WFP Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific - 2016 SPRs RBB 2016 SPRs by project type | Page 389

Standard Project Report 2016
Country Resources and Results
Resources for Results
Funding Strategy and Financial Landscape
With an overall budget of USD 343 million, the current five-year PRRO was funded at 58 percent at the end of 2016.
The operation was made possible thanks to voluntary contributions from 20 funding sources. Japan was the top
donor in 2016, making an unprecedented contribution to WFP in Myanmar by a single funding partner of USD 23.3
million. Other donors in 2016 were the United States, the European Union, Australia, Switzerland and Canada.
The annual needs in 2016 amounted to USD 75 million, of which WFP received 50 percent. WFP used the available
funding to prioritise assistance to the most vulnerable internally displaced persons (IDPs), including pregnant and
lactating women and young malnourished children, wherever access was possible.
Fundraising flexible contributions remained the biggest resourcing challenge. Geographic and programmatic
restrictions of earmarked contributions resulted in limited food-by-prescription for people living with HIV and TB
clients and capacity development activities. To tackle this challenge, WFP continued advocacy efforts with the
Government for a political solution to a number of outstanding issues causing widespread food insecurity and
malnutrition. WFP continued discussions with the Government on the importance of increased government
ownership of the WFP-supported operation in order to ensure its long-term sustainability. The areas identified for
potential three-partied partnership included the national school feeding programme and disaster risk reduction
through technical support to the Government's Emergency Operation Centre.
Value for Money
WFP in Myanmar implemented a very cost-conscious, results-oriented and partnership-based operation through
application of the "3Es" – economy, efficiency, effectiveness.
Economy: Cost containment was a standard WFP practice in the procurement of food and non-food items,
selection of cooperating partners and service providers (such as transporters), employment of new staff,
organization of assessments and training, and staff travel. Staff were directed on the cost-conscious use of modes
of travel and related accommodation facilities. Duty travel related expenditure was reimbursed directly instead of
bulk daily subsistence allowance (DSA) being issued, which resulted in cost savings of up to 45 percent for regular
trainings and assessments. In the country office and many field offices, WFP co-located offices with other United
Nations (UN) organizations such as the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which yielded significant
savings on rental fees throughout operations in Myanmar. WFP was able renegotiate its lease for the country office,
co-shared with the Myanmar Information Management Unit (MIMU) and United Nations Office for the Coordination
of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA,) with cost savings of 17 percent (USD 126,000) per year. Strong technical expertise
in the fleet management team resulted in cost savings of 42 percent in vehicle maintenance costs.
Efficiency: WFP conducted its regular annual review of overall staffing structures in Myanmar in October and
November 2016, with the aim of ensuring a balanced workload for all units, according to the operational priorities
and available funding. To harness expertise from different UN agencies for more efficient implementation of
complex humanitarian and development projects requiring a holistic approach, work was initiated in support of an
inter-agency roster. Active fleet scheduling to combine trips for staff using official vehicles allowed WFP to contain
staff overtime and fuel costs for a more efficient utilisation of resources. WFP managed to build a strong relationship
with relevant government bodies to process timely visas and travel authorisations for international staff and various
missions supporting the operation.
WFP invested in preparedness capacity to enable more efficient and timely responses to emergencies in high-risk
areas and to reduce disaster risk. This was mainly done through the establishment of field presence, capacity
development of government partners and simulation exercises in risk-prone areas, pre-positioning of supplies,
engaging in long-term agreements with suppliers and stand-by arrangements with cooperating partners.
Effectiveness: WFP's operating environment in Myanmar remained volatile with some areas prone to new
displacements due to recurrent natural hazards or conflict. WFP's preparedness capacity and procurement strategy,
which included pre-planning and pre-positioning of required resources and supplies as well as the immediate
deployment of staff, enabled the organization to achieve high levels of resource mobilisation and assistance
delivery, particularly for displaced populations. WFP scaled up the use of cash-based transfers in its operations,
with particular emphasis on relief and community asset creation to increase the effectiveness of assistance in terms
of response timeliness, targeting and coverage of needs.
Myanmar, Union of (MM)
8
Single Country PRRO - 200299