Shelter response after floods: standards, relocation site and budget trade-offs

School 1: 500 m² for 140 × 6.2 = 868 people, i.e. 0.6 m² per person (0.58). School 2: 300 m² for 150 × 6.2 = 930 people, i.e. 0.3 m² (0.32). The Sphere standard is 3.5 m² of covered living space per person: 1,798 × 3.5 = 6,293 m² would be needed, the schools offer only 800 (12.7%). Extreme overcrowding: risks to health, of violence and to dignity, and the school year cannot restart.

Plot: Sphere recommends 45 m² per person in camp-type settlements, including gardens. 65,000 / 45 = 1,444 people, i.e. 232 households. The 230 households on the embankments (1,426 people, 64,170 m²) can be relocated there; the plot cannot also absorb the households from the schools.

Conclusion: relocate the embankment households (life-threatening risk in the event of a flood) to the plot as a priority; for the schools, find other solutions: assisted return to original plots with kit and shelter, host families, a second plot.

Principle: first cover all life-saving and immediate needs, then fund transitional shelters with the balance.

Justification: households with host families have a roof; cash assistance supports hosting and prevents host families from being exhausted; repairs, which are inexpensive, quickly bring 840 households back home. The 163 shelters go to the most vulnerable households whose house is destroyed and who can return to their plot. The other 737 households with destroyed houses will have to be covered in a second phase: advocacy with the cluster and donors. An option that also gave emergency kits to hosted families would reduce the number of transitional shelters.

Area: 21 / 6.2 = 3.4 m² per person, below the 3.5 m² standard. 6.2 × 3.5 = 21.7 m² is needed, i.e. about 22 m², or a self-built extension with local materials should be planned for large households. Area must also take into account ceiling height, ventilation (hot climate) and privacy (partition).

Flood risk: raised floor on a compacted plinth above the level of the last flood, braced and anchored frame, roof secured against wind, drainage around the shelter, moisture-resistant materials at the base. Build back better: messaging and training of local artisans, without imposing a model foreign to local practices.

Quality assurance: prototype validated with families, women in particular, and the authorities; materials control; post-distribution monitoring of use.

Targeting: house destroyed (verified on site); ability to return to the plot (security of tenure, ownership or written agreement from the owner or the community); vulnerability: household headed by a woman, an older person or a child, person with a disability, chronic illness, no income. Households without formal title: do not exclude them, but document customary agreements. List validated by a joint committee, posted in anonymised form, with a complaints mechanism.

Plot: written contract with the owner, validated by the authorities, with duration, conditions for leaving and no hidden rent; land due diligence (no dispute); natural hazards; access to water, sanitation plan and distances to services; agreement of the host community; site plan with access roads and firebreaks; consultation of the embankment households on their willingness to move. Relocation must be voluntary and informed.

I do not reject the list outright, nor do I accept it as it is. (1) I thank the administration and propose a joint on-site verification of the 40 households, using the same criteria as for the others. (2) Eligible households are added to the ranking according to their vulnerability, with no automatic priority. (3) Non-eligible households are explained to the administration in writing, on the basis of the public criteria. (4) If the pressure continues, I inform my management and the shelter cluster, which can raise the issue collectively. Independent, needs-based targeting is a humanitarian principle; giving in would expose the organisation and vulnerable households.