NORTHERN SYRIA CAMP PROFILE

Transcription

1 NORTHERN SYRIA CAMP PROFILE MAY 2013

2 ii

3 Table of Contents Acronyms ii Geographic Classifications iii Executive Summary iv 1. Background 2 2. Assessment Methodology a) Objectives b) Coordination with Humanitarian Actors c) General Methodology d) Assessment Area e) Limitations of Assessment f) How to Read the Findings 6 3. Displacement Trends 7 4. Sector Overview a) Camp Management b) Overall Sector Priorities c) Health d) WASH e) Food f) Shelter g) NFIs h) Education 5. Camp Profiles Al Karameh Al Naser Aqqrabat Al Salam Atmeh (aka Olive Tree) Camp Bab Al Hawa Higher Bab Al Hawa Lower Bab Al Salameh Jarablous Lattakia (Yamadia) and Surrounding Areas Qah Taibah iii

4 Acronyms ACU SOC FGD GIS HHs IDP KI NFI NGO SYP TRC USD Assistance Coordination Unit - Syrian Opposition Coalition Focus Group Discussion Geo-referenced Information System Households Internal Displaced Person Key Informant Non Food Items Non Governmental Organization Syrian Pound Turkish Red Crescent US Dollars Geographic Classifications Name Used in Report Governorate District Sub-district Definition Highest form of governance below the national level Sub division of a governorate where many government agencies reside Sub division of a district composed by towns and villages Village/neighbourhoods Lowest administrative unit iv

5 1. Executive Summary The continued escalation of conflict in Syria has resulted in a parallel increase in displacement for large sections of Syria s population. In addition to the 1.2ml refugees that have fled Syria, more than 4.25m are reported to be internally displaced (IDPs). Initially seeking refuge in host communities, since mid 2012 an increasing number of IDPs have settled in improvised camps, notably along the Turkish/Syrian border. As of May 2013 over 70,000 IDPs reside in 12 IDP camps in Aleppo, Idlib and Lattakia governorate. More IDPs are arriving on a daily basis, resulting in growth of existing and set up of new camps. Approximately 50,000 IDPs have arrived in the camps since the beginning of 2013; 10,000 in the month of May alone. Despite the mobilisation of local communities and the effort from aid agencies, the rapidly increasing and changing dynamic of camps, coupled with issues of humanitarian access and a dearth of up to date information, has meant that services and aid has struggled to keep up with the needs on the ground. For this reason this assessment was conducted by ACU and the NGO Forum Camp and IDP Working Group, acting as a gap analysis tool. The assessment findings vary widely from camp to camp, however they can be summarised as follows: The camps vary widely in size. Atmeh camp stands as the biggest camp with 28,600 IDPs, and Aqqrabat stands as the smallest with 630. Camp Management structures vary widely in capacity and make-up. The actors involved vary from IDPs, businessmen, land owners, militias to INGOs and LNGOs. There is a consistent trend, however, of weak camp managements, which results in poor services within the camp. In particular, IDP camp services suffer from lack of site planning and poor or missing registration. While some health facilities were available in most camps, health is a recurrent concern amongst interviewees, and the key prioritized intervention. High levels of skin disease, diarrhoea, respiratory disease and psychological trauma were prominently reported during the assessment. WASH remains largely underserved, and was prioritized as the second needed intervention by respondents. Most camps lack sufficient latrines (in one case, no latrines were present) and shower/wash facilities. Food is a prominent concern identified by the IDPs and camp management actors. Most existing food interventions are conducted by actors outside of the NGO Forum. In smaller and newer camps food distributions were made in a more inconsistent fashion, with respondents finding it hard to estimate their meals per day. There was considerable variation between camps with regards to shelter. Aqqrabat camp was found as having the best shelter with an individual container bestowed on each family, whereas many other new camps have 100s or up to 1500 IDPs living in shrubland, cars and makeshift shelters nearby so that they may access the already depletes services. Such situations can be seen in Al Salam, Al Nasr and surrounding camps. With regards to NFIs, despite the significant level of distributions to date, shortages were reported, especially for consumable goods and to meet needs of new arrivals. In particular, Hygiene kits were prioritized as a need. v

6 Methodology and Overall Findings 1. Background 2. Assessment Methodology a. Objectives b. Coordination with Humanitarian Actors c. General Methodology d. Assessment Area e. Limitations of Assessment f. How to Read the Findings 3. Displacement Trends 4. Sector Overview a. Camp Management b. Overall Sector Priorities c. Health d. WASH e. Food f. Shelter g. NFIs h. Education 1

7 2. Background As the Syrian crisis progresses into its third year, some million Syrians are estimated to be internally displaced with a further million Syrians (and counting) registered as refugees in the neighbouring countries of Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, and Turkey. Over 2 1 million IDPs are located in Northwest Syria, predominantly in collective centres, make-shift shelters, temporary accommodation and in camps. In addition to the hardship for the displaced, he IDP crisis has put immense pressure on communities within Syria already reeling under the pervasive consequences of a prolonged, divisive and intense conflict and so many more choose or are pushed into camps. With the dynamics of the conflict shifting towards a focus on highly populated urban centres and with the flow of displaced people showing no signs of abating 1, the potential for a further significant worsening of the humanitarian situation both within the country and regionally presents a potentially significant threat. In response to the increased needs, in recent months aid agencies have gradually up-scaled their humanitarian operations in Northern Syria. However their effectiveness and operational capacity have been constrained by a dearth of credible and accurate information to plan and coordinate humanitarian action. This has also been true for IDP camps. Prior to this report, no overall document outlined locations, populations and needs of IDP camps in NW Syria, resulting in most humanitarian actors lacking information regarding humanitarian access, location, population and needs. As IDP camp population continues to rapidly grow in NW Syria, actors intervening in them are left without a holistic knowledge of needs on the ground. In the 2 weeks preceding this report alone, two new camps were opened and another two are in process of doing so. An overview of camp management actors, security considerations, sector specific needs and population trends has been identified as an urgent information gap by the ACU and INGO Forum; together they have set up a working group and agreed to conduct a camp profile assessment exercise to better inform humanitarian decision making and intervention in the IDP camps in Northern Syria. This report presents the findings of the first assessment, conducted between 1 st of May and 10 th of May in 12 IDP camps by an interagency team coordinated by ACU and the Camp and IDP Working Group. It will be updated on a monthly basis in order to continue facilitating humanitarian planning and decision making. 1 SNAP Regional Analysis Syria, 30th April - 2

8 3. Assessment Methodology This section highlights (a) the overall objectives of the assessment mission; (b) coordination in planning and implementation of the assessment; (c) the general methodology of the assessment including the use of key informants and GIS mapping; (d) the coverage of the assessment in terms of camp locations; and (e) how to interpret the results of the assessment undertaken. a. Objectives The key objective of the interim assessment report is to contribute to an effective and timely humanitarian response in IDP Camps in NW Syria by aid actors. Specifically, the assessment aims to inform actors and stakeholders of: Camp management situation analysis, including camp management composition and security considerations; Sector specific needs and gaps within the camps, to support the prioritization of humanitarian interventions at a camp and sector specific level; Key infrastructure and population mapping and analysis to provide service-specific data on functionality and usage of services, as well as population and vulnerabilities profiling. The assessment provides a first baseline of information which will be updated on a monthly basis by interagency assessment teams. b. Coordination with Humanitarian Actors Coordination with key humanitarian stakeholders and actors working in IDP camps in NW Syria was undertaken through an initial reconnaissance mission, which identified humanitarian actors in the camps and their surrounding areas in March In Turkey, ACU and the INGO Forum worked together to organise the camp assessment. To this end, a dedicated camp assessment subgroup of the Camp Coordination and IDP Working Group was established in order to define the questionnaire and methodology of the assessment. The methodology used built on the existing purposive sampling methodologies that were used by JRANS, JRANS 2, and the Aleppo City Assessment, which were adapted for camp specific contexts. The IDP Camp assessment was conducted in two phases: Firstly, 7 out of 12 IDP camps were assessed between th 6 th and 13 th of April. Findings were presented to the Camp Working Group on the 26 th of April to cross check findings, gather further feedback as well as set out a strategy for further information gathering. It was decided that a further assessment was required to cover the remaining IDP camps and produce a holistic report on IDP camps in NW Syria. The 5 remaining IDPs camps were therefore assessed between 15 th and 30 th of May and key data was updated for the 7 initially assessed camps and all camps for various versions of the report as the data was cross-checked through INGOs. c. General Methodology The camp snapshot assessment includes four components of data collection and analysis. First, key informant interviews were held in each camp with camp management stakeholders. Second, a multi-sector questionnaire (developed by a sub working group made from members of the INGO Assessment Working Group and the Camp Working Group) was conducted in each camp serving as the backbone of the assessment. Thirdly, secondary 3

9 data from relief agencies and camp management agencies regarding population information was collected and triangulated with physical observation. And finally, a GIS and mapping component was utilised to produce static and web-based interactive mapping of all data collected, collated and analysed. The use of these different data collection methods further facilitates the cross-verification of field information, which was conducted as part of the analysis. Key informant interviews In each camp, a survey of key actors in camp management structures and community relations provided meta-level understanding of the functioning of the camp as well as enabling the identification of other key sector-specific informants. Key informant interviews enabled a contextual understanding on the camp set up, camp composition, camp management (including registration, camp staff roles and section systems) and camp structure. The key informants were predominantly members of camp management/relief committees and IDPs themselves. In some camps direct access to IDPs was restricted, while in others there were no medical personnel to give a robust understanding of health concerns. The Key Informant networks established were then enlisted to enable the regular update of key information for future reports. Multi-sector review questionnaire The questionnaire was developed by the INGO-Forum s Camp Coordination and IDP Working Group. The questionnaire covers key needs and interventions in the following sectors: WASH, Education, NFIs, Protection, Health, Nutrition, and Food and Livelihoods. It prioritizes needs in the camp, and asks for key intervention needs, as well as a brief summary of interventions and conditions in place. The questionnaire is divided into sectors and surveyed with those members of the community and relief agencies best placed to comment on sector-specific needs (i.e. health workers, teachers, women leaders etc.). The questionnaire is attached to this report as Annex 1. Secondary data The assessment team reviewed available data related to camp population and triangulated with findings. Such data was made available with the assistance of the technical working groups and individual NGOs working in the camps. The secondary data used was from INGOs on the ground who have performed one off registration for NFI and other such interventions. Key infrastructure and population mapping The assessment teams produced key infrastructure and population data reviewing the functionality of the infrastructure and density of said population; The data was georeferenced where possible, enabling its consolidation in static and interactive maps. d. Assessment Area The camp assessment covered all known (at the time) IDP camps in NW Syria close to the Syrian-Turkish border; border areas having remained largely unshelled by the Syrian Regime and having been perceived as a safe haven for many IDPs. The three governorates where IDP camps were in place are Lattakia, Idlib and Aleppo. In Lattakia lies Yamadia camp. In northern Idlib the largest constellation of camps has formed within close proximity to each other, including: Upper and Lower Bab Al Hawa (2 separate camps), As Salam, Taibah, 4

10 Atmeh, Qah and Al Karamah camps. In northern Aleppo governorate lie Bab Al Salame and Jarablous camps. There are many areas with large collective centres in N Syria, but for the purposes of this assessment only camps in border areas were visited. Training, Logistics and Human Resources Two assessment teams were set up to conduct the camp assessment. They were trained on the 23 rd of April, conducted the field assessment between 1 st and 10 th of May, and were continuously debriefed thereafter. The two teams consisted of 1 team leader and 4 enumerators each. One coordinator supervised the ongoing activities. The teams were provided with incentives by the ACU and trained and managed by inter agency support. Assessment teams were trained, supported and debriefed by Assessment and GIS experts. e. Limitations of Assessment While every effort was made to ensure that this assessment yielded the highest quality data with the lowest incidence of error, the following constrained should be taken in consideration when analysing the results: Timeframe In order to ensure that results were rapidly available, the assessment teams only spent one day in each camp. This did not allow for tent to tent verification of all population data, which therefore relies on reported data by key informants cross verified by analysis of satellite imagery and verification with aid actors working in the camps. Lack of secondary data For many of the camps visited the only compiled data on population and humanitarian intervention available was through the camp management. Rigorous efforts were made to cross-check and verify such information, such as counting population tent to tent where possible and observing services on the ground, however this is the first assessment of its kind and therefore did not always have enough data to perform triangulation on all data received. Cooperation from camp managers Although many camp managers maintain their own registration data, not all were willing to share this with the assessment team. Firstly, there is an assessment fatigue to the point where one camp (Qah) has a sign outside of the camp requesting no more assessments. Secondly, it can be assumed that some key informants in the camps find it in their interest to exaggerate needs, concerns about aid and their population information in a bid to receive more services. Thirdly, assessments were viewed by some as a form of unnecessary monitoring on their practices, creating some reluctance in information sharing. Fourthly, some informants may have been hesitant to share data for security concern, fearing repercussions from outside parties. For this reason, names and contact details of individuals and of groups have been omitted from this report. Security/Logistics Due to security, no more than a day was allowed to visit each camp, and Yamadia camp could not be visited because of ongoing conflict in the area during most of the time of assessment. 5

11 f. How to Read the Findings. Following an overview across all camps, assessment findings are presented in a more detailed way in the form of individual camp profiles. Where possible, data was gathered and cross checked through direct observation and interviewing as many sources as possible, including host community members in camp management positions and IDPs themselves. However the report reflects mostly direct observation, and reflects more of a camp management perspective than IDPs. In each profile, the Specific Recommended Intervention section outlines interventions requested by key informants pertaining to the groups of camp management and IDPs themselves. When referring to water points, the report refers to permanent water points; water trucking distribution points are only considered water points when explicitly stated as such. It should be noted that SPHERE standards for water points per person in camps are dependent on average water flows, the measurement of which was not feasible in the scope of this assessment. Minimum levels are therefore used in identifying gaps; thus assuming that the flow rate per water point is maximised. In reality the number of water points needed may be greater. Functionality of latrines was measured by IDPs willingness to use them and so some discrepancy may exist between these findings and technical survey. The lack of use of latrines in N. Syria camps was often found to be down to poor hygiene and privacy and not always due to technical fault. Within the camp profiles is information about camp management systems and structures aiming at facilitating action and coordination with them. It should be however noted that the reported information should not be considered as endorsing or validating any camp management structure, especially in a context in which these are often subject of tension and regular change. Due to the sensitivity of the information on camp management, individuals and groups names involved in camp management have been coded. Decoding of these names can be obtained for those agencies working in the camp or truly planning to intervene in these camps by contacting the Camp Working Group or the ACU. 6

12 4. Displacement trends The overall number of IDPs is increasing rapidly in Syria. The number has now reached 4.25 million 1, with over 2m IDPs residing in the northern governorates 2. As crossing borders became more difficult and as conflict patterns become more unpredictable, camps that were once thought of as transitory (and therefore not properly planned) are now taking a more permanent status. Populations movement to and between camps is high, as IDPs do not have good information on which services can be provided in different camps and often follow where their family and friends have gone before. As the conflict situation changes in their places of origin, IDPs often go back for short amounts of time only to return to the camps. Despite the dynamic context, some clear trends have been identified by the camp snapshot assessment. As shown below, the IDP camps in N Syria have grown exponentially during the course of 2013, with two starting in the last month. The overall figure has risen from 20,000 IDPs residing in camps in January 2013 to over 70,000 IDPs.at the time of the assessment. At time of writing, three more small camps have been opening in the Qah area Al Midan, Martyr s camp and Safa and three more are planned within the next few weeks. While they were not included in the assessment, their population figures are shown below In terms of place of origin, IDPs in assessed camps were found to be predominantly fleeing from Idlib, Hama and Aleppo governorates, with recent limited incoming population from Al Quair areas. Only two of the camps (in the Bab Al Hawa area) reported a decreasing population. This is due to the increase in perceived insecurity as the population fled after an air attack on a neighbouring base. As Salam, Jarabalous, Atmeh and Bab Al Salameh all experienced sharp increases in population in the last month. Source: SNAP Regional Analysis Syria, 30th April,

13 5. Sector Overview a. Camp Management The majority of camps in Northern Syria have been created without proper planning or forewarning to those humanitarian actors well positioned to intervene; consequently many basic services simply do not exist. Such shortage in services is also due to the sharp population rise of IDPs and a current trend of IDPs preferring smaller camps due to issues of security. The sporadic and ad hoc nature of the camps and a lack of coordinated oversight has resulted in many camps being managed by a variety of structures which lack the required capacities and knowledge. The nature of camp management structures varies from camp to camp. In one camp, it is ensured by a military body, while in Bab Al Hawa Lower there is no current camp management set up. The lack of capacity of camp management bodies often impedes the set up of participatory and complaint mechanisms, community mobilization, site-planning, and basic information and communication practices. A clear correlation was noticed between the level of organisation of Camp Management structures and quality of services provided. Provision of capacity building of camp management structures is therefore recommended, particularly in terms of methods of registration and of coordination with humanitarian actors. Among camp management duties, registration of IDPs is essential in order to properly administer services, shelter, and provide information to humanitarians actors for further essential interventions. As seen below all existing camp management bodies reported registration processes as either completed or planned. However when asked to produce evidence of one, the management was either not able to do so or (in the cases of Jarablous and Taibah) the registration numbers presented were nearly double of the number verified by assessment enumerators performing a tent to tent verification. b. Overall Sector Priorities The assessment targeted respondents either from the IDP camp community or working closely with them to evaluate priorities per sector, to then elaborate which specific interventions within those sectors would most benefit the camp and its inhabitants. Respondents were taken from both camp management and section or community leaders, as well as from the IDP population. At a sector-specific level, specific key informants were sought and interviewed; such as health workers and teachers for health and education. 8

14 Through Key Informant Interviews and Focus Group Discussions IDPs were asked which key interventions were most needed. Health provision and improvement of facilities and access was prioritised, with 50% of respondents noting it as the key need. The most requested health support was medicine supplies. It was observed that not all camps have permanent medical facilities onsite, and none have the capacity for parasitic or bacteriological disease diagnosis, alert or surveillance systems. WASH was indicated as the key priority by 33% of respondents. While health was prioritised first, many of the specific health concerns identified are in turn most likely related to poor WASH standards. Many camps are without functioning latrines and have open defecation sites. Most are without showers or proper sanitation. Access to sufficient clean water was identified as an urgent gap. Interventions aiming at upgrading water sources (specifically improving pumps and generators for wells as well as access to fuel) would yield high impact. Non Food Item distribution was named as a second or third priority need by 42% of respondents, with hygiene kits a prioritized need for 33% of all respondents. Food was indicated as a priority need by 17% of all respondents. Much of the food distribution is conducted by actors (normally local communities) outside of the NGO Forum; robust quantitative information on food distributions was consequently not possible for this report. Food distribution varies widely amongst camps and is often uneven within camps due to poor camp management practices. Many respondents in camps with poor camp management reported not knowing when their next meal would arrive. However, most respondents reported having access to two meals a day, including between one and three pieces of bread per day. Shelter was named as a second or third priority by 34% of respondents, with none reporting shelter as their first priority. However this may be misleading. Although shelter was not prioritised by IDPs interviewed, the respondents were IDPs residing within the camps, the majority of which has access to some form of shelter. It should be considered that there are thousands of IDPs living on the peripheries of the camps utilising camp services, which are in need of shelter but were not targeted by the assessment. This was observed particularly in the Al Salam and Al Nasr areas. 9

15 c. Health 2 Health was rated as the top priority need in assessed camps by 50% of respondents. Although the health situation is considered to be poor, it should be noted that facilities and capacity were reported as missing to test or diagnose the most prevalent diseases. This report only addresses health facilities capacity, constraints, and priority needs as identified by key informants in the camp. The key informant interviews conducted onsite aimed to gauge symptoms rather than fully diagnosed statistics. Health workers or those best placed in the community were interviewed and asked which symptoms were being witnessed at an unusually high rate. Results were as follows: Diarrhoea was found to be unusually high in 100% of the camps; skin disease in 91%, with many respondents reporting a fear of (unconfirmed) growing cases of Leisch Maniasis; fever in 83%; respiratory disease in 50%; and psychological trauma in 58% of camps. Only six of the assessed camps have onsite medical facilities. These include dispensaries with visiting medical practitioners, such as in Bab Al Hawa Lower, and primary healthcare clinics, such as in Bab Al Salameh. One-off vaccination programs and clinics were not counted as onsite facilities in this report, despite on occasion having been present in some camps. Vaccination programs have been conducted, yet because of the rapidly revolving population in the camps, child vaccination was stated as a needs gap in all camps but Bab Al Salameh. In all camps in Idlib, it is reported that pregnant women use the Ad Dana hospital to give birth. The following graph shows priority medical needs, as reported by medical personnel (where present) and by key informants and IDP representatives (not always medically trained). A lack of medicines was mentioned as the key constraint to healthcare by 27% of respondents and named to be among the top three priorities by 45%. A lack of medical staff was reported as a key constraint by 23%. 2 Disclaimer: It should be noted that assessment data was not reviewed or collated from medical relief agencies operative in the camps. This report merely represents the issues raised by concerned parties in the camp and should not be considered as a health assessment. Further assessments are recommended with regards to health. 10

16 d. WASH WASH was stated as the key priority intervention by 33% of the assessed camps in N Syria. Access to water and sanitation are issues across all the camps that urgently need to be addressed. WASH issues were observed to have a direct impact on other sectors, notably health (through waterborne diseases and skin diseases). Unusually high levels of diahorrea and skin disease were reported in all camps. WASH was identified as an issue of primary concern, especially with the summer months around the corner. Of the 12 camps assessed only 3 met SPHERE required standards for number of latrines per person; 4 for water supply per person; and none comply with SPHERE standards for bathing areas. Furthermore, many women and children reported not using available latrines and showers due to concerns over privacy, security and hygiene. The main water sources in camps are boreholes or wells operated with a generator and pump. The main reported issues: a. Low capacity of pump and generators and/or lack of fuel. Although only 24% of respondents reported this as one of their main constraints to water access, ten camps reported it as an issue. Pumps and generators are usually old, substandard and below the required capacity for optimum use of the wells. Camp management authorities do not usually have the funds or continuous support to afford fuel and maintenance for the generators. b. The water is untested in most of these wells, so it is possible that treatment is needed (although water testing was not part of this assessment). Two used wells in two of the camps are located in open defecation sites making risk of contamination high. There is a lack of knowledge by camp managers about humanitarian standards and good practice regarding placement of latrines. Latrines or defecation sites have often been found close to water sources and in other inappropriate locations. c. Lack of water tanks to store water results in limited time per individual to access the water. This is also usually due to generator capacity issues. Water tanks are only present in three of the camps observed. d. Lack of jerry cans to store water at an individual level was reported as a constraint in two camps. 11

17 Other methods of water supply are: - Water trucking (no information was available about treatment of water); water trucking is usually practiced through private entities providing a service paid by local relief agencies observed in two camps. - In 2 camps bottled water distribution was reported. Solid waste management Solid waste management was not reported as a priority, yet is still a problem. In most camps, IDPs place solid waste in collective locations within the camps, and trucks are brought to remove the garbage on a regular basis. In some cases solid waste has been burnt to eliminate it, creating further environmental risk. Solid waste management teams are often not properly equipped, and dump waste it in randomly chosen spots in the host community or nearby roads, which could raise issues of acceptance with the host community in the future. e. Food Food was identified as the priority need by 17% of respondents, and one of the top three priorities for 59%. It is predominantly delivered through breadbaskets consisting of ten hops pieces of bread and one cache of jam. Breadbaskets differ between camps and sections within camps in terms of content and rations; the differences are largely due to which agency is delivering them. Moreover, sporadic and on the spot food distribution, provided by private donors or individuals, have been reported. Camp coordination systems need to be strengthened in order to have a better tracking of needs and gaps in terms of food distribution, as well as an effective distribution of food among camp populations. Two of the assessed camps reported irregular food delivery, leaving camp residents unsure of when their next meal will be available. Still, most IDPs reported to have two meals per day. IDPs in camps without regular food distributions report resorting to savings and selling of own belongings in order to procure food from local markets. Most food distribution is conducted by humanitarian actors outside of the NGO forum and so robust information on food per person was not obtained by this assessment. It is recommended that collaboration between all actors in the food sector is sought to properly gage food and nutritional gaps in aid delivered to IDPs in camps. f. Shelter Shelter was ranked fifth of all the sector specific priorities. However, the assessment did not interview IDPs residing in surrounding areas for whom, it is safe to assume, shelter would rank higher amongst the priorities. There is a constant flow of IDPs entering the camps, which is 12

18 expected to increase sharply in the next few weeks. It is recommended that contingency stocks of shelter be held in the key areas (Lattakia, Idlib, and Aleppo) to cater to the unpredictable peaks of IDP arrivals in the camps. All of the camps assessed have areas for planned extension. In some cases there is need to gravel unmanageable terrain; while elsewhere there is a need of more shelters, land contracts and/or services before continuing with extension. Along with shelter, IDPs require support for obtaining further land access to enable camp extensions and/or decongestion as well as key infrastructure developments, particularly WASH infrastructure. 22% of respondents requested tent upgrade as a priority sectoral intervention. In particular, support was requested for summarization of tents, as the tents distributed in winter will be too hot for the near 40 degree Celsius heat expected in July and August. Moreover, in the oldest camps, IDP households reported that tents have worn out and would like to be assisted through some maintenance/upgrade support or with a new shelter arrangement. There was an observed issue of congestion within the camps, as IDP households choose to be near their family and friends, there is little camp managers can do to stop overpopulation of certain areas which become prone to water-logging and also fire hazards, as poor drainage and makeshift cooking fuels and contraptions have made poor accessibility and fires prominent throughout the camps. g. NFIs NFI distribution is a primary concern of IDPs as well as a primary activity of the relief agencies. Large gap remain in terms of consumable goods, WASH kits, as well as provisioning of NFI for the continued population increase and change. NFIs were prioritised as the most important intervention necessary by 19% of respondents. Although the items required varied, there was a consensus on the need of: 1. Hygiene kits. Although there have been many hygiene kit distributions, their high consumable nature and the rapidly revolving dynamics of the population in the camps resulted in that 50% of respondents prioritising hygiene kits as one of their three top sectoral priority. Specifically, in all camps but one, general hygiene kits and female hygiene kits were reported as priority. 2. Infant kits. Including diapers and supplementary food, baby kits were reported by 16% of respondents as one of their top three priority need. Diapers and supplementary food prices have significantly risen in the last six months and many households struggle to purchase enough quantities of them. Disposable diapers also contribute to the solid waste problem in the camps more than most other products and consumables. 3. Clothes (summer and children clothes) were reported to be among priority NFI needs by 12% of respondents. 13

19 4. Mattresses and blankets. Although not prioritized at a camp level, many respondents reported it as a need. h. Education Given higher life-saving priorities, education was not prioritised as a key needed intervention by any of the respondents in the camps. However it is still an underserviced sector. Of the twelve camps assessed, only eight camps had schools present in these camps the schools provided a good coverage, providing schooling from 6 to 7 hours a day (usually divided into shifts) for a reported 75% of the children between 5 and 14. Among the schools found, half were religious schools Of the main constraints and key interventions needed to support education, school space/ classrooms were deemed most necessary 26% of respondents favouring it. Among camps without a school, namely Al Salam, Bab Al Hawa Lower, Al Nasr and Taibah, the first priority was classroom space; i.e.: tents or buildings where the school can conduct activities. For the four other camps (those with schools), teachers support and training was selected as top priority intervention needed by two, and equipment for schools was selected twice also. While psychosocial support was not regarded as a top priority by any camp communities it is of note that unusually high numbers of psychological trauma was reported in over half of the camps by medical personnel or leaders present, and youth idleness, behavioural issues, and begging were observed in most larger camps, and therefore there may still be a need for psychosocial programming, despite it not being top of IDPs agenda. The assessment did not include or assess host community schools which in rare occasion are accessible to IDP children. 14

20 Camp Profiles Al Karameh Al Naser Aqqrabat Al Salam Atmeh (aka Olive Tree) Camp Bab Al Hawa Higher Bab Al Hawa Lower Bab Al Salameh Jarablous Lattakia (Yamadia) and Surrounding Areas Qah Taibah 15

21 Al Karameh Camp Management Type: Camp Managers: Estimated Population: Population Trend: Origins of Majority of Camp Residents: Humanitarian Access: Committee of host community members NA 6000 IDPs Stable Heish (Idlib) and different areas of Hama Regular and unrestricted POPULATION 3 MALE FEMALE TOTAL ADULT CHILDREN CHILDREN under TOTAL FAMILIES NA NA NA Camp management and registration The camp was set up in early 2012 and, while suffering from fractious camp management in its inception, it now deals with the IDPs and INGOs in a more coordinated manner. The reported camp management structure includes 7 individuals from the host community who each maintain a different responsibility within the camp. The camp is made up of 34 sections comprising of approximately 20 tents each. Section leaders are chosen, but not elected, by authoritative figures in their section. The camp managers also have a say in the selection of sector leaders. Section leaders can be changed if the section as a whole disagrees with their selection. However there are no formal mechanisms for this to take place, which has often let itself to disagreements. While there are no community mobilization or complaints mechanisms in place, the camp management is open to this idea. They reportedly spend much of their time dealing with individuals issues in the camp as IDPs prefer to speak to the camp managers rather than the section leaders a common problem in Northern Syria camps. Registration of camp residents is conducted by camp management staff checking the tents individually on a weekly basis, also to allow vacant tents to be occupied when needed. In terms of security, there are paid individuals who guard the camp. No guns are allowed to enter the camp. Site planning The camp suffers from intense overcrowding and lack of access issues. As time passes more families are sharing the tents with relatives, as the camp does not have space available for expanding. In areas of the camp which were not graveled, the tents were reported to be 3 NB: The population information above was collected from camp management officials without the opportunity allowed for cross checking and is therefore considered to be of low reliability. According to estimates made through tent counting via satellite imagery, these figures given are highly inflated and should be approximately 4000 IDPs. 16

22 regularly flooded because of lack of drainage between tents where as in graveled areas flooding of tents was less of an issue. Lack of space in the camp has also impeded infrastructure development such as WASH facilities. There is no electricity in the camp on household level. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. Sanitation 2. Health 3. Food Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs There are 650 tents in the camp, with many families sharing shelters with other families. Lack of space and poor initial site planning of the camp has resulted in tents being in very close proximity to each other, causing congestion and accessibility problems. In the large sections of the camp which are graveled tent standards as noticed as higher, as gravelling improved drainage and reduced flooding. WASH The main water source in the camp is onsite and well powered by a generator with regular flow to a main water system. Water was reported as untreated at the time of assessment. The generator is suffering from capacity issues and needs replacing or maintenance. The camp has three water points available for IDPs. On rainy days the water-logging of the roads makes it difficult for IDPs to reach the water points in the camp. When they are accessible the queues are reported as being up to half an hour long. 750l of bottled water are also delivered each day to the camp. There are 30 latrines in the camps, of which only 12 were functioning. As the latrines are gathered in one corner of the camp, many IDPs report not using them due to lack of access and security, especially at night. There are also 15 showers in the camp but they are not being used. People started using them for defecation purposes. Food 1500 breadbaskets are delivered to the camp each day. There is no further food aid delivered and there is no communal kitchen, although individual stoves have been distributed within the camp to cook. Supply shortages and price inflation on food items were also reported as restricting IDP access to local markets. Health There is one medical point in the camp staffed by two doctors and three nurses who report having enough medicine to cover their needs one of the only points to report so throughout the camps. There is also the nearby Orient hospital roughly Shelter: 1. Summerisation of tents 2. Gravelling the road NFIs: 1. Kitchen supplies 2. Female hygiene kits 3. Baby supplies 1. Fixing sewage system and septic tanks in camp 2. Fuel for generator 3. Construction of latrines in other areas of the camp 1. Food basket distribution 2. Fuel for cooking 3. Increased bread distribution 1. Mobility devices 2. Maternity care 17

23 2km away providing free healthcare for outpatients. The main concerns reported by medical staff are skin disease and diarrhoea. Medical staff also reported the high health risk caused by free flowing sewage through the camp. Education There is one new school in the camp. There are 1400 children of school age (6-12), 75% of these children attend school. 1. School equipment books, desks, toys and stationary SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Al Karameh Population: 6000 Households: NA SPHERE min. water points p.p 1 per people SPHERE min. water point per camp, total 12-75* Actual functioning water points in camp 3 Non-functional water points in camp 0 SPHERE min. latrines p.p 1 per 50 people SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total 120 Actual functioning latrines in camp 12 Non-functional latrines in camp 18 SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp 1 per camp 1 Comments There are two doctors and three nurses working in the camp. Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 75% 1 # of children attending 1400 *depending on flow rate. SPHERE Minimum Water Points required: 12 SPHERE Total Latrines required: % 75% Gap Available 10% 15% 75% Gap Available (functioning ) Available (nonfunctioning) 18

24 Al Karameh Situation Map 19

25 Al Naser Camp Management Type Camp Managers Estimated Population Population Growth Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access Humanitarian branch of battalion AN IDPs, 200 HHs Stable and controlled As Salam surrounding areas, but originally from Has, Idlib and Kafr Ouma, Idlib, Kafr Segna, Idlib, Moaret Herme, Idlib, and Madia, Idlib Regular, unrestricted POPULATION MALE FEMALE TOTAL ADULT CHILDREN 5-17 NA NA NA CHILDREN under TOTAL FAMILIES NA NA 200 Total # of families Female headed households Elderly headed households Number of widows (families) No of Unaccompanied/ separated children No of HH with disabled persons Orphans 200 NA NA NA NA Camp management and registration AN1, one of the main land owners of the area, supported and coordinated the set up of the camp and its services and became consequently camp manager. AN1 is supported in the camp management by another 3 individuals: AN2, AN3, and AN4. It is likely that the composition of the camp management team will change in the near future. There is a strong relationship between the camp management teams of Al Naser and Al Salam camps. Although the camp management has affiliations with a military batallion, no guns are seen in the camp. The camp is open to new IDP arrivals. A list of IDPs was provided by the Al Salam camp management and through this a proper registration of the camp was commenced. Site planning The camp was developed with little site planning considerations. Due to the small size of the camp, only 194 tents, there is no section division and all distributions are conducted directly by the camp management. IDPs have tended to settle within the camp according to area of origin, which resulted in an unofficial split in the camp according to location of origin. The camp is divided in rows to enhance accessibility to tents and services. There is no electricity at a household level. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. Food 2. Sanitation 3. Health 20

26 Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs There are 194 QRC tents in the camp, which are in a new condition. At the end of March, it was noted that there were many IDPs without any tents or shelter living around Al Salam camp, so the IDPs asked the ACU for new shelter and a new area to reside in. The land has drainage issues resulting in tents being sometimes flooded. No NFI distributions have been reported to the date of assessment. WASH The main water source for the camp are 2 wells, one inside and one outside the camp. The offsite well is a privately owned well and is currently not in use by the camp as negotiations are ongoing with the owner. A small pump is used to bring water from the inside well to the surface. As yet there are is no water distribution system serving the camp, so IDPs collect water directly from the well. The pump only operates irregularly throughout the day due to fuel constraints, yet enough water and no shortage were reported. The assessment did not conduct water tests. 4 permanent latrines are available for women in the camp. These are reported as being in good conditions. Due to lack of latrines men openly defecate in areas surrounding the camp. 8 caravan latrines and showers are under construction in the camp, 4 for male and 4 for women (both including showers and latrines) and should be completed soon. Food 500 breadbaskets are delivered each day to the camp to cover needs of resident IDPs as well as of the approximately 350 IDP families surrounding Al Salam and Al Naser camp; far short of SPHERE standards. The bread comes from the local bakery. Bread being the only food distributed in the camp, food availability and diversity is the main concern for the IDPs. Health There is no medical point in Al Naser camp, IDPs are using Qah hospital and Atmeh village hospital. Significant concern as reported by IDP representatives about skin diseases and diarrhoea prominence in the camp. Reportedly, there has also been no vaccination campaign in the camp. Education There is no school in the camp. Because of lack of profiling information, the number of school-aged children is unknown (but considered high). Shelter: 1. More tent provision 2. Summerisation covers 3. Gravelling to help with drainage NFIs: 1. Hygiene Kits 2. Female Hygiene kits 3. Baby Supplies 1. Construction of more latrines 2. Water tanks with piping from wells 3. Diesel from generator 1. Kitchen construction and support 2. Food basket distribution 1. Medical point with staff and equipment 2. Vaccination program 1. School facilities 2. School equipment 21

27 SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Al Naser Population: 1160 Households: 200 SPHERE min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 1 per people 2 15* 1 1 per 50 people per camp Non-functional water points in camp Non-functional latrines in camp 0 Comments # of children attending (under construction) *depending on flow rate. SPHERE Total Latrines required: 23 35% 48% Gap Available Under Construction 17% 22

28 Al Naser Situation Map 23

29 Aqqrabat Camp Management Type Camp Managers Estimated Population Population Growth Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access Battalion AQ 1 (from AQ2 battalion) 630 IDPs Stable Kafr Naboul, Idlib; Kafr Zeita, Hama and Al Habet, Homs Regular and unrestricted. The camp is accessible, with a unified camp management. Camp management and registration The camp was set up in February, reportedly in order to provide safe housing and assistance to families who had lost their head of household to war, as well as families with extreme signs of war-induced psychological trauma or disability. The land is rented from nearby land owners, with contract backed by local courts. AQ2 reported purchasing a new piece of land (40 acres) with plans to build a second similar camp. The camp is expanding by 2 containers per day. There are 60 rooms on the perimeter of the camp, and 45 containers inside. Each room or container houses 1 family. Each container has a living room, bedroom and shower and toilet. IDPs are chosen from nearby areas and Atmeh camp. AQ2 battalion also provide security for the camp; however there are no guns nor soldiers inside the camp. Other paid camp management personnel include: - AQ3 (Purchase manager) - AQ4 (Financial Manager) - AQ5 (Medical Officer) Site planning The camp is not divided into sections and all distributions and services are administered directly through the camp management. The camp management is very involved in providing support to all families enabling a good direct link for families to complain directly to them. However, no formal participatory or complaints mechanisms are in place. The camp is well financed and organized by the camp management. Electricity is available for 3 hours in the morning and 3 hours in the evening only, due to lack of fuel. The generator also powers the pump for water access. The generator powers all of the shelters. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. Health 2. NFI 3. Food 24

30 Sector Analysis Shelter & NFI There are 105 shelters mixed between containers or brick housing per family, including functioning toilets, cooking facilities and living spaces. WASH Every individual shelter has running water, a shower and personal toilet. There is a well piping to 2 water tanks, which produce water 1 hour a day. The well provides a reported 15,000 l per day; however the generator is shared with electricity, and because of fuel shortages, it is only used for 3 hours in the morning and three hours in the evening. No water trucking or water bottle distributions were reported in this camp. Private toilets are connected to a fully functioning sewage system. High levels of diarrhoea were reported amongst children under 5. Food Every 15 days a food basket is delivered to each shelter for every family. Each family receives rations and cook for themselves in wooden and fuel stoves, although a shortage of cooking fuel was reported. The food basket includes rice, sugar, tea, oil, and other such basic foods. No problems were reported with the food baskets, but only with the means to cook them. Health There is no onsite doctor, although a medical point is being constructed with a reported planned capacity for surgery and maternity care. Concern was raised of a high level of suspected cases of Leish Maniasis Education There are two onsite schools with an estimated 75% of children aged 6 14 in school. NFIs: 1. Gas for cooking 2. Hygiene kits 3. Diapers 4. Other: Clothing, female hygiene products, and baby supplies 1. Water treatment 2. New generator and fuel 1. Cooking Fuel 2. Cooking Utensils 1. Medicine (Leish Maniasis) 2. Medical staff 1. Stationary 25

31 SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Aqqrabat Population: 630 Households: NA SPHERE min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 1 per people 1 7* 2 1 per 50 people per camp Non-functional water points in camp Non-functional latrines in camp 0 Comments 1 (under construction) 75% 2 # of children attending NA 0 0 *depending on flow rate. $ 26

32 Aqqrabat Situation Map 27

33 As Salam Camp Management Type Camp Managers Estimated Population Population Growth Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access Local landowners AS1, camp manager; AS2, MD 3075 IDPS, 512 HHs Stable and controlled Kefr Rume, Idlib, and Kafr Signe, Idlib Regular Unrestricted. So far no incidents have been reported and no appraisal of the camp management as the camp is fairly new. Access of humanitarian staff was reported to suffer from limited problems. Camp management and registration The camp management is new, overcrowded and its services are also used by IDPs left shelterless in the surrounding areas. Despite this, camp management has been well organized and has engaged with many INGOs to fill the large gap in services. Unfortunately, the camp was established before any proper services were built, and therefore the conditions are poor although this may change in the coming weeks if population growth is controlled and sustained at the level of increase of shelters. A number of IDPs living in make shift shelters in the surrounding areas also use the few basic services available in the camp. To date there are no complaints mechanisms, participatory mechanisms or community mobilization. Staff list: AS1 - Camp Manager (Qah resident) AS2 - Managing Director AS3 - Accountant AS4- Warehouse officer A good relationship was reported between the camp management and battalions in the area, who do not enter the camp with guns. Site planning Despite the fact that the camp was only set up on the 15 th of March, 2013, it has grown rapidly. The camp management had not foreseen such an expansion and planned no provision of services before the opening of the camp. Tents were distributed and located in an ad hoc fashion, and were given on a first-come-first-served basis. IDPs have arranged themselves according to their location of origin, as is so often the case in Syria, with section leaders usually being informal community leaders from the place of origin. There is no electricity at a household level. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. Sanitation 2. NFI 3. Food 28

34 Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs There are 321 tents in the camp. The tent quality was reported to be bad and there is no site planning involved in their organization. In the surrounding areas there are approximately 350 families living in shrub land and makeshift shelters. There were no NFIs delivered at the time of assessment other than blankets, clothes, tents and hygiene kits. Because of the random allocation of tent space and lack of organization through sections, there is inconsistent and poor distribution of NFIs. WASH There is a well inside the camp belonging to the operational olive oil factory. Because the water is shared with the factory it is often irregular, and so the main water supply is from the 6 water trucks delivering l each day. There are no latrines as the camp was begun without any prior planning due to a rapid IDP increase in the area, making the camp an open defecation site with IDPs making makeshift pits very near tented areas. Food There was only an irregular delivery of food aid each day, with most IDPs buying their own food and living on irregular handouts. Each family cooks for themselves as there is no kitchen available. Health There is a new medical point onsite in the camp. At the time of assessment there was no medical point onsite and so little information about this point is 1. Medicines known. The main health concerns of the population 2. Insect repellent are skin disease (very high rates were reported of suspected Leish Maniasis) and the high rates of diarrhoea. Education There is no school onsite. There are 660 children aged from 6-13 in the camp. Shelter: 1.Increase of tents or families in surrounding areas. 2.Tent summerisation 3. Land gravelling Shelter: 1. Mattresses 1. Latrines 2. Increase water trucking 3. Diesel support for generator 1. Regular food basket distribution 1. School facilities 29

35 SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Al Salam Population: 3075 Households: 512 SPHERE min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 1 per people 6-38* 1 1 per 50 people per camp Non-functional water points in camp Non-functional latrines in camp 1 Comments # of children attending *depending on flow rate. SPHERE Minimum Total Water Points required: 5 SPHERE Total Latrines required: 40 20% Gap 33% Gap 80% Available 67% Available 30

36 Atmeh (a.k.a. Olive Tree) Camp Camp Management Type Camp Managers Estimated Population Population Growth NGO with militia support AT1 (Maram Foundation), support from AT2 and AT IDPS, 3534 HHs Rapidly increasing Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access POPULATION Kafr Janna, Idlib and Kafr Zeita, Hama Regular, unrestricted. No security incidents have been reported in the immediate area, and camp management is collaborative and uncontested. MALE FEMALE TOTAL ADULT NA NA NA CHILDREN 5-17 NA NA NA CHILDREN under 5 NA NA 3282 TOTAL NA NA FAMILIES NA NA 3534 Total number of families Female headed household Elderly headed households Number of widows (families) No of Unaccompanied/ separated children No of HH with disabled persons 3534 NA NA 374 NA 248 NA Orpha ns Camp management and registration Many IDPS living in the Atmeh area throughout 2012 eventually formed a camp in August of that year which was then aided by a number of local NGOs and INGOs. Atmeh is the oldest and largest camp along the border and lies next to one of the main humanitarian access point into North West Syria. The camp management has changed hands since the camps inception and is comprised of different organisations who work closely together, although not always in a well coordinated manner. The battalion headed by AT2, arranges the day to day affairs of the camp, organizing section leaders, distributions, security and ad hoc issues, and AT4 deal with INGO coordination and border access relations as well as protection issues within the camp; AT3 also deals with distribution within the camp. A registration process was set up in the camp and is ongoing. AT4 conduct a camp coordination meeting in Reyhanli assisted by an INGO. The camp management keeps close relations with the section leaders and despite the difficulty of organization maintains a registration list which is not always made available to INGOs operating in the camp, so a good estimate of population is difficult to obtain. There are 70 sections (each with a section leader), the sections are not easily navigable or delineated. Section leaders change rapidly leaving organization of distribution difficult to monitor. There are no community mobilization and complaints mechanisms in the camp; 31

37 however, uniquely, there are some strong programs aimed at protection needs of the vulnerable such as a women s centre and programs for youth. Their capacity is hugely overstretched however. Security is maintained by a battalion inside the camp. There is sometimes an antagonistic relationship between them and IDPs. Site planning No site planning was made when the camp was set up. The current and past camp management stakeholders also did not make contingency plans for the rapid growth in the camp s IDP population. The presence and expansion of the camp has caused friction with local landowners whose olive grove the camp lays in. Latrines, for example are not allowed to be built in certain populated areas leading to make shift pits being dug, adding to the unhygienic conditions in the camp. Residents have assembled themselves according to families and origins, which has contributed to overcrowding in certain areas while space (although not services) is abundant in others. After the Bab Al Hawa air strike, an unknown number of IDPs, thought to be thousands, fled Bab Al Hawa with make shift shelters to settle in Atmeh camp, but as yet are not involved in the distribution lists or registered as residents of the camp. Reportedly, many women and children do not use the latrines at night because of lack of security. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. WASH 2. Health 3. Food Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs There are 3815 tents in the camp which, being laid haphazardly without proper site planning, suffer from drainage issues. Water logging has also repeatedly made the soil unviable in the southern part of the camp, where IDPs still reside. the lack of proper participatory mechanisms has reportedly often resulted in NFIs not always meeting their intended user. WASH 70 water trucks supply the camp with 280,000l of water a day. 17, l bottles are also distributed per day. A well is also used to fill 5 tanks inside the camp, providing an additional 200,000l per day. IDPs reported long queuing times for water although these varied on the method of water gathering (i.e. Truck or tank) and/or area within the camp. There are 311 latrines in total, some of which are considered to be often non-functioning due to their hygienic condition. In addition a number of single and sometimes private latrines have been built by IDPs and local actors; the large majority of which are not maintained to a high standard. Latrines have also created conflict with the land owners of the olive grove that the camp is built in. Camp management also expressed concern over septic tanks filling soon. There are only 50 showers in the camps, although more are planned. Reportedly, women are not using them due to a lack of privacy. 32 Shelter: 1. Summerisation covers 2. Reallocation of crowded areas 3. Gravelling to help with drainage issues Shelter: 1. Hygiene kits 2. Female Hygiene Kits 3. Dustbins 1.Increase of water bottle distribution 2. Vacating septic tanks 3. Construction of sewage system

38 Food Approximately 17,000 bread baskets are delivered each day from Turkey. As this number falls short of the total population, there is a large kitchen which supplies food once a day for everyone usually consisting of rice or potatoes; recently shortages have been reported. On average 1 piece of bread is distributed per 2 persons per day. Those who have opportunities of employment in the camp purchase their own food and supplement their nutritional intake. The nutritional status of IDPs is widely diverse, with those most likely to gain employment are also often in a better position to ensure regular receipt of food distributions. Participatory mechanisms and community mobilization are highly recommended to reduce such disparity. Health There are three main medical points in Atmeh camp, two of which have 4 doctors and 4 nurses each, the third (Orient clinic) has unknown staffing. The perceived main constraints were the low levels of medicines available; for this reason most respondents reported referring to use Atmeh village hospital or the Orient clinic. Most IDPs reported skin disease and malnutrition (especially with under 5s) as their main concern. Education There are 3 schools operating in Atmeh camp, Al Ghoraba, a religious school with 200 students aged 7-15; Bait Al Thaura with 500 students aged 7-18 (which also runs computer classes); El Aude, a school with 235 children aged 6 to 12 and which 1. New larger kitchen and support for the existing kitchen 2. Increased Bread distribution 3. Food basket distribution 1. Medicine support 2. Medical Equipment 1. School facilities 2. School equipment uses the updated Syrian curriculum. There are also a number of child friendly spaces and psychosocial programs aimed at teenagers and women. 33

39 SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Atmeh Population: Households: 3534 SPHERE min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 1 per people ** 6 (plus 69 water trucking points daily) 1 per 50 people per camp Non-functional water points in camp 3 Comments NA Non-functional latrines in camp 3 # of children attending Exact number unknown, some were reportedly underutilized due to poor hygiene. Two of which have 4 doctors and four nurses staffing of the third clinic not known. *this does not include private and wet latrines perceived functionality of each latrine also changes on a regular basis as sometimes unclean latrines are considered to be non-functional by the population. **depending on flow rate. SPHERE Total Latrines required: % 50% Gap Available 34

40 Atmeh Situation Map 35

41 Bab Al Hawa Higher Camp Management Type Camp Managers Estimated Population National NGO + INGO BHH1 (Camp supervisor), BHH2 (Camp manager) INGO 2500 IDPs Population Growth Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access Diminished, after Bab Al Hawa airstrikes Kafr Zeita, Hama and Heish, Idlib Irregular and restricted. Highly militarised area. The camp is in the grounds of Bab Al Hawa, where many batallions claim their HQ, and are accountable to the court there. Security is provided by BHL8 Batallion (operational from Bab Al Hawa to Atmeh). No guns or militants are allowed inside the camp. Aside from this, there are no problems with the camp management who actively engage with INGOs in a collaborative and open manner. Camp Management and registration The camp was set up on roughly the by BHH1; although this camp has had significant turnover of camp management personnel over the last three months, there is still consistency and organization within the camp. This is largely due to the organisational capacity of the local NGO engaged in camp management as well as the level of support of an INGO. The camp is now managed by BHH1 (a national NGO) and BHH2 (an INGO). BHH1 deals with choosing families to live in the camp, tent allocation, tent distribution and the day to day running of the camp, as well as camp maintenance. He has only been in the camp for a few weeks. BHH2 represents the INGOs operating in the camp and is in charge of all distributions. He has been involved with the camp for 4 months, but is not present every day. The camp is distributed into 5 sections, each one with a section leader. The section leaders are responsible for supporting distributions and conflict resolution. Participatory mechanisms are well established and practiced, far above the normal standard in other IDP camps visited. The section leaders have been appointed by free and fair election where there was a vote of hands in public, and then an oath was sworn by each leader. In most other camps no such participation exists in any form. Section leaders also meet daily with the camp management. Their main concerns are hygiene, health and the increasing number of displaced people in the camp and surrounding areas. The INGO onsite staff includes: (all of them relatively new) Staff list: - Camp Director : BHH3 - responsible for onsite decision-making - Housing Supervisor : BHH4 responsible for registration - Financial Supervisor : BHH5 - Maintenance Supervisor : BHH6 - Catering : BHH7 - Warehouse man : BHH8 - Security officer : BHH9 36

42 Site planning The camp has grown to 420 tents. Relative to most other camps in the region, there is a good site planning in Bab Al Hawa Higher, as infrastructure and tents were placed before IDPs were allowed to enter the camp. Despite this, there is still an overcrowding of tents problem. Registration is conducted on arrival, with household registration/distribution cards that are distributed and used. IDPs are allocated tents within the camp grounds. Although IDPs are not arranged according to location of origin, they can change position once registered and often do. After the Bab Al Hawa airstrike on Tuesday 30 th of April, more than half of the population (3200 IDPs at that time) fled to camps in the Atmeh area (predominantly Atmeh camp itself), although most have not been given proper shelter and have not been included in the distribution lists. Upon their departure, vacant tents were occupied by other IDPs from the nearby areas that lacked proper shelter, some of whom were residing in the nearby mosque. Electricity is available for every tent for 3 hours a day, and the 300Kva generator is shared with the water pump for the nearby well. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. Health 2. WASH 3. NFIs Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs Most people live in large tents, which are densely packed into the camp, there are 20 in total. Some of the tents are suffering from wear and tear issues and are in need of replacement. WASH An offsite well with generator and pump, provides water to 2 water tanks (10,000l each), which in turn deliver water for six to eight hours a day. The reportedly sub-standard water provision capacity could be increased by adding an additional generator or increasing its capacity (currently only 6-8 hours of water can be pumped per day to the camp). The limited capacity is also due to the connection of Bab Al Hawa Higher water network to the Bab Al Hawa Lower water source. To supplement the resulting water shortage, there are regular water bottle distributions in this camp. Every 3 tents share a WASH centre, situated at the side of the camp and comprising of a shower and a toilet, locked with a padlock. There are 116 latrines and 116 showers in total onsite. Their conditions are relatively sanitary. Food An INGO provides a bread parcel every morning, while the onsite kitchen provides food for a second meal per day- usually rice, beans and potatoes. Each family receives rations and decides on whether to cook for themselves or eat Shelter: 1. Tent replacement for old tents NFIs: 1. Summerisation covers 2. Generator fuel 3. Hygiene Kits 1. Water treatment 2. New generator and fuel 1. Food baskets to diversify food intake and cooking fuel. from the communal kitchen. A lack of cooking fuel has been reported. Bread available: daily - 2 pieces; and 2 meals per day per person including other food types. 37

43 Health There is no onsite doctor although there are irregular visits of doctor from varying organisations and the nearest medical facility is less than 1km away. The closest hospital is Bab Al Hawa Hospital, which only has an Emergency Management unit. For general and maternity care, patients use Adana Hospital, although there is also a dispensary and medical point in Lower Bab Al Hawa. There were reportedly unusually high cases of: skin disease (suspected Leish Maniasis) and diarrhoea. Education There is one onsite religious school. The estimated percentage of children aged 6 14 in school is 75%. 1. New teaching curriculum and support 2. Added space for school 3. Stationary SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Bab Al Hawa Higher Population: 2500 Households: NA SPHERE min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 1 per people 5-31* 28 1 per 50 people per camp Non-functional water points in camp 0 Comments 75% Non-functional latrines in camp 1 # of children attending NA 0 0 Irregular visits from doctors from varying organizations, plus dispensary and medical point in Lower Bab Al Hawa providing medical staff visits *depending on flow rate. 38

44 Bab al Hawa Higher Situation Map 39

45 Bab Al Hawa Lower Camp Management Type None currently Camp Managers Previous camp managers included BHL1, BHL2, BHL3, BHL4, BHL5, BHL6 Estimated Population Approximately 4600 Population Growth Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access Rapid, Unregulated Growth Kafr Zeita 20%, Heish 35% Kafr Sejna 15%, Zahl Al Ghab 30%, mixed within the camp. Camp management and registration Irregular, highly restricted. the camp lies in a highly militarised area, where many batallions claim their HQ, and are accountable to the court there. Security is provided by AH1 who have intermittently been camp managers on occasion. Outside visitors are not always welcome. Overall camp management is weak and disorganised, with little understanding of protection issues, participatory mechanisms, registration and/or site planning. This is also due to the fact that camp management has changed hands many times, and is highly contested. Two battalions have provided camp management at different points in time, since its outset with little site planning and little coordination of outside actors to provide basic services. The latest camp managers, BHL1, left suddenly ; at the time of the assessment there was no camp management in Bab Al Hawa Lower. Consequently, section leaders have become the de facto camp managers (and are highly supported by the camp IDPs in their functions), with BHL1 still providing security, with a 19 people patrol outside the camp. It is likely that the camp management changes hands again in the near future. After the April Bab Al Hawa air raid, approximately 4000 IDPs fled the camp, most of whom are said to be in other IDP camps. Subsequent to their departure, many of the surrounding IDPs who had been living in makeshift shelters entered the camp to occupy the vacant tents. Camp management is a priority need in Bab Al Hawa Lower. Relevant structures (section leaders at the moment) could be provided with technical assistance coupled with overall assistance. Those agencies already engaged or preparing engagement in the camp should support training to the prevailing camp management system to maintain some standards of site planning, registration, and protection of IDPs. The sectoral issues listed below are due to a combination of lack of basic services and poor coordination, which prevents the little aid delivery to be utilized efficiently. Water and food are distributed in a disorganised fashion, resulting in long queues and common disparity of distribution, further depleting vulnerable individuals access to food and water. Site planning After a high intensity conflict period in Hama at the beginning of 2013, IDPs fled to Bab Al Hawa with the eventual aim to get into Turkey. The camp was originally a transition camp but has become a permanent dwelling for many. BHL7 battalion set up the camp on the 5th of 40

46 February; 5 weeks later BHL7 left and BHL1 took over camp management. In turn, BHL1 left on after friction with section leaders. The camp comprises approximately 700 tents and has no restriction on entry. As a result IDPs arrive with tents and place them anywhere, creating issues of space and access, accentuating site planning issues. Approximately 25 families per week were reported as arriving each week at time of assessment either settling with families in tents, or in the surrounding areas of the camp. Despite the disorganization within the camp the section system is strong, with section leaders acting de facto camp managers temporarily). There are 9 sections with 9 sections leaders. They were not elected and are well known men in their places of origin and in the camp. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. WASH (sanitation= 2. Health 3. Food Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs The camp comprises approximately 700 tents; the tents are insulated making them preferable to other tents in the summer months. Many IDP families have brought their own tents or constructed makeshift shelters, placing them haphazardly. Since the missile strike, many have left the camp and taken their tents with them. WASH The camp has no onsite well, however Bab Al Hawa Higher pumps 6 8 hours of water to the camp each day. Untreated water is trucked to the camp 3 times a day. Water bottle distribution has also been reported. Given the lack of latrines, the camp is an open defecation site. Many new IDPs in the periphery areas of the camp have started digging ad hoc pits for defecation near the tents in the camp, whilst many there use the surrounding areas for open defecation. There are 100 unfinished latrines inside the camp, but they are not utlised because of their unhygienic conditions. The latrines lack working septic tanks, do not have pits and are connected to an unfinished sewage network that is blocked - resulting in overspill. There is a reported concern that the high rate of illness and skin disease is a direct consequence of the lack of hygiene products. The camp has no showers / wash spaces. Food An international NGO provides daily bread parcel, so everyone should receive one piece of bread a day on average. There is no other food support. Given the lack of registration, food is distributed per tent. As a result, it is often shared amongst large Shelter: 1. New shelters NFIs: 1. Hygiene kits 2. Summer clothing 3. Female hygiene kits 1. Latrine maintenance and septic tank construction; further latrine construction 2. New generator and fuel and/or new borehole for the camp to provide constant access to water 3. Building of showers 1. Bread distribution 2. Food basket distribution and multiple families within each tent, which means not everyone ends with the same amount of food. 41

47 Health The camp has an onsite medical centre with extremely limited capabilities, as well as a dispensary which is in the process of being established. The highly unhygienic standards in the camp have resulted in a high rate of diarrhoea, skin disease and respiratory disease. High levels of suspected Leish Maniasis were reported during the assessment. Education There is no school in the camp, despite the high proportion of children. Behavioural issues associated with psychological trauma and idleness were reported during the assessment. 1. Children s vaccinations 2. Disease surveillance in the camp. Due to the extremely poor hygiene conditions, untreated water and high population density there is a high risk for outbreak, which is of concern to the camp populace. 1. School facilities SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Bab Al Hawa Lower Population: 4600 Households: NA SPHERE 1 per people min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 9-57* 3 1 per 50 people per camp Non-functional water points in camp 1 Comments 0 Non-functional latrines in camp 0 # of children attending (unfinished, no connection to pit or septic tank or considered unhygienic and non-usable) Dispensary is being established; visits of medical staff *depending on flow rate. SPHERE Minimum Water Points: 9 SPHERE Total Latrines required: 92 33% 67% Gap 42 Available 100% Gap

48 Bab al Hawa Lower Situation Map 43

49 Bab Al Salameh Camp Management Type Camp Managers Local Relief Agency (ex-sarc) BS1 Estimated Population Population Growth Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access Stable and controlled NA Regular and unrestricted. Near the border with Kilis with reported security incidents. Camp management and registration BS1, the camp manager, is from Azaz and previously worked with the SARC. The camp management is responsive to outside parties who bring aid. The camp has a site plan; however this has been difficult to maintain in all the sections. One obstacle has been the stream of sewage running from Kilis camp, which has contaminated one well, and threatens to do so with another. A formal registration system was reported but no evidence provided of this; tents are allocated on a first-come-first-served basis. The BS2 battalion operates security for the camp and have a base 500m away from the camp. they are on occasion involved with solving internal disputes. Guns are seldomly allowed inside the camp. Site planning The camp was established on the 15 th of August, At the time a SARC employee was working with the camp. BS1 then broke away from SARC and started the camp management. The camp has now grown to 8 sections, with section leaders that are selected and fired at the behest of the camp management. The section leaders organise distribution, while conflict resolution remains with the remittances of the nearby battalion, which is said to have a good relationship with the IDPs. The section leaders meet with camp management frequently and discuss their concerns. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. Health 2. NFI 3. Nutrition 44

50 Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs There are approximately 2000 tents in the camp; they are well organized is one section but less so in others. The lack of drainage and the gradient of the camp have caused flooding inside of some tents. There was a reported shortage of around 2500 mattresses and blankets. WASH The camp is served 2 wells - one onsite and one offsite. These feed an internal camp water network connected to many water points and providing 76,000l of water per day, approximately 6.8l per person per day (less than half that required by SPHERE standards). There is also a non functioning well onsite, which was abandoned as contaminated by a stream of sewage coming from Kilis camp; there are concerns that another well may also be contaminated in the future. The camp has 25 latrine blocks, each with 6 latrines and 6 showers (150 latrines and showers in total). 36 latrines were non-functioning. Food Each individual receives 1 piece of bread per day; a kitchen also provides potatoes or rice as a second meal of the day. It was reposted that the portions are not sufficient. Health There are three medical points in Bab Al Salame camp with a total of 2 doctors and six nurses in both; details of 1. Medicine supplies the third medical point were not accessible. Reported concerns include Leish Maniasis, skin disease and diarrhoea. Education There are no schools in the camp although there are some child friendly spaces for children from Shelter: 1. Shelter provision 2. Gravelling to help with drainage issues NFIs: 1. Mattresses 2. Blankets 3. Hygiene kits 1. Increasing number of toilets 2. Support for more drinking water 1. Increase food per day 2. Increase bread distributions 1. School facilities 45

51 SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Bab al Salameh Population: Households: NA SPHERE min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 1 per people * 4 1 per 50 people per camp Non-functional water points in camp 3 Comments 0 Non-functional latrines in camp 0 # of children attending Two of which have 2 doctors and six nurses, details of the third one are not accessible. *depending on flow rate. SPHERE Minimum Water Points required: 25 SPHERE Total Latrines required: % Gap 45% Available 55% Gap Available 84% 46

52 Bab al Salameh Situation Map 47

53 Jarablous Camp Management Type Camp Managers Estimated Population Local J1 Camp administrator; J2- Director 718 IDPs, 108 HHs Population Growth Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access Stable and controlled Sfere Marje, Aleppo, and various parts of Ar Raqqa Regular and unrestricted POPULATION MALE FEMALE TOTAL ADULT CHILDREN CHILDREN under TOTAL FAMILIES NA NA 108 Camp management and registration The camp management is well organized and maintains good and frequent relations with the IDPs; camp management is directly involved in distributions. The camp managers are J1, a SARC employee and Jarablous local, and J2. There are no sections or participatory mechanisms, as they are deemed unnecessary due to the small size of the camp and close interaction between the camp manager and the populace; however there is land identified for expansion and so the need for such mechanisms as well as further community mobilization may grow. The growth of the camp also depends on the levels of services in the camp. Security is maintained by a local battalion who do not enter the camp. Site planning The camp arose to alleviate the inflow of IDPs to the collective centres in the town. Due to its small size, the camp, although not sectioned or well site planned, does not suffer from overcrowding or some of the usual consequences of lack of registration and community mobilization. There is electricity supplied by the local town for 2 hours a day. It should be noted that at time of writing the camp was experiencing a rapid influx of IDPs - these numbers are not assimilated into the results shown in this report. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. Health 2. Sanitation 3. Food 48

54 Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs There are 153 tents in the camp with an area ready for camp extension if more shelters become available. In the proximity of the camp a school hosts 180 IDP families. However, it is not necessarily the case that IDPs want to move from / to the collective centre as conditions and access to services are considered poor in both. WASH The camp is served by water mains from Jarablous town. An ongoing dispute between the towns of Jarablous and Membej often results in water shortage as Membej regularly cuts off the water supply. Despite the fact the town is near the Al Furat river, the shortage of diesel leaves the town and camp short of water in such occasions. The camp has a well which is not used because of lack of a generator. The camp comprises 20 latrines and 20 showers, all of them functioning but in very poor hygienic standards because of the lack of water. Food There are irregular food baskets delivered to the camp containing rice, beans, oil, sugar, tea and 1. Regular food baskets canned fish. As the deliveries are irregular IDPs reported a lack of opportunity to plan and ration properly, resulting in lack of food, with the exception of bread. Health There is no onsite medical facility in the camp or in the town. Most IDPs go to Membej for health care, 35 km away. Very high case levels of measles were reported. Education Shelter: 1. Summerisation of tents NFIs: 1. Hygiene kits 2. Baby supplies 3. Fuel for cooking 1. Pump and generator for well 2.440l of fuel per month was reported to be the amount to supply water to the whole town of Jarablous 1. Vaccinations 2. Onsite medical facility 3. Medicines There is one school in the town catering for the 400 IDP children from the camp and from the nearby collective centres. The school is run by local volunteers. School attendance was promoted by an order from the camp management that to stay 1. School equipment desks and in the camp residents must send their children to stationary school. 49

55 SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Jarablous Population: 718 Households: 108 SPHERE min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 1 per people 1-8* 2 1 per 50 people per camp Non-functional water points in camp 0 Comments 100% 0 (there is a school outside the camp in the town of Jarablous) Non-functional latrines in camp # of children attending all 0 0 Most of the IDPs go to Membej to receive medical care, 5km away. *depending on flow rate. 50

56 Jarablous Situation Map 51

57 Lattakia (Yamadia) and surrounding areas Camp Management Type Camp Managers Estimated Population Population Growth Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access Locals Y IDPs in the main camp (+ 750 in surrounding areas), 200 HHs Stable and controlled Jesser Al Shughur, Idlib and Lattakia Restricted. Main point of access is from Yiyladaghi, Turkey. Areas surrounding the camp are high intensity conflict areas with daily aerial bombardments. The camp management was found uncollaborative to information sharing. POPULATION MALE FEMALE TOTAL ADULT 672 CHILDREN CHILDREN under TOTAL 1100 FAMILIES 200 Camp management and registration The camp was set up on the 15 th of March 2013, initially consisting of 100 tents hosting 100 families. The camp management is organized and has practiced site planning and, unusual for Syrian camps, community mobilization. The management maintains good and frequent relations with the IDPs. The camp manager is Y1, supported by a team of local stakeholders who formed committees (medical committee, education committee, relief committee, population and statistics committee, communications committee and security committee). All of the committees are made up of IDPs but were selected by the camp manager. Despite the unusual high level of organization in the camp there are little services because of the camp is fairly new, not part of the Atmeh constellation of camps and there is little NGO presence in the camp. There are close relations with the local committee of coordination of Lattakia who provide FSA guards to the camp. Site planning Following an IDP influx in April 100 more tents were donated and the camp population increased. There is still land available for a camp expansion but no funds for land rental or shelters are available at present. The camp is surrounded by 2 groupings of tents hosting IDPs (one of 74 tents and one of 76 tents) located as far as 500m away from the camp. These scattered informal settlements do not receive services from the camp and are not considered to be under the camp management. The surrounding areas of tents have their own leaders. They are organized amongst themselves, largely through extended family links. They have built their own latrines and drink from the river and get food from ad hoc distributions. There is currently a dispute between Lattakia camp and the informal settlements as the latter would like to be integrated in the camp coordination system to benefit from their regular, although insufficient, humanitarian assistance. 52

58 Within Lattakia camp there is a well-organized camp structure with 2 sections, and a third under construction. They do not have section leaders and liaise directly with the communications committee to pass messages to the camp management. This committee also performs registration and allocates tents to new comers, as well as providing information for proper and organized food distribution. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. Access to Water 2. Health 3. Food Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs There are 200 tents in the camp (and 150 in the surrounding areas); the tents of Lattakia camp are laid on unsuitable grounding and therefore suffer from drainage issues, which are accentuated by the poor tent quality. Hygiene kits had recently been distributed and most IDPs were noted to have mattresses and blankets. WASH At present 500l of bottled water is distributed to Lattakia camp per day, leaving the camp residents with less than 0.5l per day and those in the surrounding areas with nothing. Most IDPs collect the majority or all of their drinking water from the 3m wide river. In addition to causing clear health risks, river water is expected to dry in the summer; it is urgently recommended that alternative sourcing is found. An offsite well approximately 700m away could be exploited if a pump and generator are provided and run. The camp has 24 latrines and 16 showers, with 8 additional latrines in construction. It was observed that construction of latrines was close to the river, which also had a damaged sceptic tank besides it. Another septic tank was in construction. In the surrounding areas, many ad hoc pit latrines were observed, as well as open defecation, notably in the river. Food The Lattakia coordination committee, a local entity delivers monthly food baskets for the camp and the surrounding tents. The food basket is made up of rice, beans, grains and groats, oil, tea, sugar and canned fish. It was reported to be sufficient although camp residents were concerned about Shelter: 1. Replacement of tents 2. Organisation of surrounding area tents 3. Gravelling to help with drainage issues NFIs: 1. Clothes and shoes 2. Baby Supplies 3. Ongoing Hygiene kit distribution 1 and piping for the well or construction of a new borehole and water system 2. Construction of latrines (if the camp expands) 1 Increase food basket distribution 2. Support for kitchen 3. Flour distribution the future because of (1) nearby conflict affecting supply routes and (2) continued influx of IDPs creating additional demand. Each family has a wooden stove and cooks for itself. Stoves create a concern for fire safety. There is also a Tannor (a Syrian traditional style) oven in the camp being used communally. A shared kitchen is in construction. 53

59 Health The camp has one medical point with 1 doctor and two nurses, all IDPs themselves. An INGO provides medical visits on a weekly basis for checkups and medicine dispensing. Yamadia hospital (1km away) is used by IDPs for emergency and maternity care. No dire health concerns were reported by the IDPs, although levels of skin disease, and diarrhoea are frequent and high. The main concern of the medical staff was the lack of capacity to deal with serious medical conditions in the area. Education There is one new school in the camp with 225 children and IDP teaching staff. SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Lattakia (Yamadia) and surrounding areas Population: 1100 in camp plus 750 in the surrounding areas equals 1850 Households: 200 SPHERE min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 1 per people 3-23* 0 1 per 50 people per camp Non-functional water points in camp 1 Comments 100% Non-functional latrines in camp 1 # of children attending 225 SPHERE Total Latrines Required: 37 1 Medical supplies 2. Medical Equipment 1 School equipment desks and stationary 0 8 (under construction, in the surrounding areas) 1 doctor and 2 nurses, IDPs themselves. There are also INGO visits on a weekly basis. *depending on flow rate. 65% 35% Gap Available 54

60 Qah Camp Management Type Camp Managers Estimated Population Population Growth Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access Local businessman, partial landowner Q IDPs, 840 HHs Stable and controlled Kafr Naboul, Idlib and Al Artab, Aleppo Regular and unrestricted. despite the relatively high INGO presence in Qah, there have been reports of antagonistic behavior towards INGO staff. Total number of families Female headed households Elderly headed households Number of widows (families) No of Unaccompanied/ separated children No of HH with disabled persons Orphans NA NA NA NA NA Camp management and registration Ensured by a group of local businessmen, the camp management had remained fairly stable throughout the first few months of the camp. In April as a result of tension with other camp managers Q1 assumed the sole camp manager role. The shift has resulted in a reduced level of support from some INGOs. A registration system was reported but not shared by the camp management. The camp is divided into 6 sections, each with a leader selected by strongmen from within their section. Section leaders distribute aid and work closely with the camp management. No participatory mechanisms or community mobilisation exist in the camp. Security is managed by a local battalion associated with the camp management, although guns are rarely seen inside the camp. IDP volunteers provide security within the camp itself. Site planning The camp was one of the first to be established in the area but has maintained its population size very steady since inception, and thus levels of services have not suffered due to the upsurge in IDPs seeking residence in the area. There is no electricity in the camp. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. Sanitation 2. Shelter 3. Food 55

61 Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs There are 750 tents in the camp. The tents have been there for many months and many are now worn. Drainage is reported as a concern in the camp. WASH One offsite well, situated in Q1 s property, provides water to the camp s three 20,000l tanks. Due to the fact that it is shared with the private owner and that piping is uphill, water shortages are reported. 1750l of bottled water is also delivered to the camp each day. There are 67 latrines, 63 of them functioning. There condition is said to be good compared to most other camps. There are also 19 male showers and 19 female showers without doors. Food Each person receives 1.5 pieces of bread per day, and 3500 meals are delivered each day. There is a communal kitchen. Food is considered to be sufficient but of limited variety. Health There is a well-serviced medical point in the camp, with two full time doctors and three nurses. The nearby Orient hospital - roughly 2km away provides free health care to outpatients. The main reported concerns are skin disease, especially Leish Maniasis and diarrhoea, Education Many children are reported as not attending the school in Qah village because of issues with the host community; a new school is being set up within the camp. Shelter: 1. Summerisation of tents 2. Replacement of old tents NFIs: 1. Kitchen supplies 2. Female hygiene kits 3. Baby supplies 1. Doors for showers 2. Access to water 1. Food basket distribution 2. Fuel for cooking 1. Generator for the medical point 2. Oxygen cylinder 1. School equipment desks and stationary 56

62 SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Qah Population: 5900 Households: 840 SPHERE min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 1 per people 12-74* 5 1 per 50 people per camp Non-functional water points in camp 1 Comments NA Non-functional latrines in camp 1 # of children attending 0 4 Two doctors and three nurses NA, also a school in construction, and one in the town. *depending on flow rate. SPHERE Minimum Water Points required: 12 SPHERE Total Latrines required:118 42% Gap 47% Gap 58% Available 53% Available 57

63 Qah Situation Map 58

64 Taibah Camp Management Type Camp Managers Estimated Population Population Growth Origins of Majority of Camp Residents Humanitarian Access IDP leaders T1 and T2 702 IDPs Stable and controlled Kafr Janna, Idlib and Kafr Zeita, Hama Regular, unrestricted. No security incidents have been reported in the immediate area, and camp management is collaborative and uncontested. POPULATION MALE FEMALE TOTAL ADULT CHILDREN CHILDREN under TOTAL FAMILIES NA NA NA Camp management and registration The camp was founded on the 15 th of February. The camp management is organized and stable, despite the lack of experience and relations with outside actors. Five individuals, IDPs from Hama, are engaged in camp management. One is based in Reyhanli dealing with NGO communications. One deals with media issues. One deals with warehouse management; and the other two directly manage the camp. Population information is updated upon new arrival of families; and is easily monitored as the camp is small and contained with a controlled intake of IDP families. Despite this, it was noticed that camp management tended to inflate population figures and to down playi planned INGO activities in order to attract more aid to the camp. There is gated security for the camp, with armed individuals guarding the entrance; no guns are allowed in the camp. The camp management says that there is no formal relationship with the governing battalion in the area. Families in the camp come predominantly from Hama and areas in Idlib. They come from around 5 different villages and predominantly from Al Bueda village, Hama. There is fixed tent allocation, with little movement of tents or families between tents. This system of allocation of families not according to place of origin has led to an easily navigable and accessible camp, without notable frictions between the populace. Rather than the more common section leader system, people are represented by 5 village representatives who operate distribution and manage small conflicts. The representatives represent individuals according to place of origin, and reportedly do so effectively. They were selected because of previous high standings in their respective communities. The camp management meets village representatives daily as well as individuals from the camp on a regular basis; their primary concerns are water 59

65 Site planning The camp s land is rented from a local land-owner for 150,000SP per month. The contract is binding by local Sharia courts. The site is graveled and fits 92 tents. While there has been effective site planning for shelter, WASH services are sub-standards and problematic.one well is for example located in an open defecation area. There is extendable extra land, and plans are underway to expand the camp in the days of publishing this report. Although there are latrines and showers in nearby Al Karamah camp, women and children do not go after dark as there is no lighting or electricity. PRIORITY SECTORS IDENTIFIED BY KEY INFORMANTS: 1. Sanitation 2. Food 3. Health Sector Analysis Shelter and NFIs There are 92 tents in the camp, which are new, well maintained and organized; there are many IDPs in the surrounding shrub land without proper shelter. WASH WASH conditions in Taibah are very poor: there is little access to water and no latrines (since the assessment latrines are reportedly in construction and some have been completed). The camp has two wells, of which one is in use. The wells should be tested, as they lay in areas of open defecation and are planned for further use. The well in use has a small pump pumping water directly to taps laid 2 by-2 two or three tents for 24 hours a day. Food There is bread distribution in Taibah camp, but it is very limited. Bread is distributed by a local bakery 1. Bread distribution that receives flour distributions from various 2. Food basket distribution sources. The food is reported to be below the required levels, and IDPs frequently sell their belongings and NFIs to pay for additional food. Health Orient Hospital, 3km away, is reported to be wellequipped, free for the population to use but without surgical capacity. Camp residents also use the medical point in the adjacent camp Al Karamah with 6 staff.. The main reported concern in Taibah is skin disease. Shelter: 1. New shelters 2. Gravelling of extendable area to provide space for camp extension and approximately 100 new shelters. The camp management is willing to rent the land NFIs: 1. Hygiene kits 2. Clothing and shoes New generator and fuel and/or new borehole for the camp to provide constant access to water 2. Water treatment 3. Building of showers 1. Children s vaccination 2. Protection against skin disease 3. Disease surveillance in the camp. Due to the extremely poor hygiene conditions, untreated water and high population density there is a high risk for outbreak, which is of concern to the camp populace, for this reason disease surveillance is recommended.

66 Education There are 250 school-aged children in the camp, but no school. Land has been allocated for a school construction, but money to rent the land 1. School facilities and for constructing facilities is needed. The school in Al Karamah camp does not have the capacity to intake all of the Taibah children. SPHERE Indicator Benchmarks Camp: Taibah Population: 702 Households: NA SPHERE min. water points p.p SPHERE min. water point per camp, total Actual functioning water points in camp SPHERE min. latrines p.p SPHERE min. latrines per camp, total Actual functioning latrines in camp SPHERE min. health centers per camp Actual health centers in camp Est. % of children going to school Actual # of schools in camp 1 per people 1-8* NA 1 per 50 people 14 NA 1 per camp Non-functional water points in camp 0 Comments NA Non-functional latrines in camp 10 # of children attending 0 Water network close to completion Latrines close to completion Orient hospital is 3km away *depending on flow rate. 61

67 Taibah Situation Map 62