What can we learn on data, digitalisation and governance from humanitarian cash transfers?

Over the past 5 years, UNICEF has significantly scaled up its use and support of cash transfers in humanitarian contexts. This echoes similar shifts in other agencies and donors, as part of broader humanitarian reform and commitments to greater use of cash transfers under the Grand Bargain, World Humanitarian Summit and Agenda for Humanity. For UNICEF, the timely delivery of childsensitive humanitarian cash transfers at scale is key to achieving better results under the Core Commitments for Children in Humanitarian Action.

In the delivery of humanitarian cash transfers (HCTs), UNICEF seeks to fulfil its dual mandate as both a development and humanitarian agency. It supports the use of government programmes and systems to the maximum extent possible, including strengthening of social protection systems before, during and after crises. At the same, the organisation’s humanitarian mandate also requires direct delivery of humanitarian cash in some contexts to ensure timely and impartial delivery to children and their families. 

For these contexts specifically, UNICEF has developed a Humanitarian Cash Operations and Programme Ecosystem (HOPE), a Management Information System (MIS) for managing HCT programme data. Similar to the MIS of long-term social protection systems, HOPE enables HCT programmes to manage data related to registration and targeting of programme participants, payment cycle management, grievance redressal and feedback, and financial and programmatic reporting. Since its launch in April 2021, HOPE has been used in 12 countries to register two million individuals and deliver USD150 million to children and households affected by humanitarian crises.

The development and use of HOPE have been governed by a set of data protection and humanitarian principles, including the principles for digital development. The evolving experience of applying these principles in practice offers various insights, as well as open questions, which are of interest to the subject of this issue of Policy in Focus. This article will concentrate on three areas: (i) HOPE’s commitment to the ‘preservation’ principle and broader data integration; (ii) HOPE at the edge of the humanitarian-development nexus in terms of governments and data; and (iii) the implications of digitalisation for accountability to populations affected by humanitarian crises. While these experiences come from HCT programmes, we feel they offer reflections for social protection systems more broadly.

HOPE as an ecosystem 

An important principle guiding HOPE’s development was ‘the preservation principle’, or the ‘reuse and improve’ principle. The basic idea is to use existing tools and solutions which align with UNICEF’s mandate to the maximum extent, and only to develop software where these do not already exist. The ‘ecosystem’ in the HOPE acronym reflects the fact that it relies on and links with a number of systems that previously existed both within UNICEF and with other humanitarian actors. For example, HOPE does not have its own registration module but rather imports data from either existing data collection (e.g., from governments or non-governmental organisations—NGOs) or the KoBoToolbox, a data collection tool broadly used in humanitarian contexts. Another example is the interface between HOPE and UNICEF’s RapidPro platform, which allows HCT programmes to communicate and share information with programme participants via real time messaging services. HOPE system, with the ‘core’ system in the middle box and its links/integration with KoBoToolbox for registration; Microsoft Dynamics–CashAssist powered by UNHCR for entitlement calculation and payment approval and SAP UNICEF Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software to monitor alignment between fund commitments and payment to programme participants.

This approach has had numerous implications from a governance and implementation perspective. Critically, it has encouraged and supported coordination with other humanitarian agencies and systems, particularly regarding data sharing and integration. In some cases, it has facilitated broader programme coordination. On the operational side, it has reduced the overall cost of developing the HOPE software and sometimes facilitated quicker response—for example, where there is existing or ongoing data collection. At the same time, the experience of using HOPE also underlines that there can be significant challenges in applying the preservation principle, particularly in the practical, operational aspects of relying on external systems for the MIS’ critical/core functions. The ‘contact points’ where HOPE integrates and exchanges data with external systems are often where technical problems arise. The resolution of these issues depends on external partners, which requires coordination and a significant time investment even where there is good will. These challenges have sometimes led to negative impacts on programme results, including delays in payments.

HOPE, governments and data As previously mentioned, an overarching principle of UNICEF’s work in supporting HCT programmes and social protection more broadly is the strengthening of national systems. Even when assessments indicate that a direct implementation by UNICEF is necessary, the organization tries to identify where aspects of government systems or data can be used and/or there can be a process of transition/handing over of the programme and data over time.

In terms of HOPE, this dovetailing with government systems happens in diverse, context-specific ways. For example, in the context of the immediate humanitarian response to the war in Ukraine, while UNICEF discussed with the Ukrainian Ministry of Social Policy the possibility of using existing government data or topping up existing programmes, the Ministry agreed to a parallel HCT programme in light of both the urgent need and legal data-sharing restrictions. In Nepal and the Philippines, local governments have been testing the use of HOPE to support anticipatory action disaster response and preparedness by using existing local government data on vulnerable households and facilitate quicker local response (including in areas where national government cannot/is unwilling to respond). These latter cases also reflect a growing interest in how HOPE can support implementation of shock-responsive social protection programmes and exploration of how its software might be able to support the development and strengthening of national MISs (see more below on Open Source software).

At the same time, the realities of humanitarian contexts pose situations where the default of strengthening national systems comes in conflict with humanitarian principles, including cases where strong national systems exist.

Examples include countries where the government is a protagonist in the conflict, or where sharing personally identifiable household information may put vulnerable populations at risk. Even in relatively ‘benign’ contexts, dilemmas arise where these principles clash. The timeliness of assistance is another important element in humanitarian aid. Ensuring that the process of strengthening systems “does not impair the flexibility and rapidity of the humanitarian response,” as outlined in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) recommendation on humanitarian development nexus, guides the use of HOPE (OECD 2019).

Accountability to affected populations 

When we think about data, digitalisation and governance, we often think about issues related to ownership, data agreements, integration and interoperability, and institutional frameworks. We do not often discuss whose data is at stake and what the impacts (intentional or not) of their use will be for programme participants. So far, the experience with HOPE has been a learning process that sheds light on why thinking about the accountability side of governance is critical in cash transfer MIS systems and the related use of digital tools.

Data protection of personally identifiable information (PII) and accountability to affected populations in humanitarian contexts are key principles in UNICEF’s work. The need to have a stronger system to safeguard PII in the delivery of HCT programmes was a key driver of HOPE’s development. Data protection does not mean only data security: it has wide-ranging implications across MIS systems when we think of ourselves as caretakers of personal data, including from vulnerable populations and children. For example, user roles in most MISs are defined in terms of function (programme, finance, grievance, etc.) or level of authority. HOPE’s use in contexts where programme design, delivery and data are highly sensitive highlights the need to further segregate and partition data access along additional axes, for example by very specific geography, or additional granularity in the segregation of roles.

Similar to other social protection MISs, HOPE includes a module for participant grievances and feedback, including sensitive issues such as sexual exploitation and abuse. Of the original modules included in its design, this is the one that has required the most substantial updating in terms of its capabilities. As use of HOPE has scaled up in terms of volume of households and number of countries, the level of sophistication required to use this module for programme functions that truly enable greater transparency and accountability, such as two-way communication with programme participants and management of grievances to enable real feedback and follow-up, continues to evolve. While MISs hold great potential as tools for enhancing accountability, this requires fully thinking through the implications in programme design and implementation, and appropriate human resource capacity to implement the related functions.

The road ahead

HOPE is a relatively ‘young’ digital solution, and it will continue to evolve in response to HCT programme needs. In the immediate road ahead, there are two areas worth highlighting in the context of governance and digitalisation. 

The first is HOPE’s plan to become an open-source solution by 2023. From its inception, the intention was for HOPE to become available as a digital public good and this has guided a number of choices in its development (for example, prioritisation of systems using open source software to be integrated into the ecosystem). This objective is critical to UNICEF, to allow others in the humanitarian community to benefit from the investment that the institution has already made in developing HOPE’s software. Making the software publicly available may also support strengthening national MISs by allowing governments to utilize and adapt the software for national contexts, either as a whole or on a per-module basis. This is also intended to contribute to the broader work around digital convergence within the social protection community.

The second area in the road ahead entails continuing to enhance functions related to accountability. In addition to the points mentioned above, there are two critical dimensions to this area. The first is exploring ways in which programme participants can access their own data and information, and more generally the decentralisation of relevant data to end users. In the context of the crisis in Ukraine, HOPE has created an online self-registration form to allow potential programme participants to directly input their information. In this highly literate and digital context, there has been strong public engagement with the programme, including expression of frustrations. 

One of the many innovations emerging from this experience is that HOPE has begun development of a function to enable people who have registered to check the status of their application. 

The second dimension is the need to assess the extent to which HOPE’s various digital functional options—including SMS communication, online registration, etc.—further inclusion or exclusion due to factors such as literacy and mobile/internet access; and to then test modalities that combine online and offline modalities that enhance access, transparency and communication for all populations.

These two areas also highlight specific opportunities for reinforcing linkages between MIS in HCT delivery and social protection systems. UNICEF welcomes collaboration with other partners on a forward-looking agenda which continues to advance the availability of open source software for managing cash (and other social assistance) programmes and encourages the continuous improvement of beneficiary-centred data systems.