Cash WG Meeting – Ukraine
26 May 2017
Discussion / Action Points/decisions
Agenda:
  1. Update from the previous meeting
  2. Update on cash discussions 2016 HRP annual report, Quarterly dashboard, field level)
  3. Presentation on the MEB calculation and methodology
  4. AOB – status/way forward on SCOPE

Update from the previous meeting – a separate document on action points and feedback will be shared with partners.
Update on cash discussions:
  1. 2016 HRP annual report – included a one pager on cash transfer programming which informs on numbers reached, total amount distributed based on data shared by cash partners – both HRP/non- HRP actors, summary of MPC monitoring findings and challenges faced. Numbers reached 54,000 people with approximately 1.6M. The main challenge in 2016 was a lack of MPC common indicators, which made it difficult to assess the impact of MPC. This challenge has been addressed in the strategic planning for 2017. Attached is the one pager.
  2. MPC operational plan: deadline for comments is 2 June for potential endorsement at the next CWG meeting.
  3. Quarterly Dashboard – the update is based on achievements made against the HRP MPC objectives and indicators. Focus was made on carry-over projects from 2016, the Avdiivka crisis (one-off response), and projects from some non-HRP partners. However, the lack of funding for MPC HRP partners means the needs of the most vulnerable is unattended, and may result to further erosion in the standard of living of those identified.The assistance reached 16,425 people with approximately USD 916,000. Attached is the one pager.
  4. Areas of concern from the field – (a) taxation – attempts to address taxation ofhumanitarian assistance still continues to be felt in the field, with some programmes such as cash for work being targeted. (b)Co-chair of the CWG - request were made for an aid agency tovolunteerin co-chairing CWG meetings at the field level and ultimately chair meetings in the absence of the Inter-agency cash coordinator.
Two concernson taxation were raised.Firstly,lengthy project registration process (3-6 months) with the Ministry of Economy by I/NGOs, which delayed project implementation. NGOsrisk being taxed if projects are not registered. Granted project registration did not carry retroactive effect, meaning that the lengthy registration process also shortens project implementation time. Secondly,humanitarian assistance exposes beneficiaries to be subject to taxation..
The following points were recommended to be key advocacy points on taxation:
  • Government should allow retroactive effect of project registration;
  • Project registration process should be faster;
  • In light of lengthy project registration requirement, donor organizations should try to minimize administrative delays in contract signing to allow maximum time for implementation.
Presentation on the MEB calculation and methodology(please refer to the MEB 2017 methodology paper): the recommended MPC transfer value of 720 UAH is endorsed by the CWG participants. / The NGO Forum technical working group together with ECHO and ACTED will convene a meeting on the 7th June in coming up with advocacy notes that would further be shared with the HCT in the expanded HCT meeting scheduled for the 15th of June.
AOB
  1. Status/way forward on SCOPE – WFP informed the meeting that the SCOPE platform is ready for roll-out, and have signed an MOU with UNICEF to use in their projects. However, in the absence of a SCOPE focal point in the country the platform is not in a position to take off.

Cash Working Group, Ukraine