, budgeting, financing, fundraising campaigns, maintenance of donor mailing lists, and distributing fundraising materials. Project Name Implemented by Project Agreement Start Date End Date Status Notes: 1. As work is still ongoing, beneficiary numbers since the 5-year report have increased and will continue to increase. 2. The "cut-off" date for the financial and programmatic information reflected in this spreadsheet is March 31,2016. 23 Description Attachment U: September 28, 2015 CEG request letter to GAO September 28, 2015 VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION The Honorable Gene L. Dodaro Comptroller General U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street, N.W., Room 7100 Washington, D.C. 20548 Dear Mr. Dodaro: On September 16, 2015, your office provided the Judiciary Committee a copy of GAO’s report on the American Red Cross, “Disaster Assistance Would Benefit from Oversight through Regular Federal Evaluation.” Prior to the release of the report, the Red Cross CEO, Gail McGovern, wrote a letter to the requesting party, Representative Bennie Thompson, in an attempt to “…end the GAO inquiry that is currently underway.”1 In addition to the Red Cross’ efforts with respect to Rep. Thompson, the Committee has received additional information that Red Cross personnel did not provide unfettered access to the GAO even after multiple requests for relevant information. The lack of transparency is cause for concern as the Red Cross is a federal instrumentality created by Congressional charter and receives millions of dollars every year from donors across the country. As such, the Red Cross should have shared as much information as possible in order for GAO to perform a complete and thorough study. In addition, the Red Cross has a duty to the American people and the donor community to be as open and transparent as possible. In light of the Red Cross’ apparent unwillingness to fully cooperate, please provide the following: 1. All records and communications that indicate the reasons cited by the Red Cross for not providing the material requested by the GAO. 2. A list of all material GAO requested but the Red Cross refused to provide. Justin Elliott, “Red Cross CEO Tried to kill Government Investigation,” PROPUBLICA (August 17, 2015). Accessible at https://www.propublica.org/article/red-cross-ceo-tried-to-kill-government-investigation 1 The Honorable Gene L. Dodaro September 28, 2015 Page 2 of 2 3. A list of all Red Cross officials that GAO contacted, including their titles. 4. A list of all Red Cross officials that did not provide the material GAO requested and a corresponding list of the request(s) they refused to comply with. Thank you for your help in addressing these issues. If you have any questions concerning this request, please contact Josh Flynn-Brown of my Committee staff at 202-224-5225. Sincerely, Charles E. Grassley Chairman Committee on the Judiciary Attachment V: email chain re partner disclosure approval new Cc: Ehoajtians Wineries, Subject: RE: Status of American Red Cross Partners" Armorizadon to Publicly Release Information About "Their Grants Date: Monday, September 14, 2015 11:02:56 AM Josh, My apologies for the delay in responding but 1 have been dealing with some family matters that has taken me out of town. In my absence, I understand that Suzy DeFrancis called you to discuss your request for copies of all agreements contracts, grant agreements, letter agreements, etc. I can tell you that we have now received approval from all 45 partners to release their agreements with the Red Cross Mass. 38 ofthe 45 partners have now given approval to release their agreements with the Red Cross minim. Regarding question 2 and the request for the amount of money transferred to partners by the Red Cross, this information was provided in the third column of the ?rst chart sent to you on July 22?. This chart begins on page 13 of 72. With respect to your question about the difference between the costs of a program, and the grant amount to the partner, we follow non-pro?t accounting standards set by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). These recognize two different types of expenses: ?Supporting services?, which are expenses de?ned as covering Management, General Fundraisng expenses; and Program Services expenses, which are de?ned as expenses incurred in undertaking ?activities that result in goods and services being distributed to bene?ciaries, customers, or members that ful?ll the purposes or mission for which the not-for?pro?t entity (NFP) exists. Those services are the major purpose for and the major output of the NF and often relate to several major programs?. Accordingly, the Red Cross - along with the entire non-pro?t sector - follows FASB guidance to include within program service expenses the following types of costs: I purchase and transportation costs associated with relief items such as blankets, tarps, hygiene sets, and kitchen sets. osalaries, wages and benefits for staff working on the Haiti Assistance Program (HAP) in the ?eld and at headquarters; - travel and maintenance costs for all staff working in Haiti or travel related to the program; - costs incurred to oversee grants awarded to grantees supporting disaster response or recovery in Haiti; - costs incurred to ensure accountability, monitoring and evaluation of work performed in Haiti; - operations support and assessment (staffmg or transport) costs, if not included in the other categories above; costs related to planning and reporting staff working on HAP and associated HAP-related costs like workshops and trainings; ocosts related to communications and advocacy staff working on a publication costs related to 0 human resources (recruinnent and support) costs for HAP positions; - logistics costs incurred for and accounting and other ?nancial services costs for HAP. Under FASB ASC 958-?20-20 which sets forth FASB's de?nitions of "program service expenses" and "supporting activities". program service expenses listed above are considered ?overhead?. ?Management, General Fundraising" expenses as that term is used by non-pro?ts such as the Red Cross, is considered by FASB as "supporting activities.? and often referred to as overhead. The Red Cross? is To summarize, the cost of a project includes funds transferred to a partner plus program service expenses such as those listed above. Under non?pro?t accounting rules, such project costs exclude our 9% I suspect the preceding discussion of non-pro?t accounting rules may not have been artiCulated as best as possible and that?s a meeting would be helpful. You ask whether we can ?provide the actual amount of meney transferred to each partner organization? and whether ?each agreement contain the actual amount transferred to the partner organizations.? As noted above, the third column of the ?rst spreadsheet we sent you identi?es the amount actually transferred to each partner. Each agreement contains the actual amount to be transferred to the partner organization (assuming the partner fully performs and amendments signed subsequent to the original agreement do not change the contract amount). Finally, you ask why we estimate the costs incurred to implement each project rather than track on a project-by-project basis. Non-pro?t accounting standards permit estimates of such project implementation costs in recognition of the cost and burden that would be incurred in tracking implementation costs on a project-by-project basis. I hope the above satisfactorily answers the questions in your email until we have the opportunity to discuss further in person. Regards, David From: Josh {Judiciary-Rem Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 2:02 PM To: Meltzer, David Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy; Rhea, Brian; Latham, Dawn; Bishop, Cherae L. Subject: RE: Status of American Red Cross Partners' Authorization to Publicly Release information About Their Grants David, Thank you, appreciate you getting back to me. We can meet but we want documents in hand before we schedule anything. So, prior to a meeting, we request copies of all agreements, contracts, grant agreements, letter agreements {or whatever term is used to describe the formal documented association of the Red Cross with partners in Haiti) between the Red Cross and its partners in Haiti. Please provide an update as to how many partners have given their approval for disclosure to Congress and the public. Also, specifically in regards to Question 2 in the July 8 letter, i don't believe that was answered fully. Senator Grassley requested the amount of money transferred to the partners by the Red Cross. Based upon the documentation the Red Cross provided, the dollars presented are "costs." For example, in the document attached {not provided by the Red Cross) it appears that ACTED received $5.9 million from the Red Cross; however, the spreadsheet provided to the Committee by the Red Cross shows the ?costs? related to work was $7,355,602. UNOPS is listed at $6.8 million and $8.2 million by the Red Cross, too. The difference between the figures appears to be approximately 20%, which is more than the 9% Red Cross usually takes. Can the Red Cross explain the discrepancy? What is the 20% used to pay for? How many other partners have this discrepancy? And can the Red Cross provide the actual amount of money transferred to each partner organization? Does each contract/grant agreement contain the actual amount transferred to the partner organizations? And finally, a footnote on the last page of the Red Cross spreadsheet says, ?Costs include the grant amount as well as an allocation of costs for Red Cross program services needed to implement the project. These are estimated costs because program services are not separater tracked on a project?bv-project basis, but at the program level, according to Not?for?Profit accounting standards." It is a bit concerning that costs are estimated at this point, can the Red Cross explain why estimations must be used? Are the ?allocation of costs for Red Cross program services? the 20% difference described above? Appreciate your time and attention on this matter. Very Respectfully, Josh From: Memes David Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 5:34 PM To: Josh (Judiciary?Rep) Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy Rhoa, Brian Latham, Dawn Bishop, Cherae L. Subject: RE: Status of American Red Cross Partners' Authorization to Publicly Release Information About Their Grants Josh. Thanks for your email. Below is the information I believe you are seeking but I suggest a couple ofus meet with you to make sure we have been clear in responding to your questions. We can provide copies of all of our contracts to you EXCEPT the two for which the partner has not yet given us the required consent before disclosing them to third parties such as the Congress. We have requested such consent from both partners. One partner has been hampered by decision makers being out of the office but we have been told that they hope to provide consent this week. The remaining partner had questions which we have answered and we are awaiting their response and hoped-for authorization. We suggest that we meet with you when we provide the contracts to make sure we answer any questions you have regarding the contracts. In addition to the Haitian Red Cross, we have 44 partners. Some ofthese partners have performed different projects for us and therefore have more than one agreement with us. in total, we have 64 agreements with the 45 partners. You will probably note that these numbers differ from those previously provided to you as regrettably we had inadvertently undercounted some of the agreements with partners that had multiple agreements with the Red Cross. We currently have authorization from all but IU of our partners to release such agreements to the public. To answer your question as to why we use different types of contracts, the answer is that small grants (generally less than $100,000). or large grants when there will be only a few disbursements or when the deliverables are very straightforward and easily monitored. can be covered by a less complex letter agreement. We typically use project agreements when the partner is another Red Cross organization and we are providing technical support. For the remainder. we use grant agreements which are based on the template we provided to you last month. With respect to your question about [2 grant agreements, these grant agreements are with eight different partners as some of these eight partners have more than one project with us- All but one of the agreements with the eight partners is in the form of a grant agreement or a letter agreement and we will provide you with the agreements with seven of the eight partners. The eighth partner has not yet authorized us to disclose the agreement to third parties such as the Congress. Finally, below is a list of the 35 partners with which we have agreements that we are authorized to release to the public. We are eager to publicly release these agreements and would like to discuss coordinating the release with you to make sure we are providing information in a format that is understandable to the public and re?ective of non-pro?t accounting. 35. . ACTED . American Refugee Committee . Canadian Red Cross . CARE . Catholic Relief Services . Centre d?Etude et de Cooperation Internationale (CECI) . CONCERN Worldwide . Danish Red Cross . Fonkoze . FULLER . German Red Cross . Global Therapy,r Group . Habitat for Humanity . Handicap Inter-national . Haitian Education and Leadership Program (HELP) . Haitian Red Cross . HAVEN . HOPE . International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) . International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) .JP/Haiti Relief Organization . Maison-L?Arc?en-Ciel (MAEC) . Medishare . Mercy Corps . Norwegian Red Cross . Pan American Development Foundation (PADF) . Partners In Health . Save the Children . Spanish Red Cross . St. Boniface Foundation . UN Habitat . UNOPS . Viva RIO . World Food Programme World Wildlife Fund Below is a list of the ten remaining partners who have not yet provided the authorization to release of their agreements to the public. As I previously wrote, we are changing our model/template agreement going forward to provide that the Red Cross is authorized to publicly release information relating to the agreement and we would welcome your input as we revise the language. 1. US. Agency for international Development 2. French Red Cross 3. Swiss Red Cross 4. International Rescue Committee 5. UN Foundation 6. Data GB F. International Medical Corps 8. Pan AmariCan Health Organization 9. Sustainable Organic Integrated Livelihoods (SOIL) 10. international Organization for Migration There is a lot of information in this email and I've tried to present it clearly. However. I suspect you will have questions and it would be good if we can get together to make. sure we have been responsive. Please let me know what you think. Regards. David From: Josh {Judieiary-Rep} Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2-315 1:40 PM To: Meltzer. David Cc: DeFranCIs, EJzy; Fi'noa, Brian; Latham, Dawn: Bishop, Cherae L. Subject: RE: Status of American Red Cross Partners' Authorization to Publicly Release Information About Their Grants From: tvieitzer, David Sent: Friday, August 2015 11:06 AM To: Flyi'in-Brc-wn, Josh (Judiciary-Rep) Cc: DeFrantiis, Suzy Rhoe, Brian Latham, Dawn Bishop, Cherae L. Subject: RE: fitatus of Amer ican Red Cross Partners' authorization to Publicly Release Information About Their Erants .losh. The answer to your question is that 36 of the S3 grant agreements used the template grant agreement that we provided at the meeting. As we said at the meeting. the template grant agreement requires the grantee's prior authorization before releasing information relating to the grant agreement to media or donors. Ofthe remaining 17. one used a grant agreement that is regularly used by them: their agreement prohibits each party from publicly disclosing information relating to the grant without the prior auti'toriaation ofthe other party. The remaining 16 used a different form ofa contract that was prepared by the Red Cross a letter agreement): some of which preelude publicly disclosing the information without the grantee's prior authorization. Do you want the I6 agreements as well as the USAID agreement? As i mentioned in my previous email. we would be more than willing to discuss ways to change our language going forward. Finally. since i provided the status report to you last Thursday. eight more partners have provided the authorization to publicly release information reiating to their grant agreement. This brings the total to 3 I. We continue to actively work the remaining partners to obtain their authorization. Regards. David From: Josh {Judiciary?Rep} Sent: Friday, July 31. 2015 7'33 PM To: Meitzer, David Cc: DeFrancis. E-uzy: Rhoa, Brian: Latham. Dawn; Bishop. Cherae L. Subject: RE: Status of American Red Cross Partners' Authorization to Pubiicly Release Information About Their Grants From: Matter; David Sent: Thursday, July 30,201511:54 AM To: Pym-Brown, Josh [Judiciary-Rem Cc: DeFrancis, Suzy ;Rhoa, Brian Latham, Dawn Bishop, Cherae L. Subject: Status of American Red Cross Partners' Authorization to Pubiicly Release Information About Their Grants DearJosh, l?rn Following up on the suggestion you made during our July 14 meeting that the Red Cross seek approval from our partners to release information about their grants to the public. We quickly contacted all 43 partners to request their authorization to publicly release information relating to their grants, including the grant amount and their Management, General 8: Fundraising rate. To date, 23 partners have granted the required authorization. No partner has denied authorization. However, 10 of the remaining 20 partners have asked questions which we have either already provided answers or we are in the process of answering their questions The remaining partners have either not responded to our multiple contacts or have acknowledged receipt but not responded (3.). We are actively working to obtain the required authorizations of the 20 partners who have yet given their authorization and I hope to have their authorizations shortly. Certainly, we will continue to make every effort to obtain agreEment from all partners. F?rl, we have so far traced the current language that requires the partner?s authorization before publicly releasing information relating to their grants to 2005. However, it is possible that the language ore?dates 2005. We would be very happy to work with you to develop contractual language to "emove the requirement for prior authorization for all future grant agreements. After you have completed your review of our July 22?d response to th Chairman?s questions, my colleagues anti i would be pleased to meet with you to address remaining questions. Sincerely, David Attachment W: ARC proposal to Board American Red Cross STATEMENT ON RESTRUCTURE INVOLVING THE INVESTIGATIONS, COMPLIANCE AND ETHICS DEPARTMENT (ICE) AND THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN June 13, 2016 The American Red Cross intends to combine the Investigations, Compliance and Ethics Department and the Office of the Ombudsman. With the Ombudsman now reporting to the Vice President for Investigations, Compliance and Ethics, this change will ensure adequate resources are in place to effectively respond to whistleblower and other concerns in a timely manner. in order to restructure these functions, the Board of Governors must approve an amendment to the Bylaws. Proposed revisions to the Bylaws were submitted to the Board on June 3, 2016 and will be considered for approval at the next Board of Governors meeting taking place on June 16, 2016. Attached is a Secretary?s Certificate certifying such action. We have every reason to believe the change will be approved and the new reporting structure will be effective Friday, June 17, 2016. National Headquarters Office of the Corporate Secretary American 430 17"? Street, NW Red Cross Washington. DC 20006 (202) 303-5028 (202) 639-981 1 Fax CERTIFICATE Jennifer L. Hawkins, duly appointed Corporate Secretary of The American National Red Cross, a single national corporation chartered by an Act of Congress of the United States, do hereby certify that on June 3, 2016 the Board of Governors of The American National Red Cross received read?ahead materials for the Board of Governors meeting taking place on June 16, 2016. Included in those materials was a proposal to revise the Amended and Restated Bylaws of The American National Red Cross to change the reporting requirement for the Ombudsman. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, my hand and the seal of this corporation on this 13th f? - f; 4.6. .354 9 .. a; THE AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS 3&5; .3133 .3 egg; u? A a I :nilr'YI-I in} . i yvf\ ?9 By: Jennifer? L. Hawkins Title: Corporate Secretary a . . in last .- upW? District of Columbia: #7 a? If.? In} ?abssingn?l. .v . if s? "Aldus a. mm 5 Puma/\J saucnsawms Q) t. PUBLIC DISTRICTOFOOLWBJA CommISSIon Expires: a I . - Lilia?! I .4 '4 it?s: .. Attachment X: ARC June 13, 2016 production GAO National Headquarters 430 17th Street, NW Washin ton, DC 20006 Red Cross 9 David Meltzer General Counsel June 13,2016 Dear Mr. I write to provide information about how the American Red Cross worked with the GAO on the engagement the GAO initiated in early 2014. In connection with this engagement, the Red Cross provided extensive information about many aspects of its disaster relief activities and coordination with FEMA. A dozen Red Cross personnel were interviewed, and we shared many internal documents. We also had a number of discussions with GAO about the objectives of the research and scope of the research questions. The original research questions were very broad and ambiguous, which presented two main concerns from the Red Cross perspective. First, although we were committed to giving the GAO comprehensive information about its research topics so it could reach accurate conclusions, it would have been dif?cult to do this given the vagueness and scope of the original questions. The questions needed to be refined to be more specific, and the GAO seemed to agree. From the start, they acknowledged that the questions were broad and that they intended to narrow them down as they learned more about the Red Cross. Second, we wanted to be sure the GAO research was consistent with its authority as de?ned by Section 1 of the Red Cross Congressional Charter (36 U.S.C. ?300111), which states: ?The Comptroller General of the United States is authorized to review the corporation?s involvement in any Federal program or activity the Government carries out under law.? Congress added this provision to the Red Cross Charter in 2007 as part of the American National Red Cross Governance Modernization Act. The original research questions were not limited to Red Cross involvement in federal activities but instead covered the entire Red Cross disaster program, a charitable activity more than a century old and funded almost entirely by donations. We believed that more refined research questions would help ensure that the GAO research was consistent with its statutory authority. Thus, while participating in a dozen interviews and sharing hundreds of pages of documentation, we also engaged in an ongoing dialogue with GAO to try to get clarity about the scope of the research and its ultimate objectives. We had a number of informal conversations, met in person at GAO on June 19, 2014, and had several follow?up telephone conferences. As a result of this dialogue, the GAO revised its research questions to have a sharper focus and more closely align with Section 11 of the Charter. Mr. June 13, 2016 Page 2 Before, during, and after these discussions about the scope of the GAO research, the Red Cross responded to numerous GAO requests for documents, interviews, and information. There were several issues that the GAO began to explore but ultimately did not pursue after the Red Cross raised legitimate concerns about scope. But at no point did the Red Cross refuse to provide requested information. We have prepared a summary of the most relevant communications between the Red Cross and the GAO regarding the scope of the 2014 engagement, attached to this letter along with relevant emails. General Counsel and Chief International Officer American Red Cross SUMMARY OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH GAO REGARDING SCOPE OF ENGAGEMENT January 22, 2014: The GAO sent a letter to the Red Cross regarding a new engagement. The issues under review, as stated in the letter, were: (1) How are the nature and extent of the activities of the American Red Cross in response to disasters determined? (2) What are the nature and extent of the oversight to which the American Red Cross is subject? February 10, 2014: Entrance conference. MarchZApril 2014: The GAO requested and the Red Cross provided documents on Red Cross disaster relief decisionmaking and corporate governance. MarchZApril 2014: informal convers e. In an April 3, 2014 e-mail to Lori Polacheck (ARC), -GAO) wrote that (GAO) "shared your (and my) concern about the broad scope of objective 1. But this is pretty typical of a lot of GAO studies that start off with a very broad scope and then get narrowed down during our ?design? phase. As we discussed, hopefully our meeting with staff member] will help us determine what issues to focus on . . Aprileay 2014: Five interviews of four Red Cross leaders involved in domestic and international disaster preparedness, response, and recovery and corporate governance. MayZJune 2014: Discussions about GAO field visits to conduct case studies, put on hold pending resolution of issues about scope of research. June 19 2014: Meeting at GAO regarding scope of research and GAO authority under Section 11 of Congressional Charter and other statutes. July 11, 2014: Email from -GAO) to David Meltzer (ARC): "Following up on the productive meeting we had with you on June 19, l?m checking in to find out when we can expect to hear back from the Red Cross with regard to the topics we discussed at the meeting. Thanks for any status update you can provide.? Email from David Meltzer to ?Thank you for your email. I?m sorry for the delay but it has proven challenging getting everyone around the same table due to ongoing response efforts across the U.S. One issue on which I would appreciate the Office?s views is the legal authority of the Office to research non?federally funded programs of the American Red Cross. Thanks very much for your consideration.? GAO Email from . to David lVleltzer: was surprised to see this issue raised in your response, as I thought that we had established the outlines of a plan for moving forward at our June 19 meeting. Did something change between then and now?? July 14, 2014: Email from David lVleltzerto "We appreciated the meeting as it addressed many of our concerns. However, questions still remain as to the authority for GAO to research ARC corporate governance and decision-making processes as well as ARC programs that don?t involve federal funds. Before resuming the work needed to respond to requests, we would appreciate first being informed as to views on its authority to conduct a review of this scope, including our non-federal programs.? August 1, 2014: Email from to David Meltzer: "We have considered the concerns you and your colleagues have raised about our ongoing review of the Red Cross in the wake of our meeting ofJune 19th and subsequent e-mail communications. We believe that a reframing of our objectives to more closely reflect the language of the 2007 American National Red Cross Governance Modernization Act may help to address your concerns, while also satisfying the continuing interest of our congressional requester. In that regard, the revised objectives of our review are as follows: How are the nature and extent of Red Cross?s disaster?related services determined when it is involved in Federal programs or activities? What oversight applies to the Red Cross?s disaster-related services when it is involved in Federal programs or activities? In the interest of finding a useful way forward, we would like to arrange a meeting to discuss our information needs and priorities, and how they relate to our audit objectives and our statutory audit and access authority. will be contacting Lori Polacheck to arrange a meeting later this month.? August 4, 2014: Email from to Lori Polacheck: 2 "I?m following up on an email that Andy Sherrill sent to David Meltzer last week. It lays out revised research objectives for our study, that we hope will address your concerns about audit authority to some extent. We?d like to meet with you and your colleagues to discuss these research objectives and what additional interviews and documents we will need to complete our study.? August 26, 2014: Email from to Lori Polacheck: ?In preparation for the meeting on Tuesday, September 2"d at 3:00 pm, I have attached a document focused on our top priority information needs. We are hoping to have a constructive discussion of our information needs and priorities and how they relate to the objectives of our review and our statutory audit and access authority. As indicated in the document, we are willing to conduct interviews by phone as needed to allow for flexibility in the use of Red Cross officials? time. Thank you for your time and consideration.? Auiust 2.8i 2014: Email from Lori Polacheck to "Thank you for these questions and for your flexibility about conducting interviews by phone. GAO When we talk on September 2, we are hoping to reach an understanding about the scope of "involved in Federal programs or activities the government carries out under law?. We believe reaching agreement on the scope will be a good first step in resuming the review.? September 2014: Several conversations about meaning of "involvement in federal program or activity. We discussed the fact that the Red Cross uses donated (not government) funds to perform its charitable, disaster relief mission and also works with federal agencies ursuant to certain federal planning documents and MOUs. A September 24, 2014 email frommto Lori Polacheck is illustrative. October 21, 2014: Email from to Lori Polacheck with revised research questions. "Based on our last conversation with you and David, we've developed revised research objectives and a brief action plan laying out the work needed to complete our study. Please see the attached document. As you can see, we?re hoping to conduct a limited number of additional interviews with Red Cross headquarters and regional/divisional staff. We?d appreciate it if you could review the attached document and let us know if this plan seems generally OK to you. Feel free to call me with any questions or concerns. Hopefully we can work out any remaining issues and proceed quickly to the remaining interviews.? The attached Action Plan indicated that, with respect to research objective GAO would focus on the Red Cross?s coordination with FEIVIA and other federal agencies, as follows: Revised objective How are the nature and extent of Red Cross?s disaster?related services determined through its coordination with the federal government, as well as other factors? The second research objective was revised to focus on external oversight, as follows: Revised objective What external oversight of the Red Cross?s disaster-related services exists? The GAO stated that this revised objective would not require any additional Red Cross interviews or documents. November 2014: interview of two Red Cross personnel responsible for coordination with FEMA at the national level. December 2014/Januarv 2015: Interviews of Red Cross seven Red Cross personnel regarding Red Cross responses to Moore, Oklahoma tornados, Hurricane Sandy, and Northern Florida flooding in April 2014, focusing on coordination with FEMA. Earlv 2015, through report completion: Red Cross continues to provide information in response to GAO requests. - U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 441 St. NW. Washington, DC 20548 January 22, 2014 Lori Poiacheck Associate General Counsel and Privacy Of?cer American Red Cross Dear Ms. Polacheck: This fetter is to inform you of a new US. Government Accountability Office engagement on the American Red Cross?s disaster relief efforts?code 131297. The enciosure provides information on the engagement. If we determine it is necessary to visit locations other than those speci?ed in the enclosure, we will advise you. We would appreciate your notifying the appropriate officials of this work. The next step will be to set Up an entrance conference. At that meeting, we will request that your agency identify a point of contact for this engagement. Sincerely yours, WQW Barbara D. Bovbjerg Managing Director Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues Enclosure Enclosure lnfomtation on New Engagement Engagement subiect: Management and Oversight of American Red Cross Disaster Relief Efforts Engagement code: 131297 Source for the work: GAO is beginning this work pursuant to its authority under 31 U.S.C. 717 after receiving a request from Honorable Bennie G. Thompson. lssueis) under reviewabiectiveisVKev guestionis): 1. How are the nature and extent of the activities of the American Red Cross in response to disasters determined? 2. What are the nature and extent of the oversight to which the American Red Cross is subject? Agencies and anticipated locations (HQ and field) to be notified: American Red Cross Headquarters Other locations TBD Other departments/agencies to be contacted: US. Department of Homeland Security/Federal Emergency Management Agency Estimated start date for the work: immediately Time frame for holding the entrance conference: immediately GAO Team(s) performing the engagement: Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues GAO contacts: Page 2 From: GAO Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 11:26 AM To: Poiacheck Lori cc: [erg Subject: meeting th GAO on scope Hey Lori, I?m trying to ?nd a time for a conference call that Andy, Scott, and our attorneys can all participate in. Any chance you could talk with us on either: 4/21 11-12 4/24 10304130 4/25 9:30-10:30 I did touch base about your concerns. He completely agrees with what I said about objective 1 being purely descriptivewwe?re not trying to secondng ess the Red Cross?s decision-making/procedures, just describe them. You can discuss that further with Andy in the conference call. He also shared your (and my) concern about the broad scope of objective 1. But this is pretty typical of a lot of GAO studies that start off with a very broad scope and then get narrowed down during our "design" phase. As we discussed, hopefully our meeting with Trevor wilt help us determine what issues to focus on, and we can discuss this with Andy before this high-level conference call. Don?t hesitate to ca? with any further concerns/questions. From: GAO Sent: Friday August 01, 2014 3:09 PM To: Meitzer, David Subject: RE: Following Up on Cross Meeting i i David? We have considered the concerns you and your colleagues have raised about our ongoing review of the Red Cross in the wake of our meeting of June 19th and subsequent e-mail communications. We believe that a refraining of our objectives to more closely re?ect the language of the 2007 American National Red Cross Governance Modernization Act may help to address your concerns, while also satisfying the continuing interest of our congressional requester. In that regard, the revised objectives of our review are as follows: - How are the nature and extent of Red Cross?s disaster?related services determined when it is involved in Federal programs or activities? - What oversight applies to the Red Cross's disaster?related services when it is involved in Federal programs or activities? In the interest of ?nding a useful way forward, we would like to arrange a meeting to discuss our information needs and riorities, and how they relate to our audit objectives and our statutory audit and access authority. ?Krill be contacting Lori Polacheck to arrange a meeting later this month. Thank you? GAO From: Meltzer, David Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 12:21 PM To: Sherrill, Andrew Cc: PoiacheckI Lori'l DeFrancisl Suzy; Subject: RE: Following Up on Cross Meeting GAO We appreciated the meeting as it addressed many ofour concerns. However, questions still remain as to the authority for GAO to research ARC corporate governance and decision~making processes as well as ARC programs that don?t involve federal funds. Before resuming the work needed to respond to GAO's requests, we would appreciate first being informed as to views on its authority to conduct a review of this scope, including our nonsfederal programs. Thanks very much. Sincerely, David Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 5:45 PM To: Melizer, David - i ri' DeFrancis Suzy; Subject: RE: Following Up on Cross Meeting Mr. Meitzeru- I was surprised to see this issue raised in your response, as i thought that we had established the outlines of a pian for moving forward at ourJune 19 meeting. Did something change between then and now? Sincerely, GAO From: Meter, David Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 3:43 PM To: Sherriil, Andrew cc: Poiacheck. Lori; Bananas, Suzy: Subject: RE: Following Up on Cross Meeting GAO Thanks for your email. I?m sorry for the delay but it has proven challenging getting everyone around the same table due to ongoing response efforts across the US. One issue on which i would appreciate the Office?s views is the iegal authority of the Of?ce to research non-federaily funded programs of the American Red Cross. Thanks very much for your consideration. Sincerely, David Meltzer From: Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 12:58 PM To: Melizer, David Cc: Polacheck, Lori; DeFrancis, Suzy; GAO Subject: Following Up on Cross Meeting Mr. Meitzerw Following up on the productive meeting we had with you on June 19, I?m checking in to ?nd out when we can expect to hear back from the Red Cross with regard to the topics we discussed at that meeting. Thanks for any status update you can provide. 11 12 Sent: on ay, ugus To: F?olaoheck1 Lori Subject: heilo from GAO Lori, l?m following up on an email thatend to David Meltzer last week. it lays out revised research objectives for our study, that we hope will address your concerns about audit authority to some extent. We?d like to meet with you and your colleagues to discuss these research objectives and what additional interviews and documents we will need to complete our study. Andy is on leave for the next 2 weeks, so we?re hoping to talk with you later in August if possible. Would any of these times work for your schedules: Friday, Aug 22 11:30 or 2:30 Monday, Aug 25 11:30 or 3:30 Tuesday, Aug 26 11:00 or 2:00 Wednesday, Aug 27 11:30 or 2:00 Thursday, Aug 28 11:30 We could host you here at GAO, come to your office, orjust do a conference most convenient. Thanks, GAO 13 From: Polacheck, Lori Sent: Thursda Au not 28 2014 8:48 AM To: Cc: Melizer, David . Subject: RE: Document for September 2nd Meeting GAO Thank you for these questions and for your about conducting interviews by phone. When we talk on September 2, we are hoping to reach an understanding about the scope of "involved in Federai programs or activities the government carries out under law?. We beiieve reaching agreement on the scope will be a good first step in resuming the review. Sincerely, Lori Lori Polacheck] Associate Genera! Counsei and Privacy Qf?cer American Red Cross 2025 Street, 1 Washington, DC 20006 American Ree times This e-mail contains information from the Office of the General Counsel of the American Red Cross and may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this e-maii is rohibited. If ou have received this e-maii in error, please notify us immediately by tax: delete this e-man. Thank you. From: Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 3:17 PM To: Polach Cc: Subject: Document for September 2nd Meeting Lori, In preparation for the meeting on Tuesday, September 2nd at 3:00 pm, i have attached a document focused on our top priority information needs. We are hoping to have a constructive discussion of our information needs and priorities and how they relate to the objectives of our review and our statutory audit and access authority. As indicated in the document, we are willing to conduct interviews by phone as needed to aliow for ?exibility in the use of Red Cross of?cials? time. Thank you for your time and consideration. All the Best, 14 US. Government Accountability Of?ce (GAO) 15 GAO Study of Red Cross (13129?) Information Request I August 2014 Objective (1): How are the nature and extent of Red Cross?s disaster-related services determine when it is involved in Federal programs or activities the government carries out under law? National policies decision~makfng Focus is on decision?making about what services to provide when the Red Cross is involved in Federal programs or activities the government carries out under law, with the understanding that some decisions or procedures may apply to all disasters. 1. Interviews on the following topics: 0 Red Cross allocation of funds among domestic and international disasters - Red Cross recovery activities (Similar to meeting on Preparedness Activities) 0 Lead for Red Gross National Response Framework Mass Care activities 2. Document Request: Please provide documentation on your ?re-engineered" process for disaster response (analogous to the recovery and preparedness documents we received) Case Studies We would like to understand Red Cross decision-making in three Stafford Act disasters: 0 Hurricane Sandy, with focus on New Jersey (October 2012) ?r Moore, Oklahoma and surrounding area tornadoes (May 2013) DR-4117 - Northern Florida Flooding (April 2014) 1. Interviews: For each case study please provide the following interviews, as applicable. 0 lnterview(s) with one or more chapters that were involved in response and recovery efforts interview(s) with region(s) that were involved in response and recovery efforts 0 lnterview(s) with division(s) that were involved in overseeing response and recovery efforts 16 lnterview(s) with headquarters officials who were invoived in overseeing reaponse and recovery efforts (Already had meeting on Moore, Okiahoma with Trevor Riggen). interviews may be by phone or in person; are expected to take up to 90 minutes each; and wilt address how officiats at different levels made decisions about what services to provide in response, recovery, and preparedness phases. 2. Document Request: For each case study please provide Red Cross After Action Reports or Assessments Objective (2): What oversight applies to the Red Cross?s disaster-related services when the organization is involved in Federal programs or activities the government carries out under law? This information request focuses on the component related to Red Cross internal governance when it is invoived in Federai programs or activities the government carries out under law, with the understanding that some forms of internal governance may apply to all disasters. 1. Board of Governors ?v Provide examples of the Board?s strategic oversight activities related to effectiveness and efficiency of disaster services 0 The Better Business Bureau/Wise Giving Alliance states that Red Cross meets this standard: Have a board policy of assessing, no less than every two years, the organization's performance and effectiveness and of determining future actions required to achieve its mission. Briefly describe or provide examples of how the Board assesses the performance and effectiveness of disaster assistance. 0 The Better Business BureauNVise Giving Alliance states that Red Cross meets this standard: Submit to the organization's governing body. for its approval, a written report that outlines the results of the aforementioned performance and effectiveness assessment and recommendations for future actions. Provide examples of how the most recent such report addressed effectiveness of disaster services, such as key metrics, findings, or recommendations. 2. Management chain of command - Provide examples of metrics used by management to monitor the effectiveness and efficiency of disaster services, in particular those used to monitor disaster response and recovery services. (We have aiready been provided the Preparedness Companion to the DRCF, which inciudes exampies of specific metrics used to monitor preparedness activities in the regions.) 0 Specifically address: in developing metrics, has Red Cross drawn on the Urban lnstitute's iist of potentiai performance indicators for disaster services ("What Happens to Victims? A Research Guide for Disaster-Response Studies") or any other best practices in this area? I 17 . Concern Connection Line (001.) Hotline 0 Provide examples of the types of issues related to fraud, waste, or abuse in disaster services that have been identified through this hotline. We understand these cails are confidential, and are not asking for details of specific cemplaints. . Chapter Quality Assurance - Briefly describe chapter quality assurance activities - if applicable, provide examples of issues related to disaster service deiivery identified through the chapter quality assurance process in recent years Internal Audit 0 Provide examples of issues related to disaster services that have been investigated by the internal audit division in recent years. investigations, Compliance Ethics Provide examples of the types of issues reiated to disaster services that have been investigated by the division. We are not asking for details of specific investigations. - Summarize the purpose, activities, and any known impacts of the Disaster Response Unit within the division. This unit was mentioned in the 2006 report on ?Red Cross Governance for the 21St Century? as a new initiative. Office of the Corporate Ombudsman - Provide exampies of any emerging, aggregate trends the Ombudsman has identified in recent years in the area of disaster services, which it has shared with Red Cross management. in particular, trends in the area of service delivery. . Diversity advisory council Provide the charter authorizing this council and laying out its responsibilities. - Provide examples of the types of oversight the council has engaged in specifically related to the Red Cross?s disaster services, if any. Needs assessment - Describe or provide documentation regarding how Red Cross devetops objective criteria for disbursing assistance during disasters needs assessments) as required by the interns! Revenue Service. 18 From: GAO Sent; Wednesday, September 24, 2014 3:17 PM To: Cc: Subject: mee ing WI Hi Lori, For our meeting on Friday, we think it could be fruitful for us to better understand the Red Cross? perspective on its involvement in different federal activities. We would like to discuss various roles the Red Cross has taken that are described in federal documents. First, we would like to better understand how Red Cross sees its role, and the mechanics of how the Red Cross works With federal agencies, in certain areas identified below (we do not expect to get through them alt, but hopefully we could discuss several of them). For example, when serving as a support agency under various NRF Emergency Support Functions?as opposed to your role as co-lead for mass care?de you coordinate with federal agencies, and if so what does that look iike? Second, we wouid like to better understand how, if at all, these efforts inform your decision-making about what services to provide during and after disasters. The following is a prioritized list of federal programs or activities that list Red Cross as a participant. This list is not intended to be viewed as exhaustive. ESP-mass care (co?lead and support roles) ESP?logistics ESP-public health and medical services RSF?health and social services RSF-housing National Mass Care Strategy National Disaster Housing Strategy Nationai Emergency Famiiy Registry and Locator System National Emergency Child Locator Center lnteragency Taskforce on Pre?Disaster Hazard Mitigation We would also appreciate any other examples of federal programs or activities in which Red Cross is a participant that you are aware of. Thanks, Lorin 19 From: Sent: Lies ay, 0 0 er 21, 2014 4:05 PM To: Polacheck, Lori Cc: 0 Subject: GAO action plan Attachments: Lori, Based on our last conversation with you and David, we?ve developed revised research objectives and a brief action plan aning out the work needed to complete our study. Please see the attached document. As you can see, we?re hoping to conduct a limited number of additional interviews with Red Cross headquarters and regionaE/divisionai staff. We?d appreciate it if you could review the attached document and iet us know if this plan seems generaliy OK to you. Feel free to call me with any questions or concerns. Hopefuliy we can work out any remaining issues and proceed quickly to the remaining interviews. Thanks very much, 20 DM HQ 7186647, V. 2 GAO Study of Red Cross (131297) Action Plan October 2014 Prior version of objective (1): How are the nature and extent of Red Cross?s disaster- related services determined when it is involved in Federal programs or activities the government carries out under law? Revised objective (1): How are the nature and extent of Red Cross?s disaster-related services determined through its coordination with the federal government, as well as other factors? We plan to examine the Red Cross?s involvement in the response, recovery, and preparedness phases when assisting with federally declared disasters. Specially we will address: a. How if at all does the Red Cross coordinate with federal agencies in each of these phases of disaster assistance? Specifically, what does coordination actually look like in areas where Red Cross is assigned some formal role under federal planning frameworks, federal statutes, or memoranda of understanding with federal agencies? the National Response Framework, National Disaster Recovery Framework, National Emergency Child Location Center, Interagency Taskforce on Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation. b. How does Red Cross monitor the activities it undertakes to coordinate with the federal government? 0. How does coordination with the federal government inform Red Cross?s decisions about what services to provide in each phase of disaster assistance? d. Beyond federal coordination, what other key factors inform the Red Cross?s decision? making in each phase of disaster assistance? coordination with other stakeholders, knowledge of events on the ground, availability of donated funds) To flesh out our high?level understanding of Red Cross?s coordination with the federal government and the factors affecting decision?making, we plan to conduct additional interviews with Red Cross headquarters staff knowledgeable about each disaster assistance phase and about specific coordination efforts National Emergency Child Locator Center). We envision this could involve 3 4 additional interviews, but we will rely on Red Cross to identify the appropriate experts. When feasible, we will obtain additional documentation of Red Cross coordination or decision-making procedures. In addition, to obtain more specific examples of how coordination and decision-making play out on the ground, we would like to conduct phone interviews with Red Cross regional or divisional staff involved in specific disasters. We would like to test our questions and approach with Red Cross staff who managed the response to the tornadoes in Moore, Oklahoma and surrounding area (May 2013), and may then select up to two additional 21 DM HQ 7186647, U. 2 disasters. Our questions will build off the information obtained and decision?making factors identified through our headquarters work. Prior version of objective (2): What oversight applies to the Red Cross?s disaster-related services when the organization is involved in Federal programs or activities the government carries out under law? Revised objective (2): What external oversight of the Red Cross?s disaster-related services exists? This work will not rely on any additions! Red Cross interviews or documents. 22