Community-Led Resilience Amid Conflict and Displacement

The project was implemented by the Near East Foundation, Centre for Emergency and Development Support, and Global Aid Hand in Sudan and South Sudan. It began in August 2022 and ended in November 2024.

The Advancing Self-Reliance among Displacement-affected Communities (ASRD) project established community associations in Sudan and South Sudan to increase access to basic services and livelihood opportunities. When conflict erupted in Sudan in April 2023, the project demonstrated remarkable adaptability by shifting locations, adjusting implementation approaches, and continuing its capacity support to local structures, while maintaining core objectives. Despite conflicts forcing multiple relocations, ASRD successfully supported 134,744 displacement-affected persons through community-led service delivery and economic strengthening.

The project aimed to establish and/or strengthen community-based structures (Community Associations in Sudan and Payam-Level Associations in South Sudan) that could effectively respond to the needs of displacement-affected communities even during periods of intense conflict. It sought to build local capacity for delivering integrated basic services, particularly WASH facilities, protection services, and livelihood opportunities, that were community-led and based on community prioritization. By creating decentralized service delivery systems driven by community members, the project aimed to enhance self-reliance and resilience in areas experiencing rapid increases in displaced populations due to both conflict and climate factors.

Main activities of the Good Practice

At its core, the good practice pointed to the benefits of strengthening community associations and structures to deliver essential services and support to their population directly, as it proved to be able to maintain and leverage during conflict. When war erupted in Sudan in April 2023, followed by conflicts in Al Jazirah State and Abyei, the project teams adapted through several innovative approaches. The shift to more humanitarian activities, while maintaining the development focus, illustrated a strong commitment to the nexus approach and was appreciated by communities.

1. Geographic pivoting: The project shifted implementation from Khartoum to Al Jazirah, then to White Nile State in Sudan, and from Abyei to the Ruweng Administrative Area in South Sudan, based on security assessments.
2. Remote implementation model: When direct access became impossible, the project adopted hybrid approaches combining remote support with local implementation, relying more heavily on community association members as frontline responders.
3. Localization of service delivery: The project intensified capacity-building of local associations, forming specialized sub-committees for food security, protection, WASH, and conflict mitigation, enabling them to respond to community needs with minimal external support.
4. Adaptive technical training: When conflict restricted movement, the project trained local handpump mechanics, protection service providers, and livelihood extensions agents who could continue service delivery independently.
5. Financial service adaptations: As banking systems collapsed in both countries, the project developed alternative cash distribution mechanisms, including financial service providers in areas without formal banking. The financial modalities were also adjusted to context-specific needs - while loans were initially anticipated in all locations, it was later decided to implement a blend of grants and loans. This helped alleviate immediate needs through grants while also allowing for more sustainable investment through loans in locations that were less severely impacted.
6. Protection referral systems: Protection referral mechanisms became a critical component, particularly in Sudan where protection concerns were a significant issue.

Through these adaptations, the project successfully rehabilitated 121 WASH facilities, established 49 village savings groups, trained 7,056 people in vocational skills, and provided financial support to 3,693 households despite ongoing conflict. The community associations emerged as critical civil society actors, delivering emergency response while maintaining development objectives throughout the crisis.

Elements which helped facilitate the implementation of the good practice

The flexibility of the Lives in Dignity (LiD) Grant Facility was instrumental in allowing implementers to adapt to the changing conflict environment. The facility enabled geographic shifts in implementation locations after the outbreak of war in Sudan and evolving conflict in Abyei. Additionally, the project's decentralized community-based approach proved vital, as it allowed for continued implementation even when NGO staff couldn't access certain areas. The implementing partners worked through existing networks, delivering training and conducting follow-up through remote means, and relying on members of established community structures to support delivery and the monitoring of activities while the teams identified new entry points. Regular communication channels with the LiD team, including monthly meetings and ad-hoc consultations, facilitated rapid decision-making during crisis periods. Pre-existing relationships between implementing partners (NEF, CEDS, and GAH) also enabled swift coordination during relocations and programmatic shifts.

[The market] has expanded so much because of the project; we have even founded our own market savings group. There are 30 of us in the Sanduk. Each person pays 6,600 South Sudanese Pounds per week. Once it’s collected, it will be given to five people, and it helps a lot.

- Malual Baai Payam, participant in the Advancing Self-Reliance among Displacement-affected Communities project

Partners involved

• Near East Foundation (NEF)
• Centre for Emergency and Development Support (CEDS)
• Global Aid Hand (GAH)
• Lives in Dignity (LiD) Grant Facility (managed by UNOPS and funded by the European Union)

What challenges were encountered in delivering the project and how were they overcome?

Challenges

The project faced unprecedented challenges when war erupted in Sudan in April 2023, forcing immediate evacuation from Khartoum. Subsequent conflicts in Al Jazirah State (December 2023) and Abyei necessitated multiple relocations of staff and programming. Communications blackouts and road closures in South Kordofan and White Nile severely hampered implementation. The influx into northern South Sudan had a major impact on host populations, receiving displaced people into their homes and communities. The financial sector collapsed in both countries, making grant and loan distribution extremely difficult. Severe flooding in Northern Bahr el Ghazal, Ruweng, and Warrap delayed implementation in South Sudan. The displacement crisis caused by these conflicts led to an exponential increase in people needing assistance in target communities, stretching resources beyond planned capacity. Security risks to staff increased dramatically, limiting direct implementation in many areas.

How they were overcome

Challenges were overcome through geographic pivoting of implementation locations, shifting from high-risk to more stable areas, with the project team doing their best to target the same communities as they moved. The project adopted a hybrid implementation approach, combining remote technical support with local implementation. It leveraged earlier efforts and intensified capacity building of community associations to function independently during periods when NGO access was limited. Local community members were trained as consultants to collect monitoring data and implement activities when partner staff couldn't access areas. The project established alternative cash distribution mechanisms using financial service providers in areas where banking systems had collapsed. Implementation was decentralized to community association members who could move more freely during conflict periods. Regular communication platforms (including WhatsApp groups) were established to maintain coordination despite communications blackouts. The project leveraged existing community knowledge to identify safe implementation locations and approaches.

Results of the Good Practice

• 134,744 displacement-affected persons gained improved access to integrated basic services through community-led delivery mechanisms
• 121 WASH facilities were rehabilitated, including 46 handpumps, 65 latrines, and 10 handwashing stations, increasing clean water access and reducing waterborne diseases
• 44 water user committees were trained as handpump mechanics, ensuring sustainable maintenance of water points
• 81 survivors of sexual and gender-based violence received support through newly established protection referral systems
• 7,056 people gained vocational skills, enhancing employment prospects during crisis
• 3,693 households accessed finance through loans and grants
• 49 village savings associations were established, creating community safety nets

In what way does the good practice meet one or more of the four objectives of the Global Compact on Refugees?

Objective 1: Ease the pressures on host countries

This good practice directly addresses Objective 1 (easing pressures on host countries) by establishing local structures capable of delivering services to both displaced and host communities during conflict, reducing government burden.

Objective 2: Enhance refugee self-reliance

It supports Objective 2 (enhancing refugee self-reliance) through vocational training, revolving loans, and creating income-generating opportunities for over 7,000 displacement-affected people.

Objective 3: Expand access to third-country solutions

The project meets Objective 3 (expanding access to third-country solutions) by creating stable community conditions that reduce secondary displacement.

Objective 4: Support conditions in countries of origin for return in safety and dignity

Finally, it contributes to Objective 4 (supporting conditions for return) by building community resilience and service delivery capacity that will facilitate sustainable reintegration when conditions allow return.

Next steps

The community associations established under the project are expected to continue providing services beyond the project's lifetime through revolving loan funds, trained service providers, and established referral pathways. NEF, CEDS, and GAH will continue providing remote mentoring support to these associations when possible. The training manuals developed will be shared with government departments and other humanitarian actors to scale the approach. The project partners plan to incorporate lessons learned about adaptive programming during conflict into future interventions, particularly the importance of community-led implementation structures.

Are there areas in which support would be required to continue and/or scale up your good practice?

Support is needed to community associations to facilitate their continued service delivery across dispersed communities; transport being a primary challenge. Additional support for monitoring, evaluation, and learning capacity building would enhance community associations' ability to track and report on their activities. Exchange visits between community associations in different locations would strengthen peer learning and innovation. Technical support for developing more resilient financial service delivery mechanisms in conflict-affected areas is needed. Resources for scaling up revolving loan funds would enhance financial sustainability. Support for digital communication tools would improve coordination during communications blackouts.