Two pilots for the use of cash transfers to assist people in transit

Colombia has received more migrants and refugees from Venezuela than any other country, and the number continues to increase. Large numbers have made their way on foot: in 2021, an estimated 162,000 walkers, or caminantes Caminantes: refugee and migrant population that, due to multiple privations, including the lack of resources to access public or private transportation, travel totally or partially by foot to their final destination. were expected to enter Colombia as regular or irregular migrants, and this trend looks set to continue in 2022. Caminantes face heightened protection risks during their journey due to their often-irregular migration status and lack of access to food, water, shelter and health services.

Given this context, several international and national NGOs have expressed interest in developing a protection strategy involving the use of cash transfers to support caminantes entering Colombia. Building on this interest, the Cash Working Group for Colombia (CwG) developed an advocacy strategy to persuade the Colombian government to endorse pilots for the use of cash transfers aimed at this transitory population. This article describes the advocacy strategy, assessment and analysis of the target population, the implementation of the pilots and the challenges and lessons learned.

Advocacy strategy

The Colombian government’s guidelines for the implementation of cash and voucher assistance (CVA) for the Venezuelan migrant population, published in February 2019 and revised in March 2020, stipulate the amounts to be delivered per family based on the number of people in the household, and the eligibility requirements under which migrants can or cannot receive vouchers or cash. The guidelines do not cover people in transit, including caminantes.

The Cash Working Group led an advocacy process with the government to expand CVA coverage to include people in transit. Through a series of joint and inter-linked actions, including research and context analysis, strategic alliances and political advocacy processes, it was possible to influence the government to allow two pilot cash transfer programmes specifically targeting caminantes.

The advocacy strategy contained the following components:

1. Context analysis and research. Based on reports  from a number of different organisations on the protection issues, unmet basic needs and risks and threats affecting people in transit, the Cash Working Group prepared an advocacy document justifying the use of cash transfers.
2. Strategic alliances. The Cash Working Group created space for discussion on the importance of supporting people in transit through cash transfers. The data, evidence and experience discussed were used to strengthen the advocacy document. Alliances were also formed with ZOA and VenEsperanza, two organisations that proposed pilot cash transfer projects targeting migrants in transit in border areas for government approval.
3. Advocacy. The CwG in Colombia worked with the government through the Border Management Office (Gerencia de Frontera), the Colombian government entity in charge of leading the response to the migrant crisis. Joint efforts included presentation from the CwG to the Gerencia de Frontera on the needs of people in transit, and how the proposed pilots might address them.

As a result of this exercise, the government approved the two pilots, and implementation began in July 2021. To date, around 1,500 people have received cash transfers. In the first pilot, recipients spent the majority of cash provided on transportation and food, while in the second the cash was used mainly to cover food and accommodation. 

Information analysis: rapid assessment of people in transit

From mid-2020 to July 2021, the REACH Initiative conducted eight rounds of the Evaluation of Trends in Needs and Intentions of Migratory Movements (ETNIMM). While the majority of key informants were Venezuelans (between 77% and 98% of all key informants interviewed across each round), people from other countries in the region were also entering and transiting through Colombia. These findings suggest a fluid and dynamic movement of migrants within the country, but with information gaps related to their needs, risks and vulnerabilities. The REACH assessment and the cash and voucher activities (CVA) were mainly motivated by the hypothesis of the additional risks faced by people in transit who were moving on foot.

In collaboration with REACH, the CWG coordination body and the organisations planning to conduct CVA pilots with people in transit, ZOA and VenEsperanza, reviewed the questionnaire used in the first five rounds and suggested including several additional questions in the following three rounds.

Questions were added on whether people preferred to receive assistance in cash, in-kind or as vouchers or services, as well as questions on how they used the assistance received en route and how satisfied they were with it (in order to triangulate with the preference). Questions were also added on whether receiving money while they were en route made them feel less secure or more at risk, as this was one of the main concerns of ZOA and VenEsperanza. Finally, questions on recipients’ perceptions of access or barriers to markets along their routes were added as the ZOA pilot envisaged people using their payment cards in markets to meet their needs.

For advocacy and response analysis purposes, information was also collected about people’s movement intentions.  Questions on the reasons for their movement and the main needs and risks they faced on the route, had already been included in previous rounds of the ETNIMM.

The last round of the evaluation was conducted in person between 21 and 30 June, in the municipalities of Arauca (Arauca), Bogotá, Bucaramanga (Santander) and San José de Cúcuta (Norte de Santander). The key results relevant to the CVA pilots are presented below.

In terms of assistance received, just over half of the caminantes (53%) reported having received assistance; of this, the majority (74%) reported that the assistance came from a humanitarian agency, and the top three types of assistance received were in the form of take-away food, hot food and water (57%, 54% and 41%, respectively). The vast majority (91%) of respondents reported having used or consumed the assistance received, as opposed to exchanging it for transport or other goods (4% and 3%, respectively). Regarding the level of satisfaction with the assistance, 57% of key informants reported that the assistance satisfied some of their needs, while 28% felt it met only a few.

The top three needs during transit mentioned by key informants were food, transport and accommodation (82%, 60% and 43%, respectively). Just under half of key informants (42%) said they preferred to receive assistance for these needs in cash. Preference for vouchers or coupons and service delivery was lower, at 18% and 16%, respectively. Finally, respondents were asked how they would feel, in terms of safety, about receiving cash assistance on the road. The majority (84%) reported that they would prefer to receive cash on the road rather than pick it up at a supermarket cash register, use money transfer services or be given vouchers or coupons.

Regarding access to markets along the route, 22% of key informants reported difficulties, mainly linked to social barriers related to respondents’ nationality, such as not being allowed to enter a shop or market (32%) or not being sold products (29%), and financial barriers, such as not having enough money to buy goods (25%).

Implementation of the government-approved pilots

ZOA pilot

Based on the rapid assessment of people in transit and an analysis of markets along the route between Arauca, on the border with Venezuela, and Yopal, the next city on the route to Bogotá and other municipalities in the center of the country, the following priority needs were identified: 85% of caminantes named food as their top priority, 70% transport, 51% clean water, 38% services and 37% shelter. In line with Colombian government guidelines and the needs identified, ZOA provided one electronic card with a value of up to COP $370,000 ($98) to each family in the pilot. Just over 60% of participants in the pilot are women, 44% of whom are pregnant; 39.4% are men; and 12.5% are persons with disabilities.

To date, the ZOA pilot has enabled 279 people (80 families) to access water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) services, food (hot meals), transport and non-food items (including clothing, footwear, blankets and suitcases). There are 10 designated vendors at five points along the route (Panama, Tame, San Salvador, Paz de Ariporo and Chaparrera): four supermarkets, two providers of miscellaneous assistance, three hot meal vendors and one transport provider (bus station).

The breakdown of expenditure registered on the cards is as follows:

• 72.38% was spent on non-food items such as transport (47.94%), clothing (28.85%), shoes (17.64%), hygiene items (3.95%) and medicines (0.19%)
• 27.61% was spent on food, 8.77% on hot food and 18.84% on other food items.

Two-thirds of participants in the pilot gave Bogotá as their destination, largely on the grounds they had relatives or friends living there. There was a strong preference for the electronic card instead of cash (68%), because they felt safer using it to buy goods along the route. 

Lessons learned from this pilot include:

• Field personnel spent 70% of their time on identifying potential beneficiaries.
• To ensure caminantes are targeted for cash programming, better ways of identifying them will need to be found.
• Because transport is the highest priority need, transport services providers must be included in cash programming for caminantes.
• Developing alliances at destination points with organisations that can provide complementary and ongoing assistance is critical to ensuring the continuity of assistance.

VenEsperanza pilot

This pilot began with the registration of people in transit entering the country at three border points in Norte de Santander (Los Patios and La Don Juana), La Guajira (CAT, Transport Terminal and Paraguachón) and Arauca (Transport Terminal and the Antioquia ‘Y’). Once registration had been completed, a SIM card was issued along with information on how to contact and notify VenEsperanza when people arrived at their destination. Notification of arrival is necessary before households can participate in a targeting process (through the application of the beneficiary eligibility selection criteria) which will enable them to receive humanitarian assistance for six months, through a monthly transfer of up to COP $370,000.

The VenEsperanza consortium Save the Children, Mercy Corps, World Vision and International Rescue Committee. provides assistance in the departments of Magdalena, Nariño, Valle del Cauca, Antioquia, Cesar, Bolívar, Norte de Santander, Cundinamarca, Atlántico, Santander, Arauca, La Guajira and Bogotá. People who arrive in departments where VenEsperanza is not operating are referred to the Cash for Urban Assistance (CUA) consortium. Danish Refugee Council, Norwegian Refugee Council and Action Against Hunger.

Three IT tools are being used in the pilot: KoBo (for the initial registration), a chatbot and a web form (for reporting arrivals at destination points and updating data). As an additional communication strategy, a closed Facebook group was created to share information with the population in transit. The Facebook group is a one-way communication channel designed to broadcast relevant information about the programme, to update data and contact channels and to inform people of how they can report their arrival at a destination point.

As part of the pilot, 3,728 caminantes have been registered, of whom 70% (2,611) reported their arrival to their destination (92% by chatbot; 8% by web). Eighty-two per cent of households that arrived at their destination and applied for cash assistance met the eligibility criteria.

Some of the challenges identified during the implementation of this pilot are as follows:

• The self-application mechanisms make it possible for people who are not caminantes to register.
• A significant number of people appeared to have registered twice but because they did not provide sufficient information it was not possible to contact them and verify their identities.
• A high percentage of the population in transit (55%) registered but did not report their arrival at their destination.
• There are caminantes who cannot be targeted with follow-up assistance because they have moved to departments where there is no pilot coverage.
• It can be difficult to contact households for post-distribution monitoring, mainly because they do not update their contact information.

Conclusions

The Colombian government’s guidelines for addressing the needs of the Venezuelan migrant population through cash transfers do not consider people in transit, despite the high protection risks caminantes face. The Cash Working Group developed and implemented a multi-faceted advocacy strategy which led to government approval for two pilot cash transfer programmes aimed at minimising these risks. The success of the pilots has strengthened the argument for continuing them and the government has encouraged other organisations to consider similar initiatives or to implement new pilots. One new pilot proposed by another consortium has already been approved by the government. The pilots have provided important information and experience for the design of future cash transfer programmes for caminantes, and feedback from the pilots has enabled implementing organisations to identify additional risks as well as new ways to deliver cash. Better ways of communicating with people in transit are being identified as are opportunities to provide complementary assistance to people in transit and for referral of cases to organisations present in areas the pilots do not cover. It is also evident from the pilots that supporting people in transit requires more coordination and analysis of local markets and financial services providers. 

Diego Prado is the Coordinador for the Grupo de Transferencias Monetarias (GTM) – Colombia. Esther Yaneth Garzon is the MEAL Advisor for GTM – Colombia. Lina Camperos is the Response Analysis Subgroup Leader for GTM – Colombia.

Bibliography

• Mixed Migration Centre (2020) ‘Quarterly mixed migration update: Latin America and the Caribbean’ MMC Latin America and the Caribbean Quarter 4 (https://mixedmigration.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/qmmu-q4-2020-lac.pdf).
• Propuesta consorcio VenEsperanza sobre atención a población en tránsito caminantes en Guajira, Arauca y Norte de Santander (2021).
• Propuesta ZOA atención a población en tránsito caminantes en la ruta Arauca-Yopal (2021).