Voucher Distributions

Contents

Introduction	3

Type of resource transfer	5

In-kind	5

Vouchers	5

Cash	5

Advantages of cash and voucher distributions	6

Disadvantages of cash and voucher distributions	6

Appropriateness of different type’s resource transfers	8

Where cash and vouchers are an appropriate response	8

Where in-kind distributions are an appropriate response	8

Cost effectiveness	9

Gender issues	9

Security	10

Corruption	10

Voucher distribution – comment elements	12

Programme cycle	12

Initial needs assessment	12

Targeting and beneficiary selection criteria	14

Register beneficiaries	15

Design and procurement of vouchers	18

Deciding the sizes of the individual distribution	20

Design monitoring and evaluation procedures	20

Establishing procedures for managing complaints	24

Selecting the date of the distribution	24

Co-ordination with other programme departments	24

Audit	25

Voucher fairs	26

Voucher and shops	29

References	33

Appendixes	34

Introduction

This document is largely based on the experience gained by GOAL’s team in its response to the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan and aims to discuss:

Options for transferring resource to a community in an emergency situation.

The appropriateness of the different methods of resource transfer to different situations.

Expanding the initial assessment of an emergency to allow consideration of cash or voucher transfers.

The issues surrounding the implementation of a vouchers scheme.

While traditionally international agencies have responded to emergencies by distributing in-kind commodities, other options for transferring resources to beneficiaries are available, and depending on the situation and objectives of the programme may be more appropriate.

The development of alternative methods of resource transfer has come about as a result of humanitarian agencies gaining a better understanding of the needs of communities affected by emergencies. The traditional view of emergencies, held by humanitarian agencies, is that an emergency results in the unavailability of certain commodities which the community requires to meet its basic needs. Traditionally agencies have responded by supplying the commodities directly to the communities through in-kind distributions.

Experience has shown that in some emergencies the problem facing a community is that they cannot afford to buy the commodities they need to meet their basic needs, not that such commodities are not available. Where markets are still functioning, there is an opportunity for an agency to assist, through cash or voucher distributions, the community to buy the commodities they need rather than supply them directly through in-kind distributions.

With in-kind distributions all beneficiaries receive the same items regardless of their individual circumstances. While efforts can be make to ensure the appropriateness of the items distributed, through consultation with the community, it is difficult for an in-kind distribution system to match perfectly with individual needs. If the items supplied by an agency through an in-kind distribution do not match the beneficiary’s needs then the beneficiary will sell, at a discount, the items they received to raise cash to purchase the items they have prioritised.

Cash and, to a lesser extent, voucher distributions recognise that within an affected community individuals have unique needs which they are in the best position to prioritise.

While vouchers give people more choice than traditional in-kind distributions, the beneficiaries’ choice can be limited. As with in-kind distribution there the question of whether the agency can ensure that it has a sufficient understanding of the local environment to be certain that its voucher scheme includes the commodities which the beneficiaries want. If it does not, then the beneficiaries will set up a parallel market where either;

Vouchers will be traded for cash. or

The goods purchased with the vouchers will be resold.

As with in-kind distributions either option will result in the beneficiary receiving less than the full value of the voucher.

Types of resource transfer

In-kind

In-kind distribution is the distribution of resources where the implementing agency directly supplies a restricted range of commodities to the beneficiaries. In-kind distributions normally involve the distribution of the same commodities to all beneficiaries. The objective of in-kind distributions is to provide beneficiaries with certain basic commodities which the agency, following consultation with the beneficiaries, consider necessary to meet their basic needs.

Vouchers

A Voucher distribution is the distribution of resources through the use of coupons, with a pre-ordained value, redeemable with both traders and retailers in shops or with trader, middle men or local producers in local markets, fairs or other events organized for the purpose. Vouchers can be either cash vouchers or commodity vouchers.

Cash voucher: a voucher which can be exchanged for a range of commodities up to a specific value.

Commodity voucher: a voucher which can be exchanged for a fixed quantity of named commodities.

Cash

Cash can be distributed as either a cash grant or cash for work.

A cash grant is the distribution of free cash as a relief item to targeted beneficiaries. Cash grants are usually given with one of two objectives in mind:

To help the beneficiaries meet there basics needs,

To help the beneficiaries re-establish their livelihoods.

Cash for work (CFW) is the distribution of cash in payment for work that is done either on individual projects or on public work schemes.

Cash distributions either in the form of a grant or through CFW have 3 objectives:

To assist in meeting basic needs and improve livelihoods by improving purchasing power.

To provide an asset for a community or a household. Ideally this asset should improve the livelihoods or environment of the community as a whole.

To contribute to economic recover by injecting cash into the local market.

In some situations a mixture of different methods of resource transfer can work together to complement each other as highlighted by GOAL’s Pakistan programme which used 3 methods of resource transfer to assist the communities affected by the October 2005 earthquake.

In-kind distribution of Corrugated Galvanized Iron sheeting and Plastic sheeting.

Distribution of cash vouchers, redeemable for a range of goods in local shops.

Cash for work, clearing rubble from markets and schools.

Advantages of cash and vouchers

Choice: cash and, to a lesser extent, vouchers allow individual beneficiaries the personal freedom to choose what commodities they can purchase. Vouchers and cash allow for the fact that beneficiaries are not identical and that their needs and priorities vary from individual to individual.

Cost effectiveness: with cash and voucher distributions the cost of procuring and transporting the commodities required shifts from the agency to the traders. If the trader has a more efficient procurement and transport system than the agency this will result in a net saving.

Injecting cash into the local market: this can have positive knock on effects on local economic activity. The scale of the benefit to the economy will depend on several factors including the size of the cash injection compared to the size of the economy and how much of the commodities purchased with the cash or vouchers are produced locally.

Timely: if markets are operating they may be able to procure and transport the commodities required by the beneficiaries faster than an agency. In the period immediately after the onset of an emergency an agency has to invest time and resources in establishing a supply pipe line. Local traders may be able to continue using the same supply lines they used before the on set of the emergency.

Maximise resources retained by the beneficiary: with many traditional commodity distributions the reality is that the beneficiaries sell a portion of the commodities distributed to raise cash to purchase other essential needs. The end result is a combination of cash and commodity transfer, albeit an inefficient one.

Disadvantages of cash and vouchers

Targeting beneficiaries: because cash and, to a lesser extent, vouchers are seen as more attractive than tradition in-kind resource transfers, selection of beneficiaries could be more problematic. In all distributions there will be incidents of community members who do not meet the programme’s selection criteria being included on the beneficiary list. This issue can only be tackled through community involvement and proper monitoring and verification of the beneficiary lists by the agency.

Inflation: an increase in demand may result in a price increase if the market is not strong enough to increase the level of supply. While inflation would have a negative affect on the programme’s beneficiaries, the worst affected would be those who did not benefit from the cash or voucher distribution as they would have to pay the higher prices out of unchanged resources. Cash provided through cash or voucher schemes may be dwarfed by remittances or Government schemes and as such may have a minor affect on inflation.

Security risk: All distribution programmes have to consider the security risk of the beneficiaries, in particular when they are leaving the distribution point. Although this is true whether the beneficiaries have received NFIs, vouchers or cash, because cash is sometimes seen as a more attractive commodity than NFIs and therefore the risk of robbery may be greater.

Gender: there is a concern that given the position of women in many traditional societies they will not be able to control cash or vouchers distributed as readily as they are perceived to control food and NFIs. As any commodity distributed is convertible into cash, normally at a large discount, any head of a household who wished to divert resources away from the family could do so. Considerations of the prevailing domestic power dynamics must be taken into account when planning and implementing any resource transfer programme. Procedures such as registering females as the head of house hold may help strengthen the position of women in discussions on how to use the resources distributed.

Appropriateness

Before an agency can be in a position to consider which method of resource transfer or which mix of methods is most suitable for the situation? The initial assessment of the situation on the ground must allow an agency to answer the following questions.

What are the commodities which a community requires to meet it basic needs that it can not access?

Are the markets operating and accessible?

Are the commodities the community needs available in the market, in sufficient quantities and at a reasonable price?

Are the traders able and willing to respond to an increase in demand?

What are the risks that the injection of cash into the local market will cause inflation?

Cash and vouchers are an appropriate response where:

Before the emergency the programme’s beneficiaries purchased a significant proportion of essential goods and services from the markets.

The commodities needed by the beneficiaries are available in the local market or can be quickly supplied through market mechanisms.

The market can respond to the additional demand created by a cash or voucher distribution without significant inflation.

The local market is competitive.

The beneficiaries have safe access to the market at a minimal cost.

There is a working financial network to facilitate the transfer of cash.

Vouchers can be used when cash is seen as not possible or appropriate because of security fears about the use of cash or because of market weakness, or to ensure that the community purchases particular types of goods or commodities,

In-kind distributions are a more appropriate response where:

The local markets are not working and are unable to restart operations in the short term.

An increased demand in the market, caused by distributing cash or vouchers, would result in significant inflation.

The local market lacks competition, either due to a few dominant traders or through traders combining to manipulate prices.

The beneficiaries can not safely access the market.

The cost to the beneficiaries of accessing the markets is disproportionally high in comparison to the value of the cash or vouchers being distributed.

There are no working financial networks.

Other issues which have to be considered when evaluating which methods of resource transfer are the most appropriate:

Cost effectiveness

Gender issues

Security

Corruption

Cost-effectiveness

With in-kind distributions the agency bears the cost and hassle of procuring and transporting the goods to the final distribution point. With cash and voucher distributions the cost of procurement and transport is the responsibility of the trader. If the trader can source the goods cheaper or has access to a more efficient transport system than the agency, then utilizing the trader’s supply pipe lines will result in a saving which can be passed on to the beneficiaries.

Voucher programmes require more planning and preparation than other types of resource transfer and as a result may be more expensive to operate. Voucher programmes need to allocate resources to:

Assessing the capacity of local traders and markets.

Putting in place agreements with local traders.

Preparing the vouchers.

Distributing the vouchers

Insuring that the vouchers are spent in accordance with the programme guidelines.

Paying the local traders for redeemed vouchers.

The extra cost of a voucher distribution over an in-kind distribution has to be off set against the extra choice afforded to the beneficiary. The answer to the question, “is the extra administrative burden and costs of a voucher system, as against a cash distribution, worthwhile”, will depend on the particular situation and appropriateness and feasibility of an alternative.

Gender issues

When planning and implementing a resource transfer programme, consideration must be given to how the form of resource transfer interacts with the power dynamics of the household.

During the post distribution evaluation of GOAL’s Pakistan voucher programme, the feedback from women’s focus groups was that women on the programme preferred vouchers rather then cash. The women reported that they had an input into how the vouchers were spent, an input they believed they would not have had if cash had been distributed. Even though similar findings have been reported from other programmes, in most cases evaluations have found that women are not especially disadvantaged by cash distribution programmes. Most evaluations have reported that the use of the cash received was discussed and agreed between men and women within the household.

Procedures such as registering females as the head of household may help strengthen the position of women in discussions on the use of the resources distributed. Oxfam has found that when women are the direct recipients of cash they can gain a greater share of household income, which subsequently increases their status within communities and gave them greater decision-making authority within the household

Security

With in-kind distributions, the payment for the goods and transport can be made through cheques or bank transfers in the safety of the capital office. With cash or voucher distributions more financial transactions have to take place closer to the field.

A cash distribution requires the agency to take relatively large amounts of cash to scattered distribution points. As the community has to be sensitised as to the date of the distributions it will always become common knowledge on what dates the agency is moving cash. Creative use of existing financial mechanisms may be needed to find ways to deliver cash safely. The range of financial networks available will vary from situation to situation; most situations will have some form of financial network.

In the case of vouchers, the payments are directly to the individual trader and are fewer but larger than in the case of cash distributions. Payments to traders can be better controlled and a wider range of options is available to the agency, such as:

Cheque

Transfer to bank account

Transfers through the Hawala system

Given the relative sizes of payments it should be possible to avoid direct cash payments to traders.

The security of the beneficiaries also has to be considered when deciding on which type of distribution to use. With all types of distributions there is a risk that beneficiaries may be relieved of the items they have just received. The issue for the agency is whether beneficiaries are more susceptible to having cash robbed off them rather than vouchers or in-kind items. The design of the programme can be used to reduce the risk to the beneficiaries.

As the level of insecurity increases the argument for using vouchers rather then cash becomes stronger.

Corruption

There is a concern with cash distributions about the possibility of cash being diverted to unsocial activities or to fuel conflicts. The history of the aid industry contains many examples of food and NFIs been diverted for unsocial activities or to fuel conflicts, i.e. Cambodia, Zaire and Sudan. In a conflict or resource poor environment all resources are open to diversion. Proper programme planning and investment in improved beneficiary selection, registration and monitoring will help all types of distributions to reduce diversions of aid.

In-kind distribution programmes involve the storage and transportation of large volumes of high value items. With the right systems in place, cash and vouchers are easier to store and control than large volumes of stock. The use of cash or vouchers may reduce the level of losses through theft.

Cash and vouchers are generally harder to operate in the period immediately after the onset of an emergency, as the local markets are more likely to be ineffectual, and in situations where there are concerns over:

Security

Access

Corruption

As these conditions make any type of programme, including traditional in-kind distributions harder to operate, the question that the assessment team should be asking is whether cash or vouchers would be any more difficult than possible alternatives.

Voucher Distribution – common elements

A voucher distribution is the distribution of resources through the use of coupons, with a preordained value; either a monetary value or a fixed quantity of a named commodity, and aims to enable access to a specified range of commodities or services. There are two main types of voucher distributions:

Voucher Fair:

The vouchers are redeemable at fairs or other events organised by the agency specifically for that purpose.

Voucher and shops:

The vouchers are redeemable at existing shops that are registered with the programme.

Regardless of which type of distribution is used, many of the same issues have to be addressed in the assessment and programme design stages. The approach adopted here is to first look at the common components of voucher fairs and vouchers and shops.

Programme cycle of a voucher programme:

Assessment –	Initial needs assessment

Assessment of local traders and market capacity

Assessment of local financial institutions

Programme Design –	Selection of type of voucher distribution

Targeting and beneficiary selection criteria

Method of registering beneficiaries

Design and procurement of vouchers

Deciding the sizes of the individual distribution

Design monitoring and evaluation procedures

Establishing procedures for managing complaints

Hiring and training of staff

Programme implementation –	Sensitization of beneficiaries

Registration of beneficiaries

Verification of beneficiaries lists

Selection and sensitization of traders

Distribution of vouchers

Monitoring beneficiaries spend

Payment of traders

Post implementation evaluation –	Monitoring & evaluation

Financial audit

Initial needs assessment

In order to establish which method of resource transfer is the most appropriate in a given situation it is necessary carry out a detailed initial assessment of the situation. The initial assessment should look at the impact of the emergency on people’s lives. This includes an assessment of their access to water, sanitation and health care, food security, livelihoods and the political/security situation in the area. In order to assess if a cash or voucher distribution is either possible or appropriate, the initial assessment must include examination of:

The capacity of local traders.

The efficiency of local markets.

Beneficiary’s access to the markets.

The capacity of local financial institutions.

With traditional in-kind distribution the agency is responsible for procuring and transporting the items for distribution to the final distribution point. With a cash or voucher distribution the responsibility for making the goods available to the beneficiaries is shifted to the traders in the local markets. The local traders in effect take control of a large part of the logistical element of the programme, however before traders can be trusted with this responsibility the agency must ensure that the traders have the capacity to deliver. This will require a more detailed assessment of the capacity of the local traders and market than would normally be carried out.

The Community

The assessment team should interview and survey members of the community, ensuring that different social, ethnic, political, and wealth groups are included, and with separate interviews being held for men and women. The assessment should include the following;

Needs

What was the impact of the emergency on people’s food and income sources?

What was the impact of the shock on people’s assets, in particular those essential to their livelihoods?

Are people able to meet their basic needs with the food and income available after the emergency?

Are people able to recover their livelihoods with the assets and income available after the emergency?

What strategies are people using to cope with food or income insecurity? And what impact do these strategies have on their livelihoods and dignity?

What are people likely to spend cash on?

Social relations and power dynamics

Do men and women have different priorities?

How is control over resources managed within households?

What impact will cash distributions have on existing social and political divisions?

Access to the markets

What is the distance to the nearest markets?

What is the cost, in time or money, of accessing the nearest markets?

Is there another market hub further away that is an important trading centre for the community?

Does the community have access to the market all year round?

Traders and Markets

The assessment team should interview, and hold focus group discussions with traders carry out a price survey in key local markets and assess the volume of cash the programme will injected into the local economy compared with other inflows.

Are markets in the affected area operating and accessible?

What is the level of trade going through the markets?

Are essential basic items available in sufficient quantities and at reasonable prices?

Are there any restrictions on the movement of goods?

Are traders able to restock at reasonable prices?

Is the market competitive, i.e. is the number of suppliers large enough in relation to the number of buyers? Who controls trade? Do one or a few big traders control the market?

Are traders able and willing to respond to an increase in demand?

Are traders willing to be part of a voucher system?

What is the risk that cash or vouchers will cause inflation in prices of key products?

Security and delivery mechanism

The assessment team should interview traders, bank and post office officials and remittance companies to assess if there is a secure means of transferring cash.

What are the options for delivering cash to people?

Are banking systems or informal financial transfer mechanisms functioning?

What are the risks of cash benefits being taxed or seized by elites or warring parties and how do these risks compare with the risks posed by in-kind alternatives to cash?

What are the risks of cash being diverted by local elites or project staff and how do these compare with the risks of providing in-kind alternatives?

What accountability safeguards are available to minimize these risks?

Targeting and beneficiary selection criteria

Targeting of humanitarian aid is necessary to ensure the best use of the limited resources available and to ensure that assistance reaches those most in need. The factors defining the criteria used in beneficiary selection are:

The agency’s assessment of the situation.

The objectives of the programme.

Input from the community.

Blanket or geographical targeting is where all the people in an identified geographical area receive assistance.

Household or individual targeting is where only selected individual households or individuals in an area receive assistance. Individual or household targeting is appropriate when:

There are readily identifiable differences between the intended target population and non-target population.

The intended target population is a minority of the total population.

It is operationally feasible and cost-effective to implement a targeted distribution.

The community will cooperate with the targeting strategy.

In all cases where targeting is implemented:

The selection of beneficiaries and the exclusion of other community members should be transparent.

Recipients of aid should be selected on the basis of need and/or vulnerability.

The selection criteria should be discussed and if possible agreed with representatives of the community and local authorities.

The selection criteria must be clearly documented.

To ensure that the combined effort of all agencies responding to an emergency has the maximum effect, targeting and beneficiary selection should be co-ordinated with all other agencies working on similar programmes or in the same operational area. Inter agency co-ordination should ensure that the worst effected areas are prioritised and that the needs of an area are matched with the available resources.

The elements of the selection criteria should be readily assessable by agency staff. Implementation of excessively complicated selection criteria can slow down the programme, incur extra costs and may result in erroneous decisions in relation to inclusion or exclusion from the programme.

Registering beneficiaries

The method of registration used will depend on the programme’s operating environment. Where ever possible the community should be involved in identifying those who meet the programme’s selection criteria.

Community based distribution

This approach recognises that community members are best placed to identify the most vulnerable households or individuals in their community. The main aims of this system are;

To Ensure a fair method of distribution;

To adopt a distribution method that is appropriate to local culture and which is gender sensitive

To give local communities some control over the relief operation.

The community based distribution system is a way of incorporating developmental principles into relief programmes.

WFP evaluations, in relation to food distribution, have found that “generally, community-based distribution was effective both in terms of providing a mechanism for implementing a sizeable relief operation in a relatively short period of time, and in terms of meeting the principles of transparency, accountability and fairness”.

The use of agency staff strengthens accountability by ensuring that beneficiaries’ complaints about the system or the committee are heard and investigated.

Stages in community based distributions

Following the agency’s initial assessment of an area, a meeting is set up with the community where all members of the community are invited to attend. At this meeting the community is asked to select a committee to assist with the distribution. Before the election the agency must agree with the community what the responsibilities of the committee are and the criteria for membership of the committee. The community should be encouraged to adopt criteria that include equal representation of men and woman. The committee would normally be responsible for:

Disseminating information to the community on the objectives and size of the distribution.

Agreeing the beneficiary selection criteria.

Selecting the beneficiaries.

Assisting at the distribution.

The agency should be involved in the planning of, and actively monitor the election to ensure that the election is open to all and to ensure fairness.

Following the election of the committee the agency should meet with it to establish locally based criteria for selection of beneficiaries. The agency will normally have a preconception of what the criteria should be and will guide the communities to accept that criteria with adjustments for local conditions. Once the criteria are agreed the committee will compile a beneficiary list based on the established criteria.

Once completed the committee’s beneficiary list is put in front of a public meeting of the whole village for their discussion and approval. This element of the registration process is to substantiate that the system has been fair, transparent and impartial.

The community approved beneficiary list is then submitted to the agency who should verify a proportion of the beneficiaries on the committees list to ensure that they meet the agreed selection criteria.

The agency agrees with the village committee the timetable for the distribution.

The distribution of the vouchers is undertaken by the agency staff assisted by committee members.

While community based distributions require less agency staff involvement during the distribution process than traditional agency-run distribution programmes, the initial sensitization of targeted communities can be time-consuming.

Community based distribution is most appropriate where;

A stable, non-conflict situation exists.

There is a relatively large wealth differential within communities and where not all wealth groups are equally affected by the emergency.

Targeting of a fairly large proportion of the community is required.

There is the ability to identify community representatives that can be relied on to target the most vulnerable.

The agency has a long-term presence or in-depth knowledge of the population.

If community based distribution, as described above, is not appropriate there are other options to involve the community.

Community identification

The agency holds a meeting with the whole community, where;

The agency explains the programme and its aims.

The agency explains the selection criteria.

The agency asks the community to publicly identify the members of their community who meet the selection criteria, in order of vulnerability. When a person is identified by one or more members of the community as a candidate for distribution, the community as a whole is asked to vote on whether they agree that the person identified meets the criteria and should be included on the distribution list.

The agency staff members who are facilitating the meeting should have a preordained maximum number of beneficiaries; once that number is reached the agency should stop registering.

The agency staff verify the beneficiary list agreed by the community.

This method runs the risk that when influential members of the community are proposed they will be selected as community members will, out of fear, vote to confirm them. The more family members and friends a community member has at the meeting the higher their chance of been selected and agreed. Agency staff will have to allocate a considerable amount of resources to verifying beneficiary lists obtained in this manner to ensure their fairness.

Traditional leaders

Rather then electing a committee, the agency identifies and works with traditional community leaders. The selection criteria are explained to the traditional leaders and they are then tasked with preparing the beneficiary list. Agency staff then verify the beneficiary list prepared by the traditional leaders.

This method reinforces existing power structures, and is open to favouritism. Agency staff will have to allocate a considerable amount of resources to verifying the beneficiary list.

Verification

Prior to a distribution the beneficiary list should be verified by the monitoring and programme staff to ensure that:

it contains only those who met the selection criteria (were people included in the programme that should not have been included)?

it contains all those who met the selection criteria (were any people excluded from the programme who should have been included)?

Verification will involve a mixture of community meetings and household visits and should include scrutinising a minimum of 15% of registered beneficiaries, selected at random from the beneficiary list.

Design and procurement of vouchers

Vouchers are effectively money, sometimes with a significant value relative to the location. There is a need to ensure that secure procedures are in place to cover the design, procurement and handling of the vouchers. The design of the voucher and its features must take account of needs of the programme and security.

Vouchers must be user friendly for beneficiaries, traders and agency staff. A voucher should have an appealing design with minimum wording, in a large font.

In order to facilitate the speedy printing of vouchers, a standard design should be prepared and on file. The standard design can be customized to meet the needs of the individual programme, see Appendixes 4 and 5.

The voucher must clearly show:

The unit of currency and the value of the individual voucher.

The voucher book number

The categories of approved items.

GOAL’s and the donor’s Logos.

The value of a voucher should be denominated in the local currency, (i.e. in Pakistan use Rupees, and in Zimbabwe use Dollars). The value should be a round number which is equal to an existing bank note to assist beneficiaries understand the value of the voucher. The number of vouchers per voucher book will be a function of the value of the individual voucher and the amount being distributed to each beneficiary.

When deciding on the value of an individual voucher a balance has to be kept, if the value is too small the printing and administration costs increase, if the value is too large then the question of beneficiaries getting change from traders becomes an issue. When setting the voucher value, consideration should be given to the price of the items the beneficiaries are expected to purchase; these items will be highlighted by the beneficiary assessment.

Each voucher book must have a unique 4 digit number so that it can be traced back to the beneficiary it was issued to. The voucher number should be printed in a large font size on the face of the voucher, the larger the font the easier to read when distributing and when compiling redeemed vouchers. It is not necessary for each voucher in a book to have a unique number.

As an additional security feature the voucher should have its value printed on in silver foil.

Due to the scale of programmes it can be necessary to split the distribution down in to different villages/sub villages which will take place on different days. In order to reduce the risk of forgeries each individual distribution should have vouchers which are unique in terms of colour and letter.

The categories of items the beneficiary is allowed to purchase with the vouchers should be printed on the back of the voucher; the trader is responsible for ticking which category of goods he/she exchanged for the voucher, see Appendix 5. The printing of the categories has two functions:

It allows the agency to monitor, and report on, which items were purchased with the vouchers, see appendix 7.

It reinforces with both the beneficiaries and the traders the restrictions placed on the use of the vouchers.

The categories of goods covered by the vouchers should be decided in consultation with beneficiaries and with regard to the objectives of the programme. The more categories, the more freedom of choice the beneficiaries have.

The option of pre-printing vouchers and storing them in Ireland has been discussed but at this time it is not considered workable. Each voucher distribution will be unique and as a result each set of vouchers will need to be unique in regards to:

The unit of currency and the value of the individual voucher.

The number of vouchers per book.

The categories of items printed on the back of the voucher.

The language(s) of the voucher.

Donor Logo(s).

The sizes and number of the individual distributions which make up the programme.

However it is advisable for the agency to have a pre-selected printer available.

Printing vouchers outside of the country where the distribution will take place will be appropriate where there is a risk of forgeries reaching the distribution site or where local printing facilities are unable to provide the quality and security features required. If the vouchers are printed outside the country consideration must be given to:

How long it will take the vouchers to reach the distribution site.

The cost of transporting.

Customs restrictions, delays and costs.

In order to avoid delays with customs clearance, and to reduce the cost of DHLing the vouchers, one option is to send an Irish based staff member out with the vouchers using up their luggage allowance.

Deciding the size of the individual distribution

The value of the vouchers distributed to a beneficiary will depend on the objective of the programme.

Assist the beneficiary to meet their basic needs.

Assist the beneficiary to rehabilitate their livelihoods.

When the programme aims to assist the beneficiary to meet their basic needs, then the value of the vouchers should be set at the difference between the cost of the commodities the household requires to meet its basic needs and the cost of what the household is able to acquire with its existing resources, including any assistance received through other aid programmes. If the beneficiary is engaging in damaging coping strategies (sale of income generating assets, prostitution etc.) such strategies and any resulting income should not be included in the calculation.

Where the programme aims to rehabilitate livelihoods the value of the vouchers should be linked to the cost of the assets and materials that are needed to rehabilitate the livelihood. Consideration must be given to whether the beneficiary’s basic needs are been met through either their own resources or other aid programmes. If the beneficiary’s basic needs are not met then the beneficiary will have to divert a proportion of any grant to cover their basic needs. In such cases the vouchers value should be set to cover both the beneficiary’s basic needs and the costs of rehabilitating their livelihoods.

Where a programme is looking to assist a range of livelihoods it may be necessary to set different voucher values for the different livelihoods, as the cost of assets and materials needed differs for different livelihood.

Design of monitoring and evaluation procedures

Monitoring and evaluation is essential for programme management, accountability and learning. Monitoring is an ongoing activity that involves the day-today collection and review of data, while evaluation is a temporary activity or series of activities (e.g. surveys, studies). Both monitoring and evaluation aim to demonstrate:

The extent to which the project is achieving it planned outputs.

Whether the programme’s outputs will result in the programme achieving its objectives.

In order to facilitate monitoring and evaluation all programmes should have:

Clearly defined objectives.

Indicators for objectives which are feasible to collect and analyse.

If the programme is not meeting expected outputs and objectives, monitoring and evaluation reports should:

Explain why.

Give information that allows managers to adjust the programme’s activities to meet the objectives.

As part of programme design, mechanism should be put in place to ensure that monitoring is ongoing and that monitoring reports are acted on.

Baseline

Baseline information is needed at the start of the programme to allow the agency to monitor change. Baseline information should include details on incomes, expenditure and assets. Where possible the baseline information should include information on the current year and the situation in a normal year. Where a thorough initial assessment was carried out much of the baseline information will have already been collected by the agency. Where sufficient date is not available a baseline survey should be carried out on a sample of the target group.

Examples of questions to include in a baseline survey are;

What are the community’s current sources of food and income and what were they in a normal year?

Dose the community normally obtain food through purchase?

What is the current average income and expenditure of different groups within the community and what were they in a normal year?

What are the current assets of various livelihood groups and what were they in a normal year?

What coping strategies do people usually adopt in periods of scarcity?

Do members of the household migrate for work at certain times of the year?

What are the normal intra-household mechanisms concerning the management of cash and decisions on expenditure? Who keeps the money in the household, and who decides how to spend it?

Monitoring

The monitoring aspect of the programme will be an ongoing activity that focuses on the programme’s day to day activities.

Prior distribution monitoring ensures that:

The beneficiary list contains only those who met the selection criteria (were people included in the programme that should not have been included)?

The beneficiary list contains all those who met the selection criteria
(were any people excluded from the programme who should have been included)?

Indicators of the programme’s outputs are:

How many beneficiaries were distributed to, and how does this compare with the target?

Did beneficiaries receive the distribution on time?

Did beneficiaries receive the correct amount in the distribution?

What is the community’s perception of the resource transfer process, in terms of timing, amounts, location, and method?

Indicators of the impact of the programme’s outputs on achieving its objectives will be linked to the specific objectives of the programme.

Evaluation

The information produced by monitoring will form the basis for developing the evaluation. An evaluation of a programme is a more in-depth examination of the programme which should review and report on the following areas?

Impact to Beneficiaries

How did beneficiaries use the resources distributed?

Was the value of the resource transfer sufficient to meet the objectives of the programme?

Was the timing of the programme appropriate for meeting the identified needs?

Were there any changes in beneficiary’s sources of food, income, and asset levels over the course of the programme?

What were the changes in expenditure over the course of the programme?

Did beneficiaries face any constraints in the way they used the resources distributed?

If women were targeted, what was the impact on gender relations in the household and the community?

What was the impact on control of cash resources and expenditure within the household?

Did any conflict arise between households/areas that were targeted and those that were not?

Impact on Markets

Did the programme have an impact on market prices, employment patterns, and labour availability in the area?

Did the programme affect the availability of commodities in the local markets?

Did the programme have an impact on trader activity, or control over trade in the market?

Security

Did the programme have an impact on security for the agency or the beneficiaries?

What measures were taken to minimise security risks?

Appropriateness

How were the needs of the population assessed?

Were community representatives and other stakeholders involved in the needs assessment and design of the programme?

What were the needs of the population, and was the chosen type of resource transfer the most appropriate means of meeting those needs?

Were the criteria for selecting beneficiaries appropriate and did they relate to the assessment findings and the objectives of the programme?

How was the size of the resource transfer determined and how did it relate to the objectives of the programme?

Coverage

To what extent did the programme meet the needs of the most vulnerable?

What proportion of the target population received aid?

Was beneficiary selection carried out as planned? Were there any errors of inclusion or exclusion?

Coherence and co-ordination

How was the programme co-ordinated with the programmes of other organisations working on similar programmes or in the same area? What was the level of co-ordination between organizations? How did the programme take account of assistance being provided by other agencies?

How actively did the community participate in the planning, implementation, and monitoring of the programme?

Efficiency

Was there a difference between the programme budget and the actual costs of implementing the programme?

Cost-efficiency

There are two options for calculating cost-efficiency:

Compare the cost of cash transfers and in-kind distributions.

Calculate the administration costs of the intervention and the proportion of funds that went directly to the beneficiary.

An estimation of cost-effectiveness would require an added analysis of which intervention was most effective in meeting the needs of the beneficiaries.

Establishing procedures for managing complaints

Before the agency’s first meeting with the community the agency needs to establishe procedures to deal with:

People looking to be added to the distribution lists.

Allegations of irregularities/fraud/misuse of power.

People looking to be added to the distribution lists

During the course of a distribution it is to be expected that people not included on the beneficiary list will approach the agency asking to be included. In order to avoid confusion and duplication, one staff members, from the programme’s monitoring & evaluation team, should be appointed to deal with these requests.

There should be a set procedure for recording the details of the people requesting assistance and for a follow up investigation / review of each case.

In some situations late additions to the beneficiary list will not be possible. The most common situation is where adding new beneficiaries to the list raises security concerns about the resulting large numbers of people gathering at the agencies compound or going to scheduled distributions looking to be added to the list.

Allegations of irregularities/fraud/misuse of power

Staff members, beneficiaries and traders should be made aware of the rules and regulations governing the distribution and the conduct of agency staff. All stakeholders should be made aware of the procedures for lodging a complaint against any aspect of the programme, including agency staff, and that any complaint will be immediately reported for investigation to a senior staff member, who will treat the grievance as confidential information and handle it with discretion.

Where agency staff members have signed Codes of Conduct / Standards of Integrity these codes should be make available to other stakeholders.

The programme’s monitoring & evaluation team should be tasked with handling allegations and where necessary investigating.

Selecting the date of the distribution

Which ever type of distribution is selected the dates of the distribution must be agreed beforehand with the community and traders, to avoid clashes with other market days, religious festivities, community events, or activities.

Co-ordination with other programme departments

All community gatherings, such as distributions, offer an opportunity for community sensitisation and education. The distribution team should liaise with other programme departments to allow them take advantage of the gatherings.

Audit

All programmes will be audited as part of the annual external financial audit; in addition the programme may be subject to a donor audit. The following paperwork / information will be needed for the audit and should be retained in a manner which ensures that it can be easily and speedily retrieved:

Distribution lists signed by beneficiaries.

Support for payment to traders:

Copy of cheques.

Traders receipt.

Internal “Payment Request form”.

Receipt for the number and value of redeemed vouchers, signed by the trader and GOAL staff.

Reconciliation, for each distribution, tying the number of vouchers distributed in with the total payment to traders.

Trader’s contracts.

Redeemed vouchers, sorted by category and village.

Monitoring and Evaluation reports.

Voucher fairs

A voucher fair can be organised anywhere traders can display their products and the programme’s beneficiaries can come to purchase them. The location should be convenient for both parties.

Voucher fairs are usually organized when people are not able to access goods related to a specific sector (agriculture, livestock, etc.), but which are available in sufficient quantities and quality within a reasonable distance. As a result the first task of an agency when considering a voucher fair must be to assess the situation and ensure that there is enough available supply to match the demand. If supply can not meet demand then organising a fair is likely to result in inflation.

Voucher fairs generally limit the beneficiaries to a specific range of commodities but within that range allows the beneficiaries to exercise their own preferences in terms of type, quality, and price of commodities.

While vouchers are the primary currency of a voucher fair, and have no value outside of the fair, consideration should be given to encouraging beneficiaries to use their own resources in conjunction with the vouchers to increase their purchasing power.

Before the voucher fair the agency will need to:

Assess the communities needs and local availability of the commodities needed.

Select the beneficiaries. Agree with beneficiaries what form of identification they will need for registration on the day of the distribution. The form of identification will depend on the local situation, where possible beneficiaries should produce a government identify card, but in some situations the only form of identification will be the testament of community leaders and other community members.

Select traders, the agency will need to identify potential local suppliers, and sensitize them on the concept of a voucher fair. As part of traders sensitizing, they should be made aware of the quality and variety of goods to be displayed at the fair. It is important to ensure that information reaches local producers in the neighbouring villages. The higher the number of traders participating in a fair, and the wider the range of goods on offer, the lower the risk of inflation, and the reduced risk that one large supplier or a cartel of traders can manipulate prices. To prevent powerful traders operating a cartel it may be worth considering imposing a limit on the volume of goods that each trader can display and sell during a fair.

Identify where and when traders should come after the fair to collect their payments and agree with them the method of payment. Whereever possible payment should be by cheque.

Sensitise beneficiaries and traders on the rules and regulations governing the conduct of the fair, and on how alleged breaches will be investigated and the sanctions that will be taken against those who breach the rules and regulations.

Set the date of the fair, in the case of agricultural inputs the fair must coincide with the local agricultural calendar.

Select the location for the fair.

Identify technical staff to check the quality of commodities offered for sale at the fair.

Train staff and designate duties for the day of the fair. Oxfam’s experience of organising fairs suggests that between 10 and 12 persons are need to manage a voucher fair.

Provide staff with visibility materials (agency t-shirt and baseball cap) so that beneficiaries and traders can recognize them.

Survey the market place for commodity prices prior to the voucher fair.

On the day of the fair, the following procedure should be followed.

Clearly mark out the area of the fair. Access to the fair area will need to be controlled with designated entry and exit points.

Traders should arrive early in the morning at a specified time. As they enter the fair site, agency staff should weigh the trader’s commodities, check the quality and record the amounts and types of items being offered for sale. The agency should consider appointing technical advisors to check the quality of trader’s commodities.

When the registration and inspection of commodities is complete, beneficiaries are registered; receive their vouchers and sign the distribution list as confirmation of receipt. In order to be registered beneficiaries must produce the form of identification that was approved during sensitization.

Before trading starts, all participants should be reminded of the rules of the fair. Agency staff should be available during the fair to assist buyers and sellers in the use of the vouchers.

Trading can then start.

While trading is ongoing, agency staff should monitor the price of commodities being sold and compare with the price survey carried out before the fair. If there is significant price increase the agency must considered what action it can take.

The fair should end at a predetermined time. When setting the time trading ends account should be taken of the time agency staff need to carry out their administration duties before returning to base and the time beneficiaries need to return to their homes before night fall.

Agency staff should record the amount of goods that have not been sold, in order to evaluate the types and quantities that have been preferred by the beneficiaries. The amount sold will exceed the value of the vouchers exchanged if buyers have used their own resources to purchase additional goods.

When trading finishes, agency staff should record the number and value of vouchers which have been redeemed by each trader and issue the trader with a receipt denoting that information. The trader should counter sign the receipt as confirmation that they agree with the value of vouchers being redeemed. This receipt will form the basis of the agencies payment to the trader.

For security and administration reasons payment to traders should not be made on the same day as the fair. Before any payments can be made agency staff need to review all the paperwork from the fair to ensure that there were no irregularities, such as the value of vouchers redeemed exceeding the value of vouchers issued. All payments to traders should, where ever possible, be by cheque.

As part of the monitoring process, an end of fair questionnaires should be used with a sample of buyers and traders, to assess their perceptions of the following factors.

What went well and what went badly?

Was the targeting process transparent and fair?

Were any vouchers sold for cash?

Were the commodities on offer of good quality?

Were people able to purchase what they were looking for?

Were the prices higher or lower than at the local market?

Was the value of the voucher adequate in relation to the price of commodities?

Will the beneficiaries be able to use all of the commodities they purchased at the fair or will they sell or barter some of them to meet other needs?

How far did beneficiaries have to travel to use their vouchers and what cost, if any, did they incur?

Vouchers and Shops

In addition to specially organised voucher fairs, agencies can distribute vouchers to beneficiaries which are exchangeable for selected categories of goods with registered traders operating in the local markets. The vouchers can be either

A cash voucher, exchangeable for a range of commodities up to a specific monetary value; or

A commodity voucher, exchangeable for a fixed quantity of a named commodity.

The voucher should only be valid for a set period of time in order to reduce the likelihood of fraud and to facilitate monitoring and administration. The length of the vouchers validity should bear in mind:

Beneficiaries access to the markets.

The number of customers the registered traders can serve, comfortably, in a day.

Before the voucher distribution the agency will need to:

Assess the communities needs and availability of the commodities needed in the local markets.

Select the beneficiaries. Agree with the beneficiaries what form of identification they will need for registration on the day of the distribution.

Select and register local traders who are willing to take part in the voucher distribution. Selection of local traders requires careful assessment of the individual local trader, examining:

The trader’s ability to supply the goods required in sufficient quantity to meet the expected demand.

The size of the individual trader’s business, the range of goods and the level of stock carried by the trader.

Where several voucher distributions are to be held, consideration should be given to the trader’s ability to restock and the time the trader will require to do so.

How has the emergency affected the trader’s transport costs and supply chain?

The trader’s reputation with the community.

The trader’s literacy and numeracy skills.

Beneficiaries access to the trader’s store, from both a security point of view and in terms of distance and cost.

The objectives of the programme will affect which traders are selected; if one of the objectives is to put money back into the local economy then the agency should select small traders. Small traders are seen as more likely to retain their profits in the locality. Prioritising traders most affected by the emergency should be considered when the objectives of the programme included market regeneration.

In order to spread the benefit of the voucher programme among the local traders it may be worth considering registering a large number of traders and imposing a limit on the volume of vouchers individual traders can redeem for each distribution. The higher the number of traders participating in the voucher programme the lower the risk of inflation, as well as a reduced risk that one large supplier or a cartel of traders can manipulate prices.

As part of sensitising traders about the voucher programme they should be made aware of the categories of goods covered by the vouchers and the total value of vouchers being distributed. It may be appropriate to encourage traders to increase their stock prior to the voucher distribution.

Traders should be made aware of the rules and regulations governing the operation of the voucher system, how alleged breaches will be investigated and what sanctions will be taken if the allegations are substantiated. It should be made clear to traders that a single serious breach, such as buying vouchers from beneficiaries or increasing prices for voucher holders, can result in their instant expulsion from the programme.

All traders should be issued with a contract, outlining the obligations and responsibilities of both the trader and the agency, with a signed contract being kept on file (see Appendix 1). Traders should be informed of their obligation to clearly mark each voucher with their contract number and the category of goods purchased with the voucher (the category of goods will be pre-printed on the back of the voucher, see Appendix 5). This information will be used to track how the beneficiaries have spent their vouchers, see Appendix 7.

All registered traders should be issued with a temporary sign, for the front of their shop, to indicate that they are registered traders on the agency’s voucher programme, see Appendix 6.

Identify where traders should go, after trading has finished, to redeem their vouchers, and where they should go later to collect their payment. Agree with them the method of payment. Where ever possible payment should be by cheque.

Set the date of the distribution, in consultation with the local community, traders and other agencies operating in the area.

Establish the value of an individual voucher.

Establish the value of vouchers to be distributed to each beneficiary.

Organise printing of the vouchers.

Train staff as to how the programme will operate and designate duties for the different days in the 5 day cycle.

Provide staff with visibility materials (agency t-shirt and baseball cap) so that beneficiaries and traders can recognize them.

Survey the market place for commodity prices prior to the first voucher distribution.

Set the timetable for the distribution. Voucher distributions, where the vouchers are redeemable in local markets, involve a cycle spread over a number of days, the example below looks at a 5 day cycle;

One week prior to the start of the distribution cycle the community should be informed, through an array of appropriate methods, of the programme cycle and the up coming sensitisation.

Day 1 – Sensitisation of the community which should cover:

Restatement of the programme’s selection criteria.

The names of the community members who have been registered as programme beneficiaries and who will be distributed vouchers. A copy of the specific list for each village can be given to the village representative/committee.

The location and time of the voucher distribution.

Restatement of the form of identification required by beneficiaries.

The value of the vouchers to be distributed to each individual.

For what commodities the vouchers can be exchanged.

The length of time the vouchers are valid.

The names of local traders registered with the programme and how their shops will be discernible.

The rules and regulations governing the conduct of the voucher scheme, how alleged breaches will be investigated and the sanctions that will be taken if the allegations are proved. (See Appendix 2)

Day 2 – Distribution of vouchers to beneficiaries. Beneficiaries are registered; receive their vouchers and sign the distribution list as confirmation of receipt. In order to be registered, beneficiaries must produce the form of identification that was approved during sensitisation. During the distribution responsibility for security and crowd control should be allocated to a senior member of staff. A member of the monitoring team should be available to manage any queries or complaints.

Once beneficiaries have received their vouchers trading with the registered traders can start. Once the agency staff are finished distributing the vouchers they should proceed to the local market to monitor and assist the beneficiaries and the traders.

Day 3 This is the 2nd day for beneficiaries to exchange vouchers with registered traders and the 2nd day for the agency staff to attend the markets to monitor and assist. The end of Day 3 is the end of trading.

Day 4 – Registered traders should meet at the pre-specified location and time with agency staff to record the number and value of vouchers being redeemed by each trader. Agency staff should issue the trader with a receipt denoting the value of vouchers, the trader should counter sign the receipt as confirmation. This receipt will form the basis of the agencies payment to the trader, see Appendix 3.

Before any payment is made to the traders the redeemed vouchers are reconciled to the total number of vouchers distributed by the agency. Only once the reconciliation is completed and accurate can payment be made to the traders.

Day 5 – Registered traders should meet at the pre-specified location to receive their payment, preferably in the form of a cheque and sign an Internal “Payment Request form”. Ensure that traders bring appropriate identification for collect of payment.

Agency staff can call the beneficiaries of the coming distributions to confirm the sensitisation date.

Agency staff can sensitise the beneficiaries for the next distribution.

Staffing

Different stages of the programme cycle will require different staffing levels and will require staff being allocated different duties. The registration and verification stages require more staff than other stages and in the later stages of the programme some roles can be assigned to community members.

GOAL’s experience with vouchers in Pakistan suggests that a voucher team of between 10 and 12 members, supported by a monitoring team of 6 members to verify the beneficiary lists, is needed to manage a distribution. In Pakistan the above staffing allowed the team to distribute to an average 600 beneficiaries every 5 days.

As part of the monitoring process an end of shopping day (day 2 and 3 in the 5 day cycle) questionnaire should be used, with a sample of buyers and Traders, to assess their perceptions of the following factors.

What went well and what went badly?

Was the targeting process transparent and fair?

Did any beneficiaries sell their vouchers for cash?

Were people able to purchase what they were looking for?

Were the prices higher or lower than they would be on a normally trading day?

Was the value of the vouchers adequate in relation to the prices of commodities?

How far did beneficiaries to travel to use their vouchers and what cost, if any, did they incur?

As part of monitoring the programme, dedicated agency staff should compile data on what commodities were purchased with the vouchers, split by village. The raw data is obtained from the voucher book number, the category ticked by the merchant on the back of each redeemed voucher and the trader contract number which the trader is obliged to write it on the front of each redeemed voucher.

References

Oxfam Cash transfer programming in emergencies 2006

HPG Discussion paper Cash and vouchers in emergencies February 2005 Paul Harvey

CRS Seed vouchers & fairs 2004 Paula Bramel, Tom Remington and Melody McNeil

Save the Children UK Community –managed targeting and distribution of food aid 2004 Ellen Mathys

Appendix

Memorandum of Understanding with Traders (Pakistan)

Sensitisation points with beneficiaries (Pakistan)

Traders voucher redemption form(Pakistan)

Front of Voucher (Pakistan)

Back of voucher with list of categories (Pakistan)

Shop sign

Pie chart of how beneficiaries spend their vouchers (Pakistan)

Appendix 1

GOAL ID Number GB1 Memorandum of Understanding

Between

GOAL Ireland (hereafter called GOAL)

And

Name: ________________, (hereafter called the ‘Merchant’)

In

Place: _________________________________________, Bagh Province, AJK, Pakistan

On

Date: _________________

This agreement is between GOAL Ireland and _____________________, ‘Merchant’, of

_________________, Bagh Province, AJK Pakistan, and outlines the conditions of agreement for participation in the GOAL vouchers scheme.

GOAL will distribute vouchers to persons (hereafter called ‘the beneficiary’) from Bagh Province between December 2005 and January 2006. These vouchers will have a cash value of 100 rupees per voucher and can only be spent with pre-appointed merchants.

All vouchers will be distributed to ‘beneficiaries’ on the dates outlined in the attached addendum and will be valid for a specific period. This period is defined as being from the time the vouchers are issued to the ‘beneficiary’ until close of business on the following day. This period is hereafter referred to as the ‘shopping period’.

Vouchers are only valid for the ‘shopping period’ and are colour-coded for each ‘shopping period’. On the day that Merchants reclaim money for the vouchers they will be informed of the colour of the voucher for the following ‘shopping period’.

The ‘Merchant’ will accept vouchers only within the ‘shopping period’. Any vouchers accepted after that time are not valid and will not be accepted for payment by GOAL.

The ‘Merchant’ will present all vouchers to GOAL, between 9am and 3pm on the day after the ‘shopping period’ finishes, at either

the District Commissioners ‘Rest House’ in Bagh

Malot College in Malot

the District Commissioners Information Office in Dhirkot.

Only vouchers presented on the agreed day at the assigned location will be accepted by GOAL.

All vouchers will be counted by GOAL in the presence of the ‘Merchant’ and a GOAL international staff member. A receipt will be given to the ‘Merchant’ by GOAL for the total amount of the vouchers received.

The receipts must be presented for payment at the National Bank of Pakistan in Bagh or the National Bank of Pakistan in Dhirkot on the day following the issuance of the receipt for vouchers.

GOAL agrees to:

Provide a poster for display outside the ‘Merchant’ premises to indicate their participation in the program

Inform the ‘Merchant’ when vouchers will be issued to beneficiaries. See attached addendum.

Confirm with the ‘Merchant’ the validity of the vouchers for each ‘shopping period’.

Receive the vouchers from the ‘Merchant’, at the predefined locations (see above), the day after the close of business of the ‘shopping period’ and issue a receipt to the ‘Merchant’ for the agreed amount due.

On the day after the issuance of the receipt, GOAL will pay the ‘Merchant’ with a National Bank of Pakistan cheque on presentation of the receipt at either the National Bank of Pakistan Bagh or National Bank of Pakistan Dhirkot. Please note that the National Bank of Pakistan will only cash cheques from 9am to 1.30pm.

Provide staff to monitor the prices of goods sold throughout each ‘shopping period’.

Inform each ‘Beneficiary’ that the maximum change they can receive for any one transaction is 25 rupees.

The Merchant agrees to:

Accept the vouchers from the ‘Beneficiary’ as payment for items purchased.

Indicate on every voucher accepted what that voucher has been spent on, circling a category from the list of ten set categories on the back of the voucher. Only one category should be chosen per voucher.

Write his GOAL ID Number on every voucher accepted.

Charge a fair price for goods purchased with vouchers. Any merchant seen to be overcharging will be disqualified from future ‘shopping periods’ and will be subject to prosecution under the Price Control Act.

Attempt to hold enough stock to cater for the increased amount of business on ‘shopping periods’.

Attempt to restock their shops adequately in advance of each ‘Shopping Period’

Maintain full business hours, i.e. 8.30am to 5.00pm during ‘shopping periods’.

Pay a maximum of 25 rupees change on any one transaction.

Name of Merchant:	____________________________	Date: _______________

Signature:	_____________________________

NIC Number:	_____________________________

GOAL Representative: ____________________________

GOAL Bagh, Bypass Road Bagh

Signature:	_____________________________	Date: _______________

Description of Goods: __________________________________________________

Appendix 2

Sensitisation Points

The following points were communicated during beneficiary sensitisation

Each individual householder on the lists had to present themselves at the distribution

If the head of listed beneficiary could not be present, the vouchers could be collected by members of their family. In order of preference the following people were eligible to collect the vouchers on the behalf of the beneficiary - their wife/husband, father/mother, brother/sister or child (above 12 years old). These people were required to present their and the beneficiaries ID and had to be verified by the Village Representative.

All householders had to bring identification. The only acceptable forms of ID were:

National Identity Card

Domicile Card

Passport

Service Card

Marriage Agreement

Any person without one of those forms of ID would not be accepted.

Each beneficiary was informed that they had to sign for the vouchers on the day

Vouchers were valid for two days only, from the time of distribution to close of business on the following day, after which time they expired and would not be accepted by the merchants. Beneficiaries must spend all of their vouchers in that period.

Voucher holders could only shop in participating shops which displayed a specific GOAL poster.

GOAL national staff would be present in all shopping bazaars to give assistance to merchants and beneficiaries when necessary.

Vouchers would be confiscated from any person found to be exchanging their vouchers for cash instead of using them to purchase necessary items. The reason for this was explained – as per the secondary aim of the scheme, the financial boost should remain in the affected area and not be exported to non affected areas.

When coming to the voucher distribution, beneficiaries should be prepared to be out of the house all day for shopping

Be prepared if possible to go to different bazaars, as individually the bazaars in Malot, Jaglari, Hans Chowki and Rangla did not have the capacity to handle all the beneficiaries in any one distribution.

Beneficiaries were made aware that shopkeepers could give change but only small amounts, to a maximum of Rs. 25 per purchase, and to organise their purchases in such a way that the need for change was minimised.

Please assist the more vulnerable members of the community to avail of the opportunity in the limited time allowed (transport etc.)

If vulnerable Households were missed from the list, the village representative should provide the new names in writing, with the reason for inclusion and the number of people in the household. No new names would be accepted on the day. Following the distribution GOAL’s monitoring and evaluation team would check the missed households and assist where possible with vouchers in a future distribution or CGI and/or NFI’s.

A reminder that all of those who would receive vouchers would also receive 10 sheets of CGI.

Beneficiaries were free to purchase whatever they want (subject to availability), including CGI, with their vouchers.

Appendix 3

Traders voucher redemption form

Appendix 4

Front of Voucher

Appendix 5

Back of voucher with list of categories

Appendix 6

Shop sign

Appendix 7

Pie chart of how beneficiaries spend their vouchers