Core Strategies

TBBC has developed a Strategic Plan for 2005-2010 for which the five core strategies are outlined below.

Support an adequate standard of living
Goal: To ensure access to adequate and appropriate food, shelter and non-food items for displaced Burmese people

Work through partnerships
Goal: To increase collaboration with all stakeholders through effective partnerships and inclusive participation, embracing equity, gender and diversity

Build capacity
Goal: To empower displaced people and their communities by strengthening their capacity for self-reliance

Strengthen advocacy
Goal: To advocate with and for the people of Burma to increase understanding of the nature and root causes of the conflict and displacement, in order to promote appropriate responses and ensure their human rights are respected

Develop organisational resources
Goal: To develop organisational resources to enable TBBC to be more effective in pursuing its mission.

Food security programme:
food, nutrition, and agriculture

During 2007 TBBC’s nutrition and food security initiatives have been integrated into one programme with additional staff and closer coordination with other field activities.

Food rations: The refugee diet is traditionally rice, salt, and fishpaste, supplemented with leaves and roots gathered from the forest, plus any vegetables or livestock that can be cultivated, raised or hunted. For many years the refugees were not entirely dependent on the relief programme for food and showed commendable willingness to be self-sufficient where possible. Their political organisations still controlled territory on the Burmese side of the border, traded on the black market, and grew crops in some areas. Some refugees were also able to get low-paid seasonal work in Thailand, forage in the surrounding forest, keep small kitchen gardens and raise a limited amount of livestock in the camps. At the beginning of the relief programme in 1984, TBBC’s aim was to cover only around 50 percent of the staple diet needs. At this level life in the camps remained simple and poor, but not inconsistent with standards in their former villages, or in Thai villages in the area.

Over the years the ethnic groups lost their territory to the Burmese Army and the security situation deteriorated. The refugee camps became subject to tighter controls by the Thai authorities and it became increasingly difficult for the refugees to be self-sufficient. Rations were gradually increased and by the mid-1990’s it had become necessary to supply 100 percent of staple diet needs; rice, salt and fishpaste. During 1997 even stricter controls were placed on the camps for security reasons and, in some cases, it became impossible for refugees to leave the camps to forage or get work. NGOs became concerned that the refugees were no longer getting an adequate diet and in October 1997 the TBBC commissioned a rapid assessment of the nutritional adequacy of the rations.

TBBC rations were compared with the new WFP/ UNHCR guidelines that recommended providing a minimum of 2,100 Kcal per person per day based on an average family, with no differentiation for age. The conclusion was that the standard food basket should include mung beans and cooking oil to ensure the minimum average of 2,100 kcal. This was implemented during the first half of 1998.

The TBBC food basket was still designed to cover only the basic energy and protein needs of the refugees and did not ensure adequate provision of many important micronutrients. It was assumed that the refugees supplemented TBBC rations by buying, bartering, growing or foraging to make up for any other needs. But as the refugees became more aid-dependent TBBC recognised that some segments of the population at least, may be at risk for deficiencies.

In 2001/2 TBBC conducted food consumption/ nutrition status surveys in two camps and rapid nutrition surveys in three other camps. The results showed quite consistently that the ration provided was proportionately too high in carbohydrates at the expense of protein and fat, and low in many micronutrients. It was concluded that the refugees were not able to adequately supplement the TBBC ration with other foods to compensate and were much more dependent on the TBBC ration food than was previously assumed.

Beginning in January 2004, TBBC revised the food basket to include 1.4 kg fortified blended food/ refugee/ month (no differentiation for children <5) whilst reducing the rice ration to 15 kgs/ adult/ month. Starting in Karenni Site 1 TBBC introduced the new basket on a camp-by-camp basis through March 2005. The original wheat-based blended food was replaced by AsiaMIX, a rice-based product between April and December 2005.

During an evaluation of the use of AsiaMIX in 2005 it was concluded that acceptability and use would be improved by reducing the ration from 1.4 kg to 1 kg/ person/ month and adding 250gm of sugar/ person/ month. It was also planned to add fermented bean curd as a substitute for fishpaste in Site 1 and Tham Hin. After trials in four camps MOI gave approval and the adjusted food basket was introduced to all camps by the end of the year. The revised food basket is:

There are very minor variations in the rations given to individual camps based on local preferences, but the table above demonstrates a representative ration and provides 2,210 kcal per person day. Calculations take into account the specific demographic profile of the camp residents based on UNHCR registration statistics (May 2006), and that actual needs are an average of 2,181 kcal/ person/ per day (2076 kcal/ person/ day + 105 kcal to reflect light to moderate activity levels.) Students in boarding houses, the majority of whom are adolescents ages 10 to 18 years old, have been disaggregated from the general population, and require an average of 2,440 kcal/ person/ day.

When introduced, AsiaMIX samples were tested in the supplier’s laboratory and in camp to determine its shelf-life. Results indicated that the flour maintains its integrity during a six-month storage period although there was some degradation of micronutrients, mainly vitamins A and C, due to exposure to heat and moisture. Approximately 20% of initial amounts of vitamins A and C were lost after six months, but these amounts are now compensated for by a small increase in the premix.

In collaboration with the World Food Programme, TBBC planned to conduct a more in-depth study on the effect of cooking on micronutrients in fortified blended foods. Funds, however, have not been forthcoming and the study has yet to be undertaken.

In 2004 and 2006, the Centers for Disease Control (Atlanta) conducted a baseline and follow up survey to look at the consumption and effects of AsiaMIX in Umpiem Mai camp. The study showed a significant decrease in anaemia in children, indicating improved nutrition status from AsiaMIX consumption. A final report is in process.

Fishpaste was originally supplied at a ration of 1kg/ person/ month, but quality control checks in 2004 revealed lead and cadmium contamination well above maximum levels set by WHO and the Thai Food and Drug agency. In January 2005 TBBC sourced fishpaste from a new supplier made from cleaned sea fish that met the health standards but was about 50% more expensive than the traditional product. This was introduced to the camps at a reduced ration to 750 g/ person/ month as reflected in the above Figure. The better quality fishpaste is acceptable at the amounts provided.

During 2007 a similar problem has been found with the prawn-paste supplied as a preference in Tham Hin camp and a solution is currently being sought.

Supplementary feeding: For many years the health agencies ran supplementary feeding programmes for five vulnerable groups: malnourished children; pregnant and lactating women; tuberculosis and HIV patients; patients with chronic conditions; and hospital in-patients. The budget for ingredients was provided by TBBC which included rice, eggs, dried fish, beans, sugar, milk powder (to severely malnourished children only), vegetable oil, fresh fruits and vegetables.

These programmes were evaluated in May 1998 and the main conclusions were that the programmes and target groups were justified and the current food items covered by TBBC were appropriate. The evaluation recommended the health agencies to jointly review their different protocols and harmonise their programmes. It also recommended greater interchange between agencies to share experiences, tabling a suggested new format for reporting.

From late 2000, the TBBC nutritionist worked with the health agencies to follow up on the recommendations. The majority of the health agencies phased out wet feeding centres for malnourished children and integrated the programmes into their reproductive health activities. More comprehensive reporting forms and standardised entrance and exit criteria were introduced and standardised feeding protocols were encouraged according to MSF and WHO guidelines.

However, the 2003 ECHO evaluation uncovered inconsistencies in feeding protocols and implementation, and found that most agencies had not fully adopted the TBBC guidelines. The following recommendations were made:

• Feeding protocols (for women and children) needed to be revised and standardised to fully adopt international recommendations for supplementary feeding programmes.
• TBBC and health agencies should phase out current foods and introduce a blended food mix as the supplementary feeding.
• Supplementary Feeding Programmes of health agencies should report nutritional impact using objectively verifiable indicators.
• Reliable growth monitoring of children <3 needed to be set up by all health agencies.

In 2004 the TBBC nutritionist initiated a working group, the Nutrition Task Force (NTF), made up of representatives from TBBC and all health agencies. The NTF first met in July 2004 to strategise on the implementation of the ECHO recommendations. The Centres for Disease Control, Atlanta, (CDC) sent a nutritionist from their International Health Branch for four months at the beginning of 2005 to work with the TBBC nutritionist in implementing some of the changes and providing training and technical assistance to the health agencies. All agencies had fully implemented new guidelines and protocols by mid-2005. The TBBC nutritionist now conducts refresher training and ongoing technical support annually.

Nutrition surveys: Prior to 2000, nutrition surveys of children under five years of age were conducted sporadically and reactively by health agencies. TBBC assumed responsibility for coordinating annual nutrition surveys in all camps in 2001 and developed detailed guidelines for health agencies to do their own surveys. Since then, surveys have been conducted annually in most camps and provide data to assess indicators of overall nutrition status in the camps. Since 2005 TBBC has conducted training and supervision the surveys in order to ensure standard methodology.

Nursery school feeding: Some children eat less than three meals per day, and children under five years of age are most vulnerable to malnutrition. Nursery school feeding can ensure that some children in this age group get a nutritious meal during the day when parents may be busy doing community activities or working. TBBC began supporting nursery school lunches in three camps in 2003 (Sites 1 and 2, and Mae Ra Ma Luang) and during 2005 support was extended to cover four more camps (Mae La, Umpiem Mai, Nu Po, and Mae La Oon). A private donor currently supports schools in Ban Don Yang and Tham Hin.

The programmes are administered by the Karen Women’s Organisation (KWO) and the Karenni Women’s Organisation (KnWO) in Mae Sot, Mae Sariang, and Mae Hong Son. WEAVE and TOPS support their project management, evaluation, and proposal writing. In addition to providing meals, the programmes aim to enhance attendance in nursery school programmes and the capacity of CBOs to provide nutrition education, plan and administer programmes, and to gain knowledge on a variety of issues related to project management and childcare.

The current budget for a nursery school lunch is three baht per child per day, and is mainly used to purchase foods to supplement rice brought from home. Lunches typically include fresh foods, such as fruits and vegetables, and good quality protein foods, such as meat, fish, eggs, soymilk, and beans. Foods are purchased in the camps, helping to stimulate the local economy. Teachers and cooks have been trained by TBBC and/or by the partner agencies on basic nutrition concepts and meal planning for maximum nutrition impact at the lowest cost.

Community agriculture and nutrition (CAN) project and related initiatives: In 1999, members of the Karenni Refugee Committee (KnRC) began developing appropriate farming systems based on the production of indigenous food crops using only locally sourced materials in the context of minimal access to land and water. These initiatives were formalised as the Community Agriculture and Nutrition (CAN) Project.

Following announcement of a new policy by MOI in 2000 which encouraged projects designed to increase refugee agricultural production for their own consumption, several NGOs set up training courses and small agricultural support projects in some camps. With increasing understanding of the nutritional status of the refugees, TBBC began actively supporting the CAN project as a way of supplementing TBBC rations and preventing micronutrient deficiencies.

After three years of development in the Karenni camps, the Karen Refugee Committee (KRC) in 2003 agreed to also adopt the CAN project as its food security and agricultural training programme. TBBC began supporting training and assistance to extend the CAN project to all camps. The stated goals of the project are:

• Short-term: To improve refugees’ diet in camp: To assist community members achieve sustainable increases in food production using local resources.
• Long-term: To improve coping strategies for eventual repatriation: To help develop appropriate and essential skills needed to achieve future long-term food security.

Activities have included:

• Training: Training of Teachers (ToT) training for CBOs working in the camps, with IDPs and in some Thai villages, including teacher training for middle school students; training for camp residents.
• Infrastructure and materials distribution: Setting up demonstration sites in most camps and community food gardens in association with schools, boarding houses, orphanages, and community group concerns. Supporting community-based animal husbandry initiatives in camps such as bio-compost pig pens; distribution and training in poultry incubators for re-stocking after disease incidents; and trials of household micro-livestock. Providing CAN training participants basic tool kits to enable them to carry out small-scale domestic food production. Establishing crop-tree nurseries for distribution of trees to households. The species used are chosen on the basis of their nutritional profile, application (fencing, fuel wood etc.) and familiarity to local communities. Four community seed banks were established in villages surrounding three camps in order to both support these communities as well as avoid reliance on commercial hybrid seed stock that has the potential to damage local biodiversity. The species were selected on their nutritional profile, cultural acceptance, and ease of cultivation. Distribution of seeds is through Camp Committees, Vocational Training Committees, and CBOs. The distribution of fencing to contain domestic animals and protect kitchen gardens.
• Production is ongoing of a CAN Handbook in five languages: Burmese, Sgaw Karen, English, Shan and Pa O. The English and Burmese versions of the handbook were published in the 1st quarter of 2007.

The CAN project has now been established in seven border camps. Ban Don Yang and Tham Hin camps currently are serviced by ZOA and COERR. TBBC, nevertheless, conducted CAN evaluations in these two camps in the first half of 2006 and there are plans to train CAN trainers for those camps to begin activities in the 3rd quarter of 2007.

The project aims to contribute to the nutrition of participants and their communities, and the current focus is on uptake at the household level to improve availability of fresh foods, self-sufficiency, and household food security. Although hindered in some locations by limited space and water, the project is building a comprehensive approach to both the immediate and long-term food security issues facing refugee and IDP populations.

Under the new Food Security Programme structure, a baseline survey will be carried out of agricultural activities in the camps during the second half of 2007 to inform further programme developments. TBBC will also attend a planned UNHCR/ CCSDPT Agriculture Workshop to determine possible TBBC involvement in agriculture-related livelihoods projects. Possibilities include extending agriculture activities outside the camps and related activities such as food processing and the manufacture of agricultural tools.

[Rev: Oct 07]

Cooking fuel, cooking stoves, utensils

Cooking fuel: When camps started to be consolidated in 1995, TBBC was asked to supply cooking fuel to Mae La camp in order to lessen environmental damage caused by refugees gathering wood from the surrounding forest. TBBC began supplying compressed sawdust logs in September 1995. Log rations were gradually increased on an experimental basis and by the end of 1997 they had became a major expense. During 1998 TBBC tried out new forms of fuel, principally charcoal sawdust logs and bamboo charcoal. These were well received by the refugees and were more efficient to use. In Karenni Camp 3 the Karenni Refugee Committee also taught refugees to manufacture their own charcoal logs using rice husk ash and off-cut bamboo ash.

With increasing concerns for the environment and restrictions on refugee movements, more and more camps were supplied with cooking fuel each year and, since early 2000, all camps have been provided with ‘full’ rations. Cooking fuel became TBBC’s second largest expenditure after rice. But even after ‘full’ rations had been introduced, the Thai authorities still complained that the refugees were destroying the local forests and asked TBBC to increase the rations by as much as 100%. TBBC decided that it needed expert advice to determine optimum rations more scientifically and to help assess the efficiency of the available products.

In 2000 the UNHCR commissioned a consultant who concluded that there was a need for increased rations, variable according to family size, but that improving fuel quality, supplying efficient cooking stoves and improving cooking techniques could reduce the overall need. He also recommended experimenting with much cheaper, commercially available firewood.

These recommendations had mostly been implemented by 2003 but refugees still complained that their rations were inadequate. TBBC therefore re-commissioned the original consultant to review the current situation in June/July 2003. This resulted in a recommendation to revise the family distribution curve, increasing the average fuel ration from 7.1 to 7.9 kg/ person/ month. This recommendation was implemented immediately. Other suggestions including the handling and inspection of charcoal have also been implemented and a penalty system for suppliers of poor quality charcoal has been introduced.

An experiment with firewood in Tham Hin camp in 2000/1 was partially successful in that about 34% of fuel costs were saved compared with supplying 100% charcoal. This resulted in TBBC increasing the firewood proportion of fuel in Tham Hin to 70:30 in 2002 at the request of MOI and extending the experiment to Umpiem Mai and Karenni Camp 3 to test the availability and acceptance of firewood in other provinces.

The extensions of this experiment were not successful. Tham Hin residents complain that the firewood component there is too high and the committees have problems in ensuring equitable distributions. There are problems with consistency and storage of supplies. The residents of Umpiem Mai complained of fire risk due to high winds experienced in that camp and the experiment in Karenni Camp 3 had to be abandoned when the camp was relocated to Camp 2 (now known as Site 1). It has been decided to limit the use of firewood for cooking fuel to Tham Hin camp, and to supply firewood to Umpiem Mai only for supplementary heating during the cold season. However, the range and quantity of charcoal in the market place continues to increase, consequently reducing the cost benefits of firewood.

Cooking stoves: New fuel-efficient ‘bucket’ cooking stoves developed in Site 1 Camp were introduced to other camps in Mae Hong Son and Tak provinces. Workshops have been set up for the refugees to manufacture these themselves in Mae Ra Ma Luang, Mae La Oon, Mae La, Nu Po and Umpiem Mai camps. It was originally hoped that all camps would become self-sufficient but this has proved unfeasible at least in the short term.

TBBC conducted a survey in all camps in November 2005 which established that approximately 90% of households were using bucket stoves. To address the shortfall, commercially-produced stoves were distributed during 2006 to the 10% of households identified in a survey as not having fuel-efficient stoves. The situation will be monitored. Where possible, deficiencies will be met by stoves manufactured in the camps, but where the quantity is inadequate, commercial stoves will be supplied.

Cooking utensils: The refugees traditionally took care of their own miscellaneous household needs but this became increasingly problematic as their ability to work and forage became more limited. By the end of 2000 it was observed that there were not enough cooking pots in the camps and many households were using very old ones. A distribution of pots was made to all households in 2001 at the rate of one pot per family with a larger size pot provided for families with more than five people. Further distributions were made in 2004 and 2007. Based on consultations with CBOs, for 2007 TBBC offered households the choice of either a pot or wok.

[Rev: Oct 07]

Building materials

In the past, building materials were not generally supplied, although roofing was given when camps had to be moved out of season and the materials were difficult to find. In 1997, however, the authorities began to prohibit refugees cutting bamboo in some areas and TBBC started to provide all essential construction materials for the new sites created during camp consolidations.

Early in 2000 the Thai authorities also asked TBBC to supply materials for housing repairs in all camps since they were concerned that the refugees were still depleting the local forests. During that year bamboo and eucalyptus poles were supplied to most camps and thatch or roofing leaves to some. In 2001 TBBC increased the amount of materials supplied and extended distributions to all camps, but there were still inconsistencies and difficulties obtaining good and uniform quality materials in some areas. In response to protection workshops TBBC committed to providing sufficient materials for building new houses and repairs so that refugees should not have to leave the camps to supplement the building materials supplied, thereby exposing themselves to the risk of arrest or abuse.

TBBC introduced new standard rations for all camps in 2003 and these were reviewed in 2004, largely as a result of experience with the move of Mae Khong Kha to Mae La Oon in 2004, where supplies to build a new house were considered insufficient.

In accordance with ‘Sphere’ standards, sufficient materials are supplied to ensure houses can provide at least 3.5 square metres of floor area per person. The building materials are those customarily used for houses in rural areas in Burma, as well as in the Thai villages proximal to camps. Refugee communities have high levels of skills and expertise in designing and constructing houses from bamboo, wood and thatch. Refugees design, construct and repair their own houses. The community helps out those physically unable to do so, such as the elderly. Not only does this activity reinforce self-sufficiency and identity, it also keeps refugees skilled in house building and means these skills are passed onto the younger generation growing up in the confines of the refugee camps. The ability to construct shelters from local materials will be particularly important in the event of repatriation.

Building supplies are a large budget item and procurement is problematic, particularly for bamboo because of difficulties in accessing the large quantities required and restrictions on movement across provincial boundaries. A household survey was therefore carried out in the second half of 2005 to assess the validity of the current ration. The results suggested that the ration was appropriate but, due to budget constraints, the bamboo ration in 2006 had to be cut by at least 25% and almost no new houses were built excepting holding centres in various camps.

Full rations plus extra supplies to meet the 2006 shortfall were made up in 2007, resulting in a huge increase in supplies delivered to the camps. This exacerbated procurement problems making it even more difficult to ensure good prices and timely, quality deliveries. It was necessary to start independent control checks and conduct an audit in two camps. During the second half of 2007 a review will be made of controls to be put in place for 2008 and legal advice sought to try to make procurement more transparent.

Meanwhile another household survey in 2007 again suggests that most households feel they need higher rations but again there will have to be cuts in 2008 because of budget difficulties. Bamboo rations will be cut, although there will be some increase in roofing materials because a shortage in these results in exposure and deterioration of the bamboo used for walls. There will be increased monitoring to check how refugees use these supplies.

Environmental impact: The impact of the refugee population on the environment was minimised until the mid-1990s by keeping the camps to the size of small villages. The refugees were not allowed to plant rice although in some areas they could forage in the jungle for edible roots, vegetables and building materials. The environmental impact of the camps was significant, but relatively minor when compared with the damage caused by rampant illegal logging conducted by other parties. The creation of larger, consolidated camps since 1995 has placed greater strain on the environment. This has resulted in the need for TBBC to supply cooking fuel, fuel-efficient cooking stoves and building materials as explained above. The cooking fuel is made from waste from sawmills, bamboo and coconut by-products and, where possible, the building materials are supplied from commercially grown plots. TBBC food supplies are generally delivered in reusable containers, e.g., sacks for rice, yellow beans and salt, plastic barrels for fishpaste and drums for cooking oil. TBBC is monitoring water sources to measure any contamination following the introduction of soap distributions border-wide.

[Rev: Oct 07]

Clothing

Used clothing: Beginning in 1995, World Concern and Lutheran World Relief (LWR) started sending shipments of used clothing, sweaters and quilts and TBBC was able to give most refugees at least one item of clothing most years. As the refugees became more aid-dependent there was a growing need for clothing, especially warm clothing for the cold season, and since 2001 TBBC has tried to ensure regular distributions.

The Shanti Volunteer Association (SVA) became a major source of good quality jackets/ sweaters from Japan. In 2002 and 2003 TBBC was able to receive shipments from both SVA and LWR in time for the cold season, ensuring that each refugee received at least two pieces of clothing. (World Concern was no longer able to supply large enough quantities of used clothing to make the bureaucracy involved worthwhile). Unfortunately SVA had to discontinue this project after 2003 but LWR continue to supply used clothing annually and for 2007 the Wakachiai project, a Japanese NGO, will send a consignment of 40,000 clothing items.

Used clothing is not available for young children and since 2004 TBBC has purchased one clothing-set for all under-fives. Plans were considered to purchase sets for five to 12 year olds in 2006 but this has not been realised due to TBBC’s funding shortfall. These plans, however, remain under consideration either as direct purchase of clothing-sets or as an income generation activity for refugees with in-camp production in cooperation with ZOA.

Weaving project: Since 2002 TBBC has supported a longyi-weaving project organised by the women’s organisations (Burmese style wrap-around ‘skirt’, worn by both men and women). This is to maintain and develop traditional skills, to provide income generation and also to develop the capacity of the women’s organisations in all aspects of project management. TBBC supplies thread and funds for the women’s groups to make one longyi for every woman and man (>12 years) in alternate years beginning with one longyi for every woman in 2002. Production was initially in Mae La camp, but by the end of 2004 all camps were producing their own supplies. During 2006 special weaving materials were provided for Kayan women in Site 1 to weave their own traditional clothing using back-strap looms.

[Rev: Oct 07]

Blankets, bednets and sleeping mats

With malaria and respiratory diseases being major health problems, bednets and blankets are essential relief items. They have to be supplied and replaced on a regular basis because they wear out rapidly due to heavy use and the rough conditions in crowded bamboo houses. Major distributions are made once each year.

Insecticide-treated nets were introduced in 1997 following recommendations made by the Sho Khlo Malaria Research Unit (SMRU) and the CCSDPT Health Subcommittee. Malaria transmission rates in the camps then fell dramatically and the use of impregnated nets was phased out of Tak and Mae Hong Son camps during 2000 and 2001 and in Tham Hin and Ban Don Yang camps in 2002. All camps have since been supplied with non-impregnated nets. This decision is under review however and TBBC is awaiting the recommendations of the CCSDPT Health Subcommittee.

Sleeping mats were formally supplied only when requested by the Refugee Committees. During 1998 it was agreed that these mats should be distributed more methodically to ensure that all refugees use them in conjunction with the bednets. It was noted that households not using them were vulnerable to mosquitoes entering the nets through the bamboo flooring of houses. Household surveys were conducted and additional distributions undertaken. The current policy is to carry out a full distribution of sleeping mats every two years, the latest having made in 2007.

The normal distribution rate has been one blanket for every two refugees, one family size bednet and one sleeping mat per three persons. Feedback from refugee communities regarding bednets and sleeping mats suggests the current ration is not well-suited to family and household composition. In 2007, TBBC matched household needs for bednets and sleeping mats by distributing double and family size items.

[Rev: Oct 07]

Emergency stock

TBBC aims to have staff in the area within 24 hours of any emergency situation such as an influx of new arrivals, flood or fire damage. An assessment will then be carried out where possible (i.e., where there is no security risk) in coordination with the health agencies, a member of the refugee community, UNHCR and the local Thai authorities.

Since June 2002 an ‘emergency stock’ of basic non-food items has been maintained in order to be able to ‘re-spond’ quickly to any emergency.

[Rev: Oct 07]

Protection

TBBC played a leading role on establishing the UNHCR/ CCSDPT Protection Working Group (PWG) in 2000 in response to UNHCR's Outreach Workshop held in Bangkok in 1999. The PWG is committed to the concept of shared responsibilities in protection which extends to the refugee communities. To further this, the PWG has been extremely active in organising joint activities for NGOs and CBOs and taking up specific protection issues both at the community level and with the Thai authorities. Workshops have been conducted within service sectors (education, health, food and shelter, etc) and on an issue basis (SGBV, repatriation, camp management) and ongoing training is seen as a key component of the collaboration.

PWG meetings are held regularly at both the Bangkok and provincial level. Focus areas with RTG have included birth registration and the administration of justice in camps. Other areas include child protection networks, reporting and referral mechanisms. Current focus with the Ministry of Justice is refugee access to justice and existing mechanisms for juvenile justice. Legal assistance centres have been opened in Site #1 and MaeLa after lengthy negotiations. There is also active ongoing UNHCR/ NGO/ Camp Committee dialogue on the civilian nature of camps and the protection implication of military elements in the camps. The TBBC Deputy Executive Director is the facilitator of the PWG.TBBC also represents the PWG in the UN working group on Children Affected by Armed Conflict (CAAC).

[Rev: Oct 07]

Procurement procedures, transportation, delivery, storage, distribution, food containers

Procurement procedures: Traditionally, all food items were purchased in the border provinces, usually monthly, but sometimes rice was purchased in advance to secure good prices. TBBC monitored daily rice prices published in Bangkok, checked the local markets and compared the prices paid at the different locations along the border. All of the commodities TBBC used were everyday items readily available in all markets and it was relatively straightforward to informally check value for money. Formal competitive quotations were obtained only occasionally when requested by large donors. Generally these confirmed that local suppliers could offer the lowest prices and best service, mainly because frequent deliveries were required to many small camps with constantly changing road conditions and security situations.

The TBBC programme was quite small in the early years but as it grew, it became very significant by local standards. Over time the better local suppliers geared themselves up to TBBC’s needs. In some cases they bought their own transportation and extended their storehouses. They got to know the local officials and became familiar with the topography. This enabled them to help solve administration blockages and to respond rapidly to frequent emergencies, getting their supplies to difficult remote areas at very short notice. In some cases the suppliers organised annual road repairs into the camps at the end of the rainy season to enable their trucks to get in. In short, some local suppliers built up their operations to meet TBBC’s needs and had overwhelming advantages over other potential suppliers from a distance.

During 1999, however, mainly in response to more stringent ECHO grant conditions, the TBBC adopted formal bidding/ contract procedures for rice and mung bean supplies in Tak province. And in 2000 tendering was introduced for rice, mung beans, cooking oil and cooking fuel in all provinces. Bidding was open to all interested suppliers and it became more realistic for new suppliers to compete because, as a result of the camp consolidation exercise, there were far fewer camps to serve, with better road access. During 2001 TBBC engaged an EURONAID consultant to assist in upgrading it’s tendering and contracting procedures to meet exacting ECHO standards, including international bidding and the opening of bids before a tendering committee.

TBBC now publicly tenders for all supplies of rice, mung beans, cooking oil, AsiaMIX, fishpaste, soybean cakes, tinned fish, chillies, salt, sugar, cooking fuel, bednets, blankets, sleeping mats, cooking pots/ woks, plastic sheeting and eucalyptus poles, representing around 80% of all commodity purchases. The only major items for which public tendering remains unfeasible at present are building supplies (bamboo and thatch), which are restricted items under Thai law.

The whole procurement process, including the advertising of tenders, bidding process, opening of bids, awarding of contracts and invoice/ payment procedures, has been subject to several evaluations and audits and gradually upgraded and standardised. The ECHO audit in June 2007 was the latest to recommend minor adjustments and these have already been implemented. The procedures meet all major donor requirements and is summarised in the chart. A comprehensive TBBC Procurement Manual was produced in 2005.

Most contracts are still awarded to local companies. Experience with ‘outside’ suppliers has often been problematic and TBBC has adopted a policy of only awarding new suppliers with relatively small contracts in the less sensitive camps as a way of testing their ability. All tendering is processed in Bangkok to protect field offices from potential pressures.

Transportation: Transportation costs are included in the price of all food supplies except AsiaMIX. In Tak province transportation is usually by ten-wheel truck with a capacity of 400 50-kg rice sacks. For the other camps which are less accessible, transportation is usually by six-wheel trucks or 4-wheel drive pick-ups. The TBBC staff organise the necessary permits from the local Thai authorities.

Delivery/storage: TBBC itself does not store food. Small quantities of AsiaMIX were initially stored by TBBC, but this is no longer the case. The suppliers keep their own stock and delivery is made directly to warehouses in the camps. TBBC supplies building materials for the warehouses and the refugee Camp Committees are responsible for their construction and maintenance. TBBC provides guidance and technical input to foster best practice. The frequency of delivery varies by location. For Mae La camp delivery of rice is every two weeks, but for other commodities and in most of the other camps, delivery is monthly during the dry season. During the rainy season remote camps have to be stockpiled for up to eight months because they become inaccessible by delivery trucks.

TBBC staff arrange and check deliveries to camps. The Refugee Camp Committee checks weights and quality on delivery, and generally sets aside any deficient items pending further checking and/or replacement. Standard weights have been distributed to the camp stores to allow the calibration of scales prior to the checking of delivered goods and ration distributions. A goods received note (GRN) signed by warehouse managers was fully introduced during 2005 and has subsequently been upgraded based on suggestions from refugee warehouse staff. This form is TBBC’s record that commodities have arrived in camp in correct quantity, weight and quality. Delivery schedules are designed to ensure that new supplies arrive before the refugees have consumed the previous deliveries, with sufficient allowance for possible delays due to road conditions, breakdowns and other factors.

Camp Committees receive training in the management of supplies and warehouse design has been reviewed. Most warehouses have been rebuilt or received major repairs since 2005 with technical input from the TBBC staff, and with reference to WFP guidelines. In some cases warehouses are still substandard and training, repairs and rebuilding is ongoing.

Distribution: The Refugee Camp Committees are responsible for the distribution of supplies. Food distributions were traditionally organised by men because they had to carry 100 kg sacks. However, during 2001, 50 kg sacks were introduced to all camps and women were drawn more into the unloading and distribution process. Distributions of household items, e.g., pots, bednets and clothing often are conducted with the assistance of women’s organisations, teachers or health workers. Each family has a ration book stating their entitlement, and they are called to the delivery point for distribution. Whilst most are male-headed households, it is the women who usually collect the TBBC rations.

During 2004 the UN High Commissioner for Refugees made five commitments to women including their equal participation in food distribution. Throughout 2006, TBBC worked with Camp Committees to strengthen the role of women in food distribution and borderwide, women involved in food distribution increased from 11% in 2006, to 35% by early 2007.

Ration pictures are posted at each warehouse depicting ration items and amounts. Their presence is checked monthly as a component of TBBC’s monitoring system. Amounts distributed are recorded on camp records and in the ration books. TBBC issues standard ration books borderwide and monitors their usage to help ensure each family retains its own ration book. The use and design of ration books is constantly under review and larger versions with more room for signatures and comment will be introduced for 2008.

Following the ECHO evaluation in 2003 greater attention has been given to the accuracy of weights and distribution measuring containers. TBBC introduced standard measures to improve distribution accuracy in the warehouses which were not weighing individual rice rations. Most camps now are either weighing only, or using a combination of standard measures and weighing. TBBC continues to encourage camps to weigh supplies during distribution.

Food containers: In general, distributing reusable food storage containers to households is a response to not only health but also environmental concerns. TBBC began providing refugees containers for AsiaMIX in 2004 and cooking oil in 2005. Sealable plastic containers are given to each household to enable proper storage of AsiaMIX to safeguard it from moisture and rodents and refugees are only allowed to collect the AsiaMIX ration if they bring their containers with them to distribution points. Plastic oil containers with volume gradations were distributed to each household during the second half of 2005. These have proved to be durable and beneficial. Not only are they hygienic, but refugees can also check visually that their oil rations are received in full.

In the first half of 2006 sealed plastic drums were introduced for the delivery and storage of fishpaste. These have replaced the metal tins formerly used and which were recycled from other uses including holding toxic chemicals. The new plastic drums are purchased and supplied by TBBC but are the suppliers’ responsibility during a contract period. Consideration now is being given to supplying households containers specifically for home storage of fishpaste.

[Rev: Oct 07]

Quality control, monitoring

Quality control: Since the Refugee Committees are very familiar with the expected quality of supplies, it was generally considered in the past that appearance, smell and taste were adequate to assess quality. Substandard supplies rejected by the Camp Committees were returned to the suppliers for replacement. Rice and other food samples were submitted for testing by an independent inspection company only on an occasional basis.

However, regular independent quality control inspections were introduced in 2001 and now TBBC utilises the services of professional inspection companies to carry out independent checks in accordance with major Donor regulations. Sample checks are made on weight, packaging and quality for rice, yellow beans, AsiaMIX, cooking oil, fishpaste, soybean cake, chillies, salt, sugar and cooking fuel. This occurs at the source of the supply, en route to camp, or in camps. The vast majority of inspections are now done in camps. In addition, the Refugee Committees carry out checks at the time of delivery/ distribution. Refugee warehouse staff and TBBC staff have been trained in basic checks of commodity quality and weight. Substandard supplies are subject to warnings, penalties or replacement. Despite this, inevitably quality problems continue to occur. When these happen sampling rates may be increased, further checks initiated and protocols modified if necessary.

Monitoring: TBBC staff continuously monitor refugee population numbers, and the quality, quantity, delivery, storage and distribution of supplies. A dynamic and formal monitoring system has been continually refined since 1995 based on frequent evaluations. This system involves information collection by professional inspectors and checks made on supplies (delivery, quality, weight, and distribution) through camp recording systems and staff visits to the camps.

TBBC is constantly seeking ways of improving the accuracy of camp population figures used for supply calculations. The Camp Management Project, led by the Karen and Karenni Refugee Committees in partnership with TBBC, produces ‘feeding’ population figures (as opposed to camp registration figures) which take account of absentees from the camps. These figures have been reviewed in all camps during June/July 2007.

The major features of the current supply monitoring system are:

‘Goods received notes’ (GRNs) are TBBC’s major means of verification that supplies are delivered to camp as planned. A GRN is completed by Warehouse Managers on arrival of every supply truck to camp, recording:

• Information concerning the type of commodity, quantity, supplier, purchase order, time of delivery and driver.
• Comments on supplies rejected and why.
• An assessment of quantity (a 10% random sample of food items/ charcoal is weighed and recorded).

GRNs are signed by the Warehouse Manager and verified by TBBC staff. Data collected are converted to field reports on percentages of commodities passed for weight, quality and time of delivery.

Checks at distribution points which allow TBBC staff to transparently monitor a larger number of household rations. Furthermore, the distribution practices of warehouse staff are observed, ration book usage noted, as well as verification that appropriate information on rations is visible and available to refugees. The system requires that one percent of households is checked, for a selected supply distribution, in each camp per month. Checking criteria are itemised. The data is converted to a percentage pass.

Formal inspections of warehouses in camps are conducted each month by TBBC staff. 20 parameters are used to rate the state of the warehouse as a percentage.

Every month, two community groups per camp are visited by TBBC for feedback. Generally one group is a collection of households. The second group may be a women’s organisation, religious group, boarding house or other group. Qualitative data is recorded.

Locked comments post-boxes are installed at warehouses and, in some camps, at CBO offices with a request for anonymous feedback on supplies.

A ‘supply and distribution reconciliation’ is made monthly to detect what proportion of all supplies delivered to camp is distributed to the target population.

The Procurement Manager compiles a comprehensive summary of quality and weight inspections of TBBC supplies conducted by independent accredited inspection companies.

TBBC Field Assistants and Coordinators make a preliminary evaluation of data in respective field sites. The Programme Support Manager and Programme Coordinator then make a borderwide evaluation and documents these in monthly reports. Findings inform TBBC’s relief programme. Feedback is given to TBBC management and other staff, refugee partners and recipients, and other relevant stakeholders.

[Rev: Oct 07]

Assistance to Thai communities

TBBC has always provided assistance to Thai communities in the vicinity of the refugee camps. This is in recognition of the fact that there are poor communities which do not have access to any other assistance and which may feel neglected when support is given to refugees in their area. For many years assistance given was ad hoc, TBBC providing educational supplies to Thai schools, distributing blankets during the cool season, and assisting many times with flood relief. The TBBC also provided compensation to local communities affected by the location of the refugee camps in their area, and assisted local Thai authorities with the cost of repairing roads near the refugee camps.

In 1999 the TBBC established a more formal policy for responding to such requests. The policy specified potential beneficiaries for assistance including: disasters and emergencies in the border provinces; communities directly affected by the refugee populations; other border communities whose standard of living was equal or less than that of the refugees; and Thai agencies providing security or assistance which were not adequately funded by the authorities. The policy set out procedures for submitting requests, but was still very general in nature, covering potentially huge geographic areas. It proved difficult for field staff to control when faced by numerous requests through the local authorities.

During the RTG/ NGO Workshop in December 2006, MOI asked all NGOs to submit action plans for assistance to neighbouring Thai communities for 2007 and stated that the camp commanders had lists of target villages. This provided TBBC with an opportunity to reconsider how best to prioritise Thai assistance.

TBBC has agreed to focus local support (90%) on villages less than 30 kilometres from the refugee camps and to apportion available budget for Thai authority support between provinces in proportion to their share of the refugee population. A specific budget will also be allocated for assistance for repairs to camp access roads used by TBBC suppliers. TBBC has been supporting many communities quite far from the camps for some time and will be phasing these out during 2007. MOI has been informed of the policy which will make more rational use of available resources and be easier for staff to control.

[Rev: Oct 07]